|
Originally Posted by Jason
To each his own. If you like this process, then stick with it, but I'm not sure I think this is a good approach. It looks like you're trying straddle the stakes ... like slowly dipping your foot in the water or something to make sure it's not too cold or shark invested
I briefly tried that method when I made my first jump from $2NL to $5NL and came to the conclusion that I was only doing it out of fear and that I had already, through bankroll management and beating my last stake, built a system through which I had no reason to play $2NL anymore and no valid reason to fear $5NL. I had 10 full buy-ins to "take a shot" at the next level. If I lost that many buy-ins, then I was clearly not ready for it and could drop down a level where I could clearly win back the money and try again another day. It's important to give yourself permission to fail through either coolers, bad beats, bad play, or whatever as long as you are trying to play @ your best. It's much worse to try to rise up and play scared money because you'll never be @ your best.
So, I would argue you're either ready for $50NL and should jump in full time with both feet or you're not and you should focus on $25NL. With this 1-2 hour a day method, you're putting $50NL on a pedestal and making the challenge larger than it should be both mentally and game wise with the subtle differences between each stakes as far as blinds, raise sizes, and villain tendencies. I've only been playing full time $50NL for a whole 3 days and it's taken me half-way through day 3 to realize that when a shortstack shoves allin for $10, that's the same number of big blinds as $5 @ $25NL - it seems like more @ $50NL. That example and so many other things add up, but by me focusing right now on one stake, I'll adjust better and faster.
The exception that I could see as being more acceptable is when you get to the higher stakes and the game selection just isn't there like @ $1000NL, $600NL, and maybe $400NL. As you move up more, there could be more situations where a really juicy $200NL table is twice as good as a tough, nit invested $400NL table. But, I'm pretty sure there's always a juicy enough selection of games @ $50NL to keep a capable, rolled player out of $25.
Anyway, just some food for thought - good luck with whatever you do.
Well I haven't really been playing scared money, I just feel like I'm getting outplayed by the regs...then everytime I decide to make a light calldown they have a set or something retardedly nut like. So it kills my confidence a bit when I feel like I'm getting pwned.
Regarding the $ amounts, I still feel comfortable pushing 20bb into a short stacker bvb even though it's '$10' now instead of $5. That;s just an example, but the same thing applies to semi-bluffing and value betting. I just look at the pot and think about what percentage I want to bet, then determine the $ amount it is equal to.
I think I've got past that stage pretty quickly, right now my biggest problem is not whipping out my e-dick and getting into reg wars because I feel like I'm being 'outplayed'. So for that reason, until I settle in, I'm taking it slow. However, I see merits to your suggestion of just getting in and playing. It actually makes alot of sense because...
...I think the biggest fear I have is the results. What if I'm not a winning 50nl player? What if I breakeven for 50k hands? What if --- I should stop worrying and just play. The only way I'm going to find out the answers to these questions I fear is by putting in the time to play 50nl. If I don't play, I'll never know where I stand. In other words, in order to conquer this fear of seeing my results down the road, I need to address the fear face-to-face and just sit at 50nl.
|