Attempts to get out of the micro limits

[8infinity8]

Correcting individual mistakes at micro stakes, building the building and then smoothening the transition.

 

[fundiver199]

What actions do you take to get out of the micro limits?

If "getting out of the micros" is a goal in itself, then just buy into games, that are above the micros. Deposit 11$, play an 11$ MTT, and you are per definition "out of the micros". I suspect this is not the case though, and then its a badly fraised question, because what is it then, that OP really wants?

* Win a certain monthly income from poker?
* Reach a certain hourly winrate?
* Become good enough to compete in certain games?

The answer will be different for each of those and also depend on OPs sitaution. Where he can play, how much time he is willing and able to put into it, etc.

 

[caracaski220]

caracaski220

Making enough of a bankroll to progress to higher limits. It is vary important to allways go up with profits, not diving in to your pocket for more to try to recover previous losses. Go up with profits, to a level you are comfortable. I know playeers who are grat at 5/10 , and make good money but at a higher level losse their cool.

 

[qWald0]

I play abs poker)

 

[mclay]

Satellites are a good way for MTTs to try your skill at the higher limits, but this is a separate poker discipline,and you need to learn how to play them correctly.

 

[fundiver199]

what for?
75% of fish plays micro limits
24% of fish plays medium limits
1% of fish plays on top

There is a lot of truth to this, and at the same time rake does not really decline, until you get into high stakes, which can be kind of problematic. Lets assume for instance, that we are playing 2,2$ MTTs, and we are able to beat these games for 30% ROI. However we pay 10% rake, so in reality we are beating them for a 40% ROI. The poker site keep 25% of our net winnings, which is not so bad, since obviously we can not expect to play for free.

Lets say then, that if we move up to 11$ MTTs, our edge on the field is cut in half. Now we beat the games for a 20% ROI, but we only get to keep 10%, so the poker site now takes half of our net winnings. That not quite so great, and it also mean, our winnings per tournament only increased from 60c to 1$, But we are experiencing way larger swings, so we need a much bigger bankroll.

Lets say we move to 55$ MTTs then, and once again our edge on the field is cut in half, so that we only beat these games for a 10% ROI. Now we are not even winning, because the poker site keeps 100% of our net winnings as rake.

So for this hypothetical player, even though he is good enough to still beat the fields in 55$ tournaments, its clearly not the optimal level for him to play from a monetary standpoint. And maybe 11$ is not even optimal either. From a pure monetary standpoint he might be better off increasing his ability to multi table and play more 2,2-5,5$ tournaments for a steady source of low risk / low variance income.

Of course the other solution is to become better, so that maybe he can beat the 55$ MTT for a 20% ROI and once again get to keep half his net winnings. But this requires a lot of work away from the tables, and realistically not everyone can do it.

 

[finaltable1]

There is a lot of truth to this, and at the same time rake does not really decline, until you get into high stakes, which can be kind of problematic. Lets assume for instance, that we are playing 2,2$ MTTs, and we are able to beat these games for 30% ROI. However we pay 10% rake, so in reality we are beating them for a 40% ROI. The poker site keep 25% of our net winnings, which is not so bad, since obviously we can not expect to play for free.

Lets say then, that if we move up to 11$ MTTs, our edge on the field is cut in half. Now we beat the games for a 20% ROI, but we only get to keep 10%, so the poker site now takes half of our net winnings. That not quite so great, and it also mean, our winnings per tournament only increased from 60c to 1$, But we are experiencing way larger swings, so we need a much bigger bankroll.

Lets say we move to 55$ MTTs then, and once again our edge on the field is cut in half, so that we only beat these games for a 10% ROI. Now we are not even winning, because the poker site keeps 100% of our net winnings as rake.

So for this hypothetical player, even though he is good enough to still beat the fields in 55$ tournaments, its clearly not the optimal level for him to play from a monetary standpoint. And maybe 11$ is not even optimal either. From a pure monetary standpoint he might be better off increasing his ability to multi table and play more 2,2-5,5$ tournaments for a steady source of low risk / low variance income.

Of course the other solution is to become better, so that maybe he can beat the 55$ MTT for a 20% ROI and once again get to keep half his net winnings. But this requires a lot of work away from the tables, and realistically not everyone can do it.

It's a really terrible thinking!
First of all sharkscope can tell you that about 30% of players with highest winnings have paid more rake than the total they've won. Rest are close, and only very few have paid less than 40% of what they've won.

In second and more important - WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

since obviously we can not expect to play for free.

Are you serious???
Can't we just pay 15$ a month subscription or 1$ per day instead of paying such a huge rake?

What is the difference for PC server when it hosts 1) 1000 player freeroll 2) 1000 player 2.2buyin MTT 3) 1000player 55buyin MTT?? In all 3 cases servers will consume like 2 kilowatts of energy and same number of traffic. Why do you believe that since you're paying less rake in %, but you're paying more in actual numbers - it makes your choice smarter or better? Both choices are dumb. Poker as a game parasites the society cause it creates nothing useful, and inside this game there are different levels of parasites, like casinos, pros, grinders, and so on - and they all trying to look legit, smart, like a real gentleman, LOL while playing online game which is registered at offshore jurisdiction, believing that everything is truth and for real, while they can't see the code of the program, and falsely believing that they're playing with humans and see cards. All that online poker players can see is just pixels at their screen feeded to them by someone who extracts money from their pockets and uses their lifetime. If you can calculate odds and outs - then how about calculating 100 year life? 24*365*100 = 876K hours, 30% for sleep, 1% for toothbrush and so on, AND some time has passed already, AND will you live to 100? You're paying rake every second, and you still believe that observing pixels that represent 52 cards at the screen is a good time spending?:thumpdown

 

[fundiver199]

It's a really terrible thinking!
First of all SharkScope can tell you that about 30% of players with highest winnings have paid more rake than the total they've won. Rest are close, and only very few have paid less than 40% of what they've won.

In second and more important - WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?



Are you serious???
Can't we just pay 15$ a month subscription or 1$ per day instead of paying such a huge rake?

What is the difference for PC server when it hosts 1) 1000 player freeroll 2) 1000 player 2.2buyin MTT 3) 1000player 55buyin MTT?? In all 3 cases servers will consume like 2 kilowatts of energy and same number of traffic. Why do you believe that since you're paying less rake in %, but you're paying more in actual numbers - it makes your choice smarter or better? Both choices are dumb. Poker as a game parasites the society cause it creates nothing useful, and inside this game there are different levels of parasites, like casinos, pros, grinders, and so on - and they all trying to look legit, smart, like a real gentleman, LOL while playing online game which is registered at offshore jurisdiction, believing that everything is truth and for real, while they can't see the code of the program, and falsely believing that they're playing with humans and see cards. All that online poker players can see is just pixels at their screen feeded to them by someone who extracts money from their pockets and uses their lifetime. If you can calculate odds and outs - then how about calculating 100 year life? 24*365*100 = 876K hours, 30% for sleep, 1% for toothbrush and so on, AND some time has passed already, AND will you live to 100? You're paying rake every second, and you still believe that observing pixels that represent 52 cards at the screen is a good time spending?:thumpdown

I honestly have no idea, what you are on about. If you dont want to play poker and think, its not good, why are you even here?

 

[Bnobob]

Just quote

In addition to continuous learning at microlimits, you need iron patience. To reduce variance due to the number of participants, you need to additionally play another discipline.

Keep patience and continue learning!
Not to play more than 1 tournament per day, to know that the day lost was not an accident but a learning experience.

 

[1KrazyMofo]

Anxiety stop a lot of people fulfilling their full potential in poker, including myself and my uncle, 90% roi in mtts at the lowest stakes and I know I could produce this in stakes upto $10, but do I want a $300 - $600 downswing, NO WAY ! I guess the only way I will ever get there is by doing tickets and grinding tickets on the side of my other games.

 

[Matt_Burns88]

What actions do you take to get out of the micro limits?

Can I ask what your poker experience is?

The reason I ask is that many many micro stakes players start playing the game thinking they'll be wsop champion next year. When in reality, moving up stakes is a long slow grind.

Say you start out with $50 and you play 1 $1 tournament a day, every day for a year with an average ROI of 30% (which most players don't have). That means you will have a bank roll of around $150-$160, but you will also have averaged 5-6 hours of poker EVERY DAY for a year. Of course, that is before you take into account the time needed to study and improve your game, which should be at least a couple of hours a day on top of your playing time. Do you have that kind of time and commitment?

 

[horscht22]

double up my br...but 0 double stays 0...

 

[fundiver199]

The reason I ask is that many many micro stakes players start playing the game thinking they'll be WSOP champion next year. When in reality, moving up stakes is a long slow grind.

Absolutely true. Most people expect fast results in not just poker but anything, they do. And usually this is not, how things work out. As for online poker its not a hidden secret, which has just been waiting for someone to discover it in 2020. Back in 2005 talented your players were able to race up through the stakes and play for millions after just a few years, but these times are long gone, and they will never come back.

Say you start out with $50 and you play 1 $1 tournament a day, every day for a year with an average ROI of 30% (which most players don't have). That means you will have a bank roll of around $150-$160, but you will also have averaged 5-6 hours of poker EVERY DAY for a year. Of course, that is before you take into account the time needed to study and improve your game, which should be at least a couple of hours a day on top of your playing time. Do you have that kind of time and commitment?

This is an exaggeration though. An MTT only last 5-6 hours, if you run deep, usually all the way to the final table. The average time spend is probably more like 2 hours and less, if its a turbo, or you register late. Moreover anyone serious about online poker will of course multitable, so typically a session will be like 5-10 MTTs rather than just one.

There is also noone, who say, you have to start with as little as 50$. If the intention is to play MTTs, then a more reasonable starting bankroll is 500$, and playing with anything less is pretty much only for practice.

 

[Geyomobama]

You can never leave...lol once you go micro you can never go back.
On a more serious note
Discipline is the only trait I know that is able to help anyone looking to increase stakes.
Take a good long look at yourself and ask am I discipline enough.
Discipline is usually harder for those who Cant even step away from the table. So yeah do a discipline introspection and fix that.

 

[Pokerpoet2]

I know from my own experience that there is no such thing as a quick fix. anything you do in life, if it is worth doing, you have to work hard at it.
Whether it is training for the Olympics or just being good at one thing, it need's practice, practice, practice.
It is the same with Poker, and for every player who wins a big tournament, there are thousands of others that don't. You only have to look at the number of people that turn up for these big events.
Once you can accept these simple facts you can grind away at the tables for as long as you want, but playing multiple tables becomes laborious, boring and eventually drains you to a point where you would be better off doing a regular 9 to 5 job.
I play for the simple love of the game, I can never do more than 2 or 3 tables at a time and most of the time I will play single sit and go tables.
I am rich already in the fact I have a loving family, my own house and no debt to worry about, so trying to make a fortune from poker is as far away from my mind as travelling to another planet.

It will never happen!

 

[Matt_Burns88]

This is an exaggeration though. An MTT only last 5-6 hours, if you run deep, usually all the way to the final table. The average time spend is probably more like 2 hours and less, if its a turbo, or you register late. Moreover anyone serious about online poker will of course multitable, so typically a session will be like 5-10 MTTs rather than just one.

There is also noone, who say, you have to start with as little as 50$. If the intention is to play MTTs, then a more reasonable starting bankroll is 500$, and playing with anything less is pretty much only for practice.

You're right on the timings; 5-6 hours is more like if you get to the final table, but if you're averaging 2 hours, you're probably not cashing too often and certainly not going deep, so you have zero chance of a 30% ROI.

I understand that the majority of players looking to seriously grow their bankrolls are going to multi-table, but I was trying to give a straight-forward example for a new player.
I don't agree that no one starts with as little as $50. I have a few friends that I would class as "semi-pro's" that built their bankrolls from nothing and now earn at least $20,000 a year from poker. Or Jonathan Little - he started with $50 and has won millions, including 2 WPT's.

Also, if the OP is completely new to the game, he may be playing with $50 in the hopes of spinning it into a fortune.

 

[Nr98]

what for?
75% of fish plays micro limits
24% of fish plays medium limits
1% of fish plays on top

You have to fight harder for the money at higher limits, it means more time, more hands, much more often to fold, and have VPiP under 10%.

While at micro limits... it's normal occasion when someone goes all-in with overcards like AK when you flopped a set of deuces.

Lets say you have a small boat, and a fishing rod, a net and a harpoon. You can catch a lot of small fish with a net, or search for a big tuna using expensive bait and fishing rod or another choice is to fight sharks and whales with a harpoon. Can your boat and fishing road handle a big strong tuna? Can it handle a big shark or tribe of whales? What if you'll be biting dust each day instead of eating tuna or shark meat? Isn't it better to catch a 1000kg of different small fish instead of catching one single 1000kg shark? It's the same 1000kg of fish meat, but you spend less resources to get it. Jumping from 1K to 5K at NL10-20 tables and jumping from 1K to 5K at NL100-200 tables are two different stories, sometimes you do that at high limits only because of the rakeback.


If your question was about how to win big, then the best option to win big is to play big guaranteed tournaments and start with satellites. Win Sunday Storm ticket using 5 coins... win 2.2 ticket to the bounty at 20cent satellite. Win Sunday Million ticket starting with sub-satellite.

Some maths for example:
It might take months or a year or even more to get to the final table in daily $2.2 or 3.3 bounty starting from satellite. But at the end it will be a pure profit, since you've spent 50cents per day on qualifiers, and total per year was $180 for 365x2 = 730 attempts. If you will not win the 1st or second place once in 730 attempts starting from cheapest qualifer with no rebuys, then you'd better quit playing poker or take a break and read all possible articles about it.

Okay Ima just comment on the satties part, since a lot of people may take this advice and blow their bankroll in no time. Satties can definitely be profitable to play. However, they only increase variance. If you're not properly rolled for the target tournament, you're not properly rolled to play the sattellite either.

Having said that, if you're just playing for fun by all means go and take a shot. But if you actually want to grind it out you need to be very wary of this.

 

[fundiver199]

You're right on the timings; 5-6 hours is more like if you get to the final table, but if you're averaging 2 hours, you're probably not cashing too often and certainly not going deep, so you have zero chance of a 30% ROI.

I dont know the exact average time, I spend on an MTT, but I think, you overestimate it. After 2 hours more than half the field is normally gone, so to me that is not a completely wild guess. Typically only 1 in 7 players cash, so to be a winning player you just need to cash a bit more often, or maybe more realistically run deeper, when you cash.

I don't agree that no one starts with as little as $50. I have a few friends that I would class as "semi-pro's" that built their bankrolls from nothing and now earn at least $20,000 a year from poker. Or Jonathan Little - he started with $50 and has won millions, including 2 WPT's.

There are certainly a lot of people doing it, or trying to do it. Just look at the number of "50-10.000$" or similar threads in the challenge section. This however does not mean, it makes a ton of sense, or is particularly advisable.

The issue with MTTs is, the selection is not that big, and if you are only bankrolled for like 50c event, it might indeed take a year or more to reach the first 500$. And what is really the purpose of that, if you are good enough to beat even just slightly bigger games like 2-3$ MTTs?

Its a little different, if you play cash games, because then you can just sit down and grind 2NL, and get a lot of volume in a short amount of time. Another option are the SnG MTTs on pokerstars, but realistically these are more for practice than actually building a bankroll.

There are faster ways to earn 500$ than playing the low end of the micros, and what I am saying is just, that if you have ambitions in poker, then why hold yourself back because of some artificial and self-imposed bankroll constraint.

 

[masik6]

I'm just not playing the bankroll.:icon_rr:

 

[Matt_Burns88]

The issue with MTTs is, the selection is not that big, and if you are only bankrolled for like 50c event, it might indeed take a year or more to reach the first 500$. And what is really the purpose of that, if you are good enough to beat even just slightly bigger games like 2-3$ MTTs?

Its a little different, if you play cash games, because then you can just sit down and grind 2NL, and get a lot of volume in a short amount of time. Another option are the SnG MTTs on PokerStars, but realistically these are more for practice than actually building a bankroll.

There are faster ways to earn 500$ than playing the low end of the micros, and what I am saying is just, that if you have ambitions in poker, then why hold yourself back because of some artificial and self-imposed bankroll constraint.

I totally agree, that's why I asked the OP what he poker experience is like. Lot's of people think they can deposit $50 online and run it up to thousands in a few weeks. It doesn't take long for reality to sink in. That's why the vast majority of the threads you mention are a flurry of activity and excitement to begin with and then after a few weeks it all goes quiet because the challenger has lost his bank roll or even made a small profit, but they're still disappointed because they were hoping to be playing in Monte Carlo by now!

 

[fundiver199]

I totally agree, that's why I asked the OP what he poker experience is like. Lot's of people think they can deposit $50 online and run it up to thousands in a few weeks. It doesn't take long for reality to sink in. That's why the vast majority of the threads you mention are a flurry of activity and excitement to begin with and then after a few weeks it all goes quiet because the challenger has lost his bank roll or even made a small profit, but they're still disappointed because they were hoping to be playing in Monte Carlo by now!

Exactly. People think, they can deposit 50$ and run it up to tousinds in a few weeks, like its an arcade game. But this is just not possible, unless you gamble and get lucky, and then you might as well go in the casino section. My own mostly for fun "challenge" is a good example. Even though I have a previous track record on PokerStars in the exact same games and know, I am profitable in them, I am still down around 10% after the first 170 events. Not exactly what I hoped for, but such is variance.

And here is my main point. If you actually make it to that 10.000$ bankroll, then nobody other than yourself will care, if you started with 50$ or 500$. So there is no need to be so overly afraid of putting at least some of your own money on the line. You are going to invest a whole lot of time in the project, and that time could also have been converted to money by finding a second job for instance.

So why does it even matter, if at some point you are down 100$ or 300$? To many people keep hanging around in freerolls or the low end of the micros for no really good reason. If you are serious about online poker, then move to either 10NL cash games or 2-5$ MTTs, as soon as you have a bit of practice, and you at least seem to be winning. Dont wait another 6 month or a year "because you have to build up your bankroll" grinding for pennies.

 

[alien666dj]

Stick to bankroll management.

 

[Syltan]

Collecting bonkrol, grain by grain I watch a lot of videos on YouTube for a great understanding of the game and improving my skill. And most importantly, in my opinion, I try not to outplay every player at the table.

 

[Pokerpoet2]

I started playing poker on-line on Pokerstars and although I have tried several other sites I always return to Pokerstars. I never intended to make a fortune from Poker and still play for fun and the love of the game.
I have managed to build up some semi decent bankrolls depending on what is considered decent but never play above my limits. When I cashed for the first time on Pokerstars in a free-roll I won 32 cents. from this and playing more free-rolls I soon had around $15.00 and from there I started buying into 10 cent sit and go's then as my bankroll grew I started buying in for 25 and 50 cent games.
Today I play more and more $1.00 and $1.50 games and depending on how I am playing will occasionally try the odd $5.50 game but never risk my entire bankroll on a single game.
I think the best way to improve your game and the amounts you can win is practice, practice, Practice and Pokerstars rewards are so much better than most other sites.

 

[Split]

reach the final tables as often as possible!