Originally Posted by Legendash

I'm currently in that transition from level 2 to 3 and its quite a painful transition when you're used to a steady win rate and suddenly you start getting proper variance. It's made me question my ability to play at my current level and i'm hoping i've had a cold run of cards and it'll turn around without a complete overhaul/backtrack. We shall see...

Originally Posted by JonDoe

implementing high stakes play at $25 nl, sounds fun... but surely you hardly *ever* do hit with them rags on the button!?.. and its harder to bluff your opponent off their hand.. im thinking this play is less profitable than monster camping in the long run?

Originally Posted by biondino

"you hardly *ever* do hit with them rags on the button!?"

That's my big mental block with this game. I know deep down that good players get dealt the same crap as, well, me, but still seem to make enviable careers based on 35o. And that, I guess, is why I'm not a good player

Originally Posted by Element187

yes i miss alot, big deal, its easier to toss rags then it is to toss your AA.. with implied odds you make back that money quick.

Originally Posted by alias2211

Robby Robot plays

Originally Posted by SmackinYaUp

Just remember that any sort of strategy or tactics in the low level NLHE games goes totally unnoticed by your opponents. There are still plenty of things to learn by watching your opponents, but there's not going to be as much deep thinking going on.

Originally Posted by Legendash

It seems to be a common theme that anybody who plays above the level that is currently being discussed basically thinks that no players at the level in question have any poker skills at all. This then leads them to recommend playing ABC poker and not trying anything clever. I saw someone make this comment about 2/4 limit the other day and thought to myself "surely people at 2/4 know what they're doing" I think it's all relative to where you're at. One of the few people who doesn't do this is Fnord, he'll give advice on 5/10 and 0.01/0.02 the same and more people should try to do the same. I'm not saying the level you're at has no relation on the skill of play but it's lazy to just assume everyone is an idiot. Most of us were down there at one time and we obviously weren't idiots.

Originally Posted by ChezJ

most of the players i've seen at $25NL ARE idiots. but at the same time, they are bluffable.

if i have 86s on the button and i attack the blinds, they will call with any shitty rags just to see a flop.

then if the flop comes A high, they check to me, i bet, and they fold.

call it "playing the position" if you want, but it's a stone cold bluff and it works. it works BECAUSE i know my opponents are indeed morons playing any two cards.

clearly there are intelligent people (like FTR'ers) at the low limits too. but they are like 5% of the population.

ChezJ

Originally Posted by fkn2pt

nice post..

i'm probably moving from stage 2 to 3 at the moment. i would probably say that good players who have mastered stage 3 would find that this skill is much more applicable to the 6max shorthanded games than the full ring ones.

i basically learned the holdem basics from the internet sites such as this one, pokertips.org and others. i haven't read sklansky but pokertips had a pretty good synopsis of his theories on their site. i would say that all that information (hand rankings, pot odds) and stuff is very useful from moving from stage 1 to 2, but once you have mastered stage three, you realise that in certain situations, these rules have to be broken. this is especially true for nl over limit, and shorthanded v longhanded.

i must say the catalyst for realising the existence of a third stage was watching phil ivey and ted forrest play in the WPT first season finals. those guys are excellent...