Thoughts on beating micros #6

I stopped these for a bit, ran out of steam, but had to post this one as it occurred to me today:

This shit aint rocket science!

Really, my results slowed down for a while, I wont call it running bad, I just wasnt winning like I should be. Turned that around in the last week. How? I stopped trying to think too deep, and just played basic poker. I folded when I was probably beat, and I value bet when I was probably ahead. I only slowplayed real monsters, and I played my strong but vulnerable hands fast. Not much bluffing and only in really good spots or with good reads. Net result? My big hands got paid, and I didnt suffer the losses associated with making marginal/metagame plays that just arent required at micros.

This is microstakes poker guys. Our opps are generally bad. We dont need to be fancy, we dont need to outlevel our opps, we just need to win lots when we're ahead and lose little when we're behind.

I think there are things that can be done at micro-stakes that can't be done at higher stakes:
1. Fold a good hand because you're getting value-towned after an obvious draw came in
at higher stakes people can bluff their straight draws when the flush draw makes it and vice versa
2. Call a marginal hand because his line looks like a bluff
at higher stakes people will make "bluffy" shoves to get paid on huge hands

you can do MORE of those things
also you can play more hands
so if you open AQs in NL100, you can probably open AQo in NL10

well I have to say I can understand how your thinking helps you win at your current level Ben but I just don't think it's the correct attitude.

Like it's not FPS that beat 400nl, it's really solid poker fundamentals coupled with some deeper level thinking. Being fancy or trying to outlevel is not necessarily what it takes to be higher levels in NL especially in 6max and FR games.

Poker fundamentals that apply to all levels:

1. Play a tight range OOP
2. Play a wide range IP
3. Exploit your opponents mistakes
4. Manipulate your opponents range to your advantage

These are basically the 4 things I think about when I play NL nowadays, with number 3 and 4 obv highlighted because 1 and 2 are second nature.

I don't like this thread. Just because you can win at micro stakes by avoiding marginal spots, doesn't mean you should. Why not try to make the right decision in those spots, that way you might get better at poker in the process too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcatdog

I don't like this thread. Just because you can win at micro stakes by avoiding marginal spots, doesn't mean you should. Why not try to make the right decision in those spots, that way you might get better at poker in the process too.

---

Isn't that what I said? As in you can make correct decisions at the micros that are much more marginal at higher stakes that they might be incorrect against some opponents

you can fold that TPTK at the micros if you know that your passive opponent would only bet a flush so meekly because he doens't want you to go away

Its for discussion so I dont mind if people disagree, they're my thoughts ;).

As a general rule I personally believe that if you get too deep at micros you're going to make mistakes. I've seen heaps of replies to posts along the lines of:

"Theres no way he slowplays a set or two pair there because the board has too many draws".

Well they do slowplay there. A lot. Because opps at micros arent thinking about how vulnerable their hand is, they're usually playing about the opposite of how they should for whatever their personal reasons are. Levelling yourself into marginal hero calls for more than 25% of your stack is usually a mistake. Thats one example.

I'm not saying that this kind of play is required at 400nl+ Spenda. In fact something thats really stood out to me reading the blogs of our mid-high stakes guys (like Griffey and Zook) is just how much the same concepts DO apply across all levels. I just suspect that as our margins diminish (which they should as we move up) then we probably need to push thinner edges to keep our winrates decent. Dunno, maybe I'm wrong about that. I know Zook said in his log that he believes just good basic poker and solid table selection can beat up to 600nl.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcatdog

I don't like this thread. Just because you can win at micro stakes by avoiding marginal spots, doesn't mean you should. Why not try to make the right decision in those spots, that way you might get better at poker in the process too.

---

Fair point, but two things. 1 I think a lot of microstakes guys come up with excuses to do what they want to do (call/bluff/raise/whatever) and so justify something as marginal when its really not, and 2 if you really do believe something is marginal but its a big pot situation you dont need to be in, then I dont think its worth the hit to your session. If you've played an hr to win a buyin, then putting a stack on the line when you're not relatively sure if you're good or not just isnt neccessary.

This thread from a little while ago is an example of what I mean: http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...ai-t75933.html We may be good, we may not, but villain has shoved for over 100bb c/r. Theres no need to risk a buyin there on a pretty marginal call.

I agree with Spendas point. There are basic poker fundamentals that all winning players go by, at any game, and any limit. One of these fundamentals would be adapting to the game you are in. Be it loose, tight, full of fish or sharks.

Micro limit strategy in on the whole does not require the same level of thinking as higher limit games. I think the 2 main reasons for this are 1) the standard of opposition in general isnt very good, and 2) the stakes just arnt high enough to warrant complex and intricate plays that you can pull off at higher limits. Most micro players are not paying attention. They see their cards, and the board. I mean Phil Ivey can lay down KK on a 376 board to a $300k all in re-raise, how many times are u laying down KK in that spot for a $20 all in re-raise?

I have an still play the micros, and have been as high is $2/$4, playing all in between, and it really is a different game. In fact i have heard more than a few pro players recommend to almost completely remove bluffing from micro limit games.

Personally, i find the way to beat these games is play purely for value, bet when your winning, fold when your losing, and call when you have the odds to do so, that is more than enough to profit well at these limits.

Quote:

---

If you've played an hr to win a buyin, then putting a stack on the line when you're not relatively sure if you're good or not just isnt neccessary.

---

That's a losing thought-process
if you don't like variance, get a job

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

Poker fundamentals that apply to all levels:

1. Play a tight range OOP
2. Play a wide range IP
3. Exploit your opponents mistakes
4. Manipulate your opponents range to your advantage

---

this and http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...om-t76292.html are what you need to beat poker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

Quote:

---

If you've played an hr to win a buyin, then putting a stack on the line when you're not relatively sure if you're good or not just isnt neccessary.

---

That's a losing thought-process
if you don't like variance, get a job

---

lol

Continually putting your stack in when you're not sure if you're good more often than not is a good plan? Do tell.

if you're less than relatively sure you're good, but good more often than not you can put your stack in

for example it was my last hand of the day and I get AA UTG, raise it up and get two callers
I put my stack in with AA on a 73x flop
the guy flips over A7 and hits trips

so I'm up only two buyins for the day and not three
big deal

you're good there more often than not

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swiggidy

you're good there more often than not

---

I'm not relatively sure I'm good though, which was the original statement

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swiggidy

you're good there more often than not

---

I'm not relatively sure I'm good though, which was the original statement

---

You should be relatively sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swiggidy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swiggidy

you're good there more often than not

---

I'm not relatively sure I'm good though, which was the original statement

---

You should be relatively sure.

---

no, he could have a set
I'm not sure at all

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swiggidy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swiggidy

you're good there more often than not

---

I'm not relatively sure I'm good though, which was the original statement

---

You should be relatively sure.

---

no, he could have a set
I'm not sure at all

---

El Oh El

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swiggidy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swiggidy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swiggidy

you're good there more often than not

---

I'm not relatively sure I'm good though, which was the original statement

---

You should be relatively sure.

---

no, he could have a set
I'm not sure at all

---

El Oh El

---

Do you know the definition of sure? I'd be sure if I had a set in that spot.

BAN

Against a guy who calls pf with ACrap and gets all in with TPTK you can generally feel relatively sure.

In fact I'm probably fistpumping if I had a read on him.

I'm not suggesting you need to have an almost nut hand to get ai, infact against plenty of people TPGK is good enough for me. However if you're faced with a "shit, I dunno, wtf" situation and the pot odds arent good (like the hand I linked where he shoved 100bb into approx 10bb pot) then just fold.

I dont see yours as marginal. A closer example would be if he just called your cbet and then when the 2nd 7 comes he shoved all in with around a 15-20bb pot for the rest of his stack (if he was fullstacked), and you had a read that he plays all kinds of crap and calls flops with any piece of the board. Now you're in a more marginal spot (I dunno, I probably call anyway, but its closer, no way would I fold to a guy like that on the flop).

I'm not saying it's marginal, I'm saying the kind of thinking "last hand of the session, so I'll just save myself the chance of losing my winnings" is detrimental

Way to miss the point and ghey up a thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swiggidy

Way to miss the point and ghey up a thread

---

NO U

Lol, I didnt mean that, it was just an example since I (and I assume a lot of people) tend to play worse towards the end of a session. Thats where I'm more likely to hero call off half a stack or more for no more reason than "well..umm.. he could be bluffng". A week or so back when I wasnt playing so well, I was a buyin up when I decided to quit. By the time I closed my tables down I was down to 1/5 of a buyin. I called down a nit with trips WK (my hand was basically faceup and this supernit is taking me to value town) and on another table decided to throw a random c/r bluff in. If I'd found a fold on the river in the first hand, and avoided the c/r bluff on the 2nd I probably only lose about $10 in those last 10 or so hands rather than $40.

I have those "he could be bluffing" moment but usually with TPWK on a rags board

calling people down is the lowest EV thing evar generally unless you have a read

Ok I have a question then this situation happened to me last night.
.05/.10
I was dealt kk no diamonds
I raised .60 I was bb. I try to raise 4xbb +1bb per limper.

I had two callers.
the flop is 7d9d2s
I bet 1.40 and got two all in callse for another 3 dollers.

Do you call or fold in this situation My read was one of them was on a diamond draw I had a solid read on him the other person I put on JJ

I will post what I did and the results if I get some feedback in this situation.

Thanks
Don

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mcatdog

I don't like this thread. Just because you can win at micro stakes by avoiding marginal spots, doesn't mean you should. Why not try to make the right decision in those spots, that way you might get better at poker in the process too.

---

QFT

I actually have seen a bit of a reduced win rate lately, but I've been trying hard to learn more about 3-bet/4/-bet pots, when to call for value, how to play MTT's. I had made the mistake I think McatDog is warning against - stagnation. Just putting in hands to build BR is dangerous, if you're not learning anything - you likely won't be ready for the next level.

I have just posted this same question here if anyone knows of an example I would appreciate it. thanks
Don

http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/...ng-t76372.html

Ahh the irony. I guess its like the old saying goes "You can lead a horse to water, but you cant convince it that the reason he cant beat microstakes isnt a lack of theoretical knowledge about 3 & 4 bet pots".

Or something like that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bjsaust

Ahh the irony. I guess its like the old saying goes "You can lead a horse to water, but you cant convince it that the reason he cant beat microstakes isnt a lack of theoretical knowledge about 3 & 4 bet pots".

Or something like that.

---

qfmft! well spotted aussie

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robb

I've been trying hard to learn more about 3-bet/4/-bet pots, when to call for value, how to play MTT's.

---

Are you still at 10NL?

And MTTs have NOTHING to do with improving (directly at least).

Not sure if BJ was talking 'bout me with horse analogy, but one thing IS for DAMN sure: betting on me sucking at poker would NOT lose anyone money.
:shifty:

Swiggidy, I'm back at 10nl semi-permanently. I'm only playing about 1k hands per week (4th child on the way, home improvement projects out the whazoo). I've won consistently at 10nl over 100k hands, but have yet to win consistently at 25nl. So I'll be at 10nl for a few months, learning as much as possible in 2 - 3 poker hours per week.

Pretty much Robb, or at least it (and all these thoughts on beating micros threads) is aimed at anyone whos been trying for a while and hasnt beaten micros.

I mean, mcat has a point, but his point is why settle for 8ptBB/100 when you could make the best play all the time and win at 10ptBB/100. This isnt about that. Its for people who arent beating micros at all (or maybe are but for a very small amount). Walk before you can run kind of stuff.

If you still havnt had a successful tilt at 25nl, and have been running poorly lately, its nothing to do with 3/4 bet pots or other "edge case" spots. Almost certainly you're not winning enough when you're ahead and you're losing too much when you're behind. Chances are either you're taking yourself to value town, or you're letting others do it.

Heres a better example of what I mean:

$0.25/$0.5 No Limit Holdem
6 players
Converted at weaktight.com

Stacks:
UTG my72s ($52.55)
UTG 1 Hero ($64.25)
CO WorBear ($50.40)
BTN wwwPOKERcom ($20.36)
SB BacardSuperior ($149.84)
BB parsifal1972 ($15.25)

Pre-flop: ($0.75, 6 players) Hero is UTG 1 :8s: :8d:
1 fold, Hero raises to $1.75, 1 fold, wwwPOKERcom calls $1.75, 2 folds

Flop: :9d: :qc: :2s: ($4.25, 2 players)
Hero bets $3, wwwPOKERcom raises to $18.61, Hero folds

Final Pot: $25.86
wwwPOKERcom shows: :5c: :9c:

wwwPOKERcom wins $25.36 ( won $5 )
Hero lost -$4.75


Now his shove on the flop makes no sense. Looks really bluffy to me, very tempted to call but the fact is I now have 3rd pair and villains do dumb things sometimes. He was nice enough to show me what he had this time (I dunno why, if I could beat a pair of 9s I'd have called so not sure if he thinks he was showing a bluff or showing he "had it"...). Thats an example of a "marginal spot" thats not necessary to beat micros.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bjsaust

If you still havnt had a successful tilt at 25nl, and have been running poorly lately, its nothing to do with 3/4 bet pots or other "edge case" spots. Almost certainly you're not winning enough when you're ahead and you're losing too much when you're behind. Chances are either you're taking yourself to value town, or you're letting others do it.

---

This is true - for me. I wish I could pull that post down and start over. I wasn't thinking or writing clearly. Here's what is true. I can beat 10nl but not 25nl. I read spoon's Some Encouragement for New Players post, which says in part:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

I'm just throwing this out there: if you've been at any level 10nl or lower for 100k hands you need to find a new fucking hobby, like seriously. The following is why:

You aren't working hard enough at getting better to get more out of this game than you're going to end up putting into it, and I don't mean just money.

So seriously, even if it is just a hobby, get on the fucking ball. Know what I mean?

---

I have been taking an extremely serious look at the reasons why I suck at poker, the time I have to commit, what I can learn. Here are some big problem areas:

1. I don't know when to call profitably.
2. I don't know how to limp profitably.
3. My default bet/raise/fold approach to 10nl is not effective at 25nl, where more 3betting/raising/reraising occurs (it's almost non-existent at 10nl). I trap myself and spew.
4. I don't raise enough cbets when villains are aggressive.

On the plus side, I play tight enough, cbet well, and stay agro enough in small ball pots to win at 10nl. But I suck at poker, and the above list is only a few things I need to work on.

What BJ said is exactly right - it's not an edge deal with me. It's every freakin' pot. I should have said that I'm working hard now on my game at 10nl (instead of just mindlessly grinding roll for another shot at 25nl). I should have said that my thoughtless 10nl aggression needs thought - and some occasional passive lines added in. BJ said it, though. vnh.

Was going to send a PM with some tips, but this threads gone off topic enough already maybe some others could benefit.

Heres some general ideas for you Robb, these are literally things I've done when I've been running bad:

- Go through your 25nl DB and look at your losing hands. Identify the ones you think you played badly. On a pad, keep a list of categories of bad play (bad call down, bad bluff, took PP too far, whatever) and keep a score of each. This will really help to identify your main leaks.

- Create a list of rules. Base it off your play leaks identified above, and other areas you think you need work on (table select, dont play tired, whatever else) and print it out and put next to your computer, read it before every session.

Some specific stuff from your comments above

1. You call when you think you're likely ahead more than behind. HOWEVER take into account the threat of leverage. Calling a small bet on the flop, could mean being faced with big bets on turn and river. Think about whether its really worth it. If you do call flop to "evaluate turn" then be prepared to fold if things didnt improve.

2. I very rarely limp, when I do its overlimping at least one bad player that I'm happy to see a cheap flop with, or specific implied odds situations (eg otb or SB with multiple limpers and SC type hands ).

3. You're probably overreacting to the 3-betting. Yes it happens more, but just fold your weak hands and 4-bet your best hands (QQ+,AK+). Maybe call with some moderate ones like KQs or even TJs depending on their 3bet size. I've probably 4-bet bluffed 5 times in 40k hands of 25nl and 50nl and only with specific reads. One of my leaks was calling 3 bets too much. Postflops a little more interesting, but look to identify patterns. Again its rarely wrong to fold weak hands to a raise. One of my rules above is "when faced with aggression postflop, stop and ask myself what he has". You gotta be prepared to fold when you're beat. People arent bluffing anywhere near as much as you'd like them to be. Get reads on people.

4. Target the TAGFish with these. I wont do it on 2 broadways, but a single broadway (unlikely to have hit them just from pure odds point of view) where I'm saying "I hit the Q, did you?" or all unders "yes I probably called you with a PP, you want to take on my set?". Dont overdo it though, its an occassional move.



For you personally, I think you're too much of a numbers man. You learn the %s, you figure the theory, but you dont seem to get the concepts. Spend your time thinking about ranges. Think about what happens to those ranges when you raise v's when you call. Think about how often their range can improve if you dont end the hand now, v's the chance of extra bets if they dont improve. Think about how your hand fairs v's their range, and whether you'll get more value by raising (do they call with enough of their range that you beat, or only with the part of their range that beats you?) or by just calling and letting the weaker part of their range bet again.

Reply getting long, it really comes down to my initial point though. This shit aint rocket science. If you're getting too bogged down in the nitty detail you're probably missing the bigger picture stuff. Win as much as you can when ahead, lose as little as possible when behind, the work is in figuring out which you are.

One last thought, without coming over all weak tight, its often better to make a small mistake by folding the best hand, than to make a big mistake by calling big bets with the worst hand.

If you want some more thoughts/tips send me a PM.

BJ, all above is great advice. I truly appreciate you taking the time to write it all down. You're right. I've got enough 25nl hands in the db to analyze some patterns/take notes. I will only take issue with "being too much of a numbers guy." That's not the problem. The problem imo is analytical laziness - not taking what I know of theory and applying it on a thoughtful, practical, hand-by-hand basis. I don't look at enough HH's from the db to find spots where I can learn from mistakes.

Again, much thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Robb

BJ, all above is great advice. I truly appreciate you taking the time to write it all down. You're right. I've got enough 25nl hands in the db to analyze some patterns/take notes. I will only take issue with "being too much of a numbers guy." That's not the problem. The problem imo is analytical laziness - not taking what I know of theory and applying it on a thoughtful, practical, hand-by-hand basis. I don't look at enough HH's from the db to find spots where I can learn from mistakes.

Again, much thanks.

---

Dude... u r like the coolest, humblest mf-ka floating around. You got mad math skills, write some boss posts, and still able to recognize and accept leaks, advice n' sh!t. It's like you the poster dude for the perpetually learning attitude... kinda like the "contra-Slevin"

... I just made that up right now, in my head, for this post....

Gotta say makes your posts that much more credible for dudes like me what's learning from them...

Think about the adult learning model:
1. Unconscious incompetence
2. Conscious incompetence
3. Conscious competence
4. Inconscious competence

you want to be in #4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

you want to be in #4

---

I'd settle for #0: slightly less incompetent than all the dipsh!t, dumbass motherf****rs I play against.

No, seriously you want to be good. You want to comfortable in the stakes you play and you want to know what your opponents do. There is no reason why you shouldn't learn to crush the microes.

No, seriously you want to learn about sarcasm. There's no reason why you couldn't be comprehending irony before I learn to crush the micros.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swiggidy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swiggidy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iopq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swiggidy

you're good there more often than not

---

I'm not relatively sure I'm good though, which was the original statement

---

You should be relatively sure.

---

no, he could have a set
I'm not sure at all

---

El Oh El

---

you are missing the point, iopq. you suffer from the same syndrome as i do. you need to get over your "i'm right, so you have to be wrong, and i will go to any length to prove it" attitude, open your mind to some real constructive criticism, and learn from what others are trying to tell you.

or, YOU need to go get the job.

OK, I'm wrong, I will stop playing winning poker at the end of the session.