Rant +a few questions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIGandRICH

I was watching my mate the other night absolutely destroy the poker stars NL400 game, 3 tables running, I stop watching when he had one table on 3K, one on 2.5K and the other 2.2K, almost 8K total after buying in for 1.2K, or around 16 buy-ins up. I know he did the re-buy trick a few times in there, but even so it’s still an amazing run.

So obviously he was on a good run, as it only took a short session (don’t know the exact length). But how much of it was good run and how much extra did he make because of his skill? Brings me to the question of if I had had the exact same situation given to me would I have profited such an extreme amount. I doubt it.

So I asked him about his strategy, this is what he told me. To start off he went in and completely ruined his image, raising 100% of hands, showing bluffs, and making the re-buy a few times to get a big stack. He said the having a deep stack was vital for the strategy he was using. After he’d killed his image with maniac raising he dropped back into playing around 15% of hands pre-flop, only pairs/AK/occasional suited connector, and AQ but not to any resistance. At which point most of the table felt the urge to throw money at him. This is where he stacked up the 3 tables to about, 2.5K, 2K and 1.8K. Then the tables adapt to his super tight play, as most of them have just lost a buy-in to a set/straight/two pair. So he then changes up again, increasing his pre-flop to around 40%, tempered lagg he called it. And from there just gradually took smaller pots and built up to the final amount of profit that he was at when I left.

So using this strategy he pretty much wiped clean 3 tables, and though I still believe it was to a degree of upward variance, I also think he did pretty much what he planned to do, and wasn’t all that surprised at how much he destroyed the game.

So to any of you big game players, do you employ similar strategies at those tables? And if so how long before you were able to do so.. as in, I know that even if I had the bankroll for it I wouldn’t really feel comfortable raising everything pre-flop at higher stakes. I’m assuming that’s my lack of experience, and fear of big money, because if I find the right table at my stakes I don’t hesitate to bet the shit out of everything. Or you think that by the time a player has built enough bankroll to be playing 2/4 or 3/6 they would have enough knowledge and be comfortable doing that?

My mate also said that you can still just play Tagg, 15-25% pre-flop and win at 2/4, which came as a surprise to me as I have always assumed you have to be more manipulative at higher stakes because you won’t get paid off anywhere near as much.

And also, having read rilla’s bible on bankroll management, I have stuck with having 15 buy-ins or more for the desired limit. And my mate says that in his bankroll building days he worked on 10 buy-ins, and that 10 is fine is your playing a complete camping game, where as 15+ if your being a bit more inventive. What do you guys think about that?

Because of his 10 buy-in theory he has suggested to me that I should move up to $0.50/$1 NL right away, from where I am currently playing .25/.50 tables. I have $1300 online (the 1.6K in my sig counts my live money as well), but my roll is split over 2 sites, so I have been treating them as 2 separate bankrolls. I would feel comfortable playing NL100 if my entire bankroll was on one site, so I will probably move it all over to poker stars soon. Despite what people have said, that the stars games are of a higher standard, I have still seen many a fish about the place. So you can still get paid off, but the higher concentration of more sensible players also makes for a lower variance game, which suits me fine, actually I think the stars game isn’t any more skillful, just a different stupid. Is there anyone out there that plays exclusively on pokerstars? And what is your opinion on that?