About micro cash games (nl2 to nl5)

[magnus369]

Do you think it is instructive to play these game levels to learn how to play better? I recently got some free coaching hours from a Brazilian cash game player (N00KI5) who plays regular nl100 and nl200, so he told me about certain bad habits for future stakes, and that I could be wasting my time playing for a few dollars a week, that later I would need to relearn, and maybe future downswings will hurt me to settle into the higher limits, especially nl25 and nl50, which according to him is where poker starts to be played for real.

On reflection it seems like a solid argument what he told me, however on the other hand, I always like to think of poker as a game of cards and decision making, that we don't necessarily need to see the monetary value, but we can understand the game by the blinds, however I fully agree with him, that due to the high aggressiveness and the somewhat curious lines of play it distances me from the normality of the higher fields.

So what can you tell me? If you were to make poker a profitable hobby, where you dedicate and commit half a period or less of your days to play, and half a period to study, thus having about 6 hours a day to play and study poker, you also having experience in the game, would you start from the bottom, I mean nl2 even, or would you think about investing your money in time to start from the middle/upper nl25 or more?

 

[eetenor]

Do you think it is instructive to play these game levels to learn how to play better? I recently got some free coaching hours from a Brazilian cash game player (N00KI5) who plays regular nl100 and nl200, so he told me about certain bad habits for future stakes, and that I could be wasting my time playing for a few dollars a week, that later I would need to relearn, and maybe future downswings will hurt me to settle into the higher limits, especially nl25 and nl50, which according to him is where poker starts to be played for real.

On reflection it seems like a solid argument what he told me, however on the other hand, I always like to think of poker as a game of cards and decision making, that we don't necessarily need to see the monetary value, but we can understand the game by the blinds, however I fully agree with him, that due to the high aggressiveness and the somewhat curious lines of play it distances me from the normality of the higher fields.

So what can you tell me? If you were to make poker a profitable hobby, where you dedicate and commit half a period or less of your days to play, and half a period to study, thus having about 6 hours a day to play and study poker, you also having experience in the game, would you start from the bottom, I mean nl2 even, or would you think about investing your money in time to start from the middle/upper nl25 or more?

Thank you for posting.

If I had the bankroll and previous skill I would play NL25.
Not because it is easier playing against better players it is not. If we want to develop skills for higher levels of play we cannot keep playing down to the level of player we find below that buy-in.

Other points to think of-
1 harder to beat the rake at lower levels so we spend more time and make less money
2 If we are playing in a game with straight forward play what are we studying?
3 If we do study advanced concepts they are based on V adjusting ranges to those plays but V in the lower levels seldom due adjust so how do we know the advanced play is effective.
4 If we run like god for a month in NL2 and then move up to NL25 a normal down swing will eat up our entire winnings. What was the point of the month of time we spent?

Time is your most valuable asset do not spend it on a hamster wheel.

Hope this helps

 

[magnus369]

Thank you for posting.

If I had the bankroll and previous skill I would play NL25.
Not because it is easier playing against better players it is not. If we want to develop skills for higher levels of play we cannot keep playing down to the level of player we find below that buy-in.

Other points to think of-
1 harder to beat the rake at lower levels so we spend more time and make less money
2 If we are playing in a game with straight forward play what are we studying?
3 If we do study advanced concepts they are based on V adjusting ranges to those plays but V in the lower levels seldom due adjust so how do we know the advanced play is effective.
4 If we run like god for a month in NL2 and then move up to NL25 a normal down swing will eat up our entire winnings. What was the point of the month of time we spent?

Time is your most valuable asset do not spend it on a hamster wheel.

Hope this helps

I think climbing up to the highs stakes is possible, but it is perhaps an unnecessary way to reach a good level of poker, as you said it is a waste of time to stay months in a low limit, and then have to relearn how to win a new field, besides the fact that the dispersion increases in the lower levels, I know it is possible to beat these limits, but what price would we be paying for that?

Sometimes I try to use a level thinking using the idea of blockers and unblockers, what I dislike is to see that the theory works very well when following some streammer who plays mid and high stakes, while you can't apply it to the tables you play.

A glaring factor in my view to observe is the dreaded red line, the hands won without showdown, in the micro stacks it is basically a joke, much lower than expected or adequate, may be because of the field calling station, yes it contributes, but a lower level of thinking during the hands would make it very difficult to use a bluff as a resource, the cbets pass less, and as you reminded me the rake is extremely abusive in micros.

 

[eetenor]

I think climbing up to the highs stakes is possible, but it is perhaps an unnecessary way to reach a good level of poker, as you said it is a waste of time to stay months in a low limit, and then have to relearn how to win a new field, besides the fact that the dispersion increases in the lower levels, I know it is possible to beat these limits, but what price would we be paying for that?

Sometimes I try to use a level thinking using the idea of blockers and unblockers, what I dislike is to see that the theory works very well when following some streammer who plays mid and high stakes, while you can't apply it to the tables you play.

A glaring factor in my view to observe is the dreaded red line, the hands won without showdown, in the micro stacks it is basically a joke, much lower than expected or adequate, may be because of the field calling station, yes it contributes, but a lower level of thinking during the hands would make it very difficult to use a bluff as a resource, the cbets pass less, and as you reminded me the rake is extremely abusive in micros.

Thank you for responding.

Your red line point is very good. Alex Fitzgerald did a study of fold freq data in micro stakes and found that in mid stakes the fold freq with any pair is 40% but in micros 20%.

So balancing our play with bluffs becomes very difficult and has us adapting our ranges in a way that has a very negative effect on our play when we move up.

We also have a significant bet sizing change when we play more skilled players. We cannot just blast rivers and get calls so we have to remodel our entire bet sizing scheme when we move up we have to be exact on each street to get stacks in on the river.

This is no small change and can cause us to have to unlearn as your coach said.


Hope this helps

 

[coolDadJimbo]

i think an important way to move up and not focus on 'levels' is by displaying stack sizes in BB rather than $. it takes away the 'money shock' that might dissuade good play when moving up. it is also actually better to think in terms of stack sizes and BB i believe. it is quicker and easier to qucikly calculate odds, spr, etc, etc regardless of level. plus most books, etc talk in terms of BB. i would suggest this for everyone actually.....

i study at least as much as i play, if not more. i do a lot of hand reviews, PT reviews and have a journal to keep track of ideas, study notes, goals, etc. i play about 75% 5nl and 25% 10nl, depending on fishiness of the table. my BR isn't deep enough to make the full jump yet.

good luck!