How big of a difference in 10 NL VS 50 NL?

[IcyBlueAce]

but that assuming you break even and then you have to split it in half if there is anything left and then you have to play the correct volume for 74$ a day which is not bad.

COOL!

 

[madtom1337]

@OP...

Did you say something about post count?

 

[cjatud2012]

So you get $74 in rakeback a day, but obv that's only your profit per day if you're a breakeven player. You would add/subtract from that whatever your winnings are from the tables themselves, and what people are trying to say is that it isn't reasonable to expect that you maintain your winrate from 10NL at 50NL. At 50NL, there will still be fish, but there will be fewer of them. The regs will be better, they will not always fold to your c-bets, they instead will c/r you, they won't set-mine out of position in 3-bet pots, etc. Also, 16-tabling with only 20 buy-ins is not very good bankroll management, it would not be unreasonable to see all of that go in one session. I'm sure the smallest amount that pros play with is 100 buy-ins. Most have at least 200 probably. And if you do plan on playing 16 tables for 8 hours a day, I would imagine that is very physically and mentally taxing. There's no way you could play an optimal game for that long, further lowering your winrate.

So yeah, you could play 50NL, but considering your experience, with fewer fish and better regs, a risky bankroll and an insane amount of volume, it'd be very hard to succeed, which is all anyone is trying to say.

btw this is fun to watch, i'm sitting in front of my computer like this:

 

[Marginal]

Qualunque. Sei davvero un testardo, vi auguro persona il meglio di guardare e ansiosi di vedere un aggiornamento thread sul vostro progressi con il gioco

 

[IcyBlueAce]

 

[dmorris68]

I'm 19, and make a little over that much per day at my job, so its a lot to me.

I said I was going to drop this thread, and I will after this (really, I will!), but this post just answered a question that's been burning in my mind. When my kids were 19 they were know-it-all, argumentative arseholes too.

 

[IcyBlueAce]

Qualunque. Sei davvero un testardo, vi auguro persona il meglio di guardare e ansiosi di vedere un aggiornamento thread sul vostro progressi con il gioco

Io ti amo.

 

[IcyBlueAce]

I said I was going to drop this thread, and I will after this (really, I will!), but this post just answered a question that's been burning in my mind. When my kids were 19 they were know-it-all, argumentative arseholes too.

Yeah its sad that I probably know 100x more than you do and I haven't even known how to play poker for a year.

 

[cardplayer52]

I'll venture a guess that 50nl is way different than 10nl. I'd say 10nl is more of a straight foward game and all about value betting. If you know hand rankings and some basic math you should be able to beat it. At 50nl there will be alot of other skills to be used bluffing, restealing of blinds, squeezing, isolating etc. I'd say the game is beatable but I wouldn't just jump right in to try. Figuring out how much you would win per day is just a bad idea imo. I think you should focus on improving you game before moving up. Like some posters have stated if you only beat 10nl for 1BB/100 then trying 50nl is just silly. I don't agree with the "you gotta lose some to win" mentality at all. If you start learning how to exploit the 10nl fish you'll know how to exploit those same fish at higher levels. The thing is there will be less of them at 50nl and you really want to be sure you making the most possible off them.

 

[Tammy]

Yeah, this thread has turned into a pile of garbage and is going nowhere. If OP can't learn to take genuine advice from people without turning into a troll, then he probably shouldn't post here anymore.

 

[Debi]

Amen!