Lets all beat 200 and 100 NL

"1. I really don't think you guys should be putting this in writing in a public forum at all ever never ever never. You have AIM, Vent, IRC, etc for this type of discussion and I would suggest using that. You of course know this but I think it should be said "

lame

Originally Posted by andy-akb

Originally Posted by IowaSkinsFan

Originally Posted by andy-akb

Originally Posted by sauce123

2. I know this is counter-intuitive in a way but im absolutely convinced that calling in position with hands like KQ, AJ, AT, AQ, is a negative expected value play against strong tight aggressive opponents as is calling in the blinds with 22-99. Im also convinced 3betting with all of these hands is usually +ev

Maybe Im reading this wrong, but are you 3betting 22-99 as a "standard" play? If so, what percentage are you estimating that you do this?

You should be threebetting pp's from the blinds a fair amount or folding them if there's only a BU raise involved.

I agree, but the frequency I do it with is less than 50% so I wouldnt call it a standard play. If I read his post correctly, then it makes it seem as though he is doing it >50% which is something I havent really considered. I recently have started folding them to a single button open though, unless they have like a 5% PFR.

what he's saying is that playing out of position without initiative with a fairly well defined hand that generally misses and has poor implied odds when it 'hits' generally sucks. now against weaker opponents where you can often c/c once and they'll give up, or c/r often and they fold a huge amount of the time (or have other exploitable tendencies), different story quite obviously.

now I think he went too far by grouping 22-99 together as I think the higher end of that range, heavily weighted towards the top, still has a lot of value. Hence in certain spots I think it's right to call with 88/99 type hands and 3-bet 22/33 type hands. Not because say 99 would be -EV to 3-bet with (if you're 3-betting 22 then 99 should damn well be +EV to 3-bet if you play halfway decent post-flop), but because it's all relative and it has to be compared to calling, folding, 3-betting a smaller/larger amount, etc. sometimes folding is best, oh well.

Originally Posted by gabe

"1. I really don't think you guys should be putting this in writing in a public forum at all ever never ever never. You have AIM, Vent, IRC, etc for this type of discussion and I would suggest using that. You of course know this but I think it should be said "

lame

yeah, ive never really understood this mentality. I understand for Sbrugby, Antonius, etc. that maybe they would lose some of there edge by putting this stuff out there, but for SS/MS regs i dont think you are compromising your game by doing it.

they might be compromising some but seems more important to learn as much as you can about poker so you can get past 200nl

Originally Posted by Lukie

sidenote, a lot of people still really botch the turn in all kinds of funny ways. IMO easily the hardest street to play, especially given the general flow of ~100bb online games where stacks are often awkward on the turn and ranges tough to estimate against aggressive players.

I really wanted to get to this point, thanks for mentioning it. I think Danny touched on it a bit in another thread when he was talking about how people aren't bet/folding the turn enough. I think the turn is definitely the hardest street to play and i think most people struggle mightily with it.

I think what is a useful tool against bad turn players is floating the flop, even OOP. Many players only have a couple of moves on the turn, so their hands become very easy to read once you get to the river. I think this is especially useful against multitablers who may even forget what has happened in the hand, see a river bet, and fold their midpair/weakish holdings.

Originally Posted by Lukie

2. the days of winning lots of $$ by just playing reasonably preflop are long over, but it had to happen eventually.

lol donkaments

I think betting on the turn becomes a lot more important when people are reading your hands better.

Most underrated, overlooked leak/way to become profitable: Having a Solid Small/medium-small pot game.

I've finally plugged my biggest leak, which is fighting over pots that don't matter and cbetting too much or on the wrong board.

I've had a great big pot game for a long time, i.e. getting big hands paid and folding when I'm beat in big pots, but then I'd notice after taking say 2-3 stacks while 4 tabling, slowly the money would disappear and I'd have no idea what happened. Well, I just cbet too much, at the wrong times, or fought over smaller pots that I shoulda folded.

The small/medium-small pots were killing me. I would just slowly bleed my stack... I'd read all this stuff about 3 betting, hand ranges, bluffs, blah blah blah trying to improve when the reality was for me that I needed to get my small pot game under control and that all things considered, the rest of my game was fine. Cbetting probably 30% less and 2 barreling much less, on top of being willing to dump marginal hands on the turn has been the biggest money saver for me.

Now after stacking people, I don't bleed my winnings, and when I'm a bit card dead I don't lose too much. I feel a lot nittyer, but it also allows me to play more tables at once because I'm not screwing around with a lot of small pots/marginal situations... so now can I not only make more per table, but play up to 6 high speed tables at a time.

Originally Posted by mixchange

Most underrated, overlooked leak/way to become profitable: Having a Solid Small/medium-small pot game.

I've finally plugged my biggest leak, which is fighting over pots that don't matter and cbetting too much or on the wrong board.

I've had a great big pot game for a long time, i.e. getting big hands paid and folding when I'm beat in big pots, but then I'd notice after taking say 2-3 stacks while 4 tabling, slowly the money would disappear and I'd have no idea what happened. Well, I just cbet too much, at the wrong times, or fought over smaller pots that I shoulda folded.

The small/medium-small pots were killing me. I would just slowly bleed my stack... I'd read all this stuff about 3 betting, hand ranges, bluffs, blah blah blah trying to improve when the reality was for me that I needed to get my small pot game under control and that all things considered, the rest of my game was fine. Cbetting probably 30% less and 2 barreling much less, on top of being willing to dump marginal hands on the turn has been the biggest money saver for me.

Isn't this kinda going against what ISF and Massimo are saying? I mean they are saying to double barrel more, and you are saying to double barrel less...

I'm just saying what worked for me. They seem to play totally differently. I have a tighter, more straightforward careful game. They seem very into tricky, complicated plays and thinking which I find not necessary at 100 and 200nl. I bled out a lot of pots with fancy play. Maybe they are just flat out better than me at it and I suck with it. I just know that once I stopped trying to police all the small pots and cbet/bluff a lot I saved tons of cash.

I just wanted to pose a different perspective. There's no one way to play, and for me getting too caught up in 3bet ranges, bluffs, etc. ended up just being counterproductive from keeping focus on adjusting to opponents, reads, and really finding my style which is more of a big and medium pot game.

Maybe that's all stuff I need to get into before doing well at 400nl+ but for now I'm doing quite well.

Lol at over 1k views and 80 odd posts. Seems not everyone that reads this wants to contribute (that includes me obv)

Originally Posted by mixchange

I'm just saying what worked for me. They seem to play totally differently. I have a tighter, more straightforward careful game. They seem very into tricky, complicated plays and thinking which I find not necessary at 100 and 200nl.

I'm not tricky at all, I think you've gotten a bad impression from hands ive posted.

Are you being serious? It seems like you are obsessed with fancy plays. I guess that's whats fun to post, but you try a lot of stuff I'd never do.

Originally Posted by mixchange

Are you being serious? It seems like you are obsessed with fancy plays. I guess that's whats fun to post, but you try a lot of stuff I'd never do.

Okay to me "fancy" play has a negative connotation because fancy is doing things you'd never do with other hands or never do at all. I don't like doing those, however there's nothing wrong with making a hand that you play like a set that's actually a total bluff.

semantical issue, I am bad with lingo I suppose. No, there is nothing wrong with a bluff that you think has a high chance of working. EV+ plays are always g00t!

I do think though that a lot of poker players struggling with 200NL and down don't realize how badly they leak in the small pots by cbetting too much or in the wrong spots, making thin calls with marginal hands, and not folding turns with weak holdings. Turn calls are expensive and we save a lot by realizing we're beat before calling turn bets.

I agree with some of what mixchange is saying. A lot of the supposedly sophisticated strategy discussion that takes place amongst "good" poker players (I'm referring mostly to players who belong to the online poker culture that has developed over the last couple years) is pure masturbation. Most of your money in poker comes from fairly straightforward plays made against people who make very bad decisions, and once your opponents are able to stick to a sound basic strategy, there isn't a lot you can do to take their money at a rate that isn't painfully slow. This is true regardless of whether or not they make statistically optimal adjustments to players who reraise preflop with garbage, or other "advanced" plays.

i've always wondered who are making the "mistakes" at 100/200NL such that aba can achieve winrates of like 8ptbb/100...

lol at ISF being tricky

Honestly dsaxton, have you played a significant number of hands of HSNL? (I don't know whether you have or not, I'm not accusing you of anything). I haven't so I don't consider myself qualified to comment on the source of people's profit in those games. But I'd imagine that what might be a "painfully slow" way to take money from mediocre players at SSNL, would bring in money much faster if the blinds were multiplied by 10 or 20.

Originally Posted by mcatdog

Honestly dsaxton, have you played a significant number of hands of HSNL? (I don't know whether you have or not, I'm not accusing you of anything). I haven't so I don't consider myself qualified to comment on the source of people's profit in those games. But I'd imagine that what might be a "painfully slow" way to take money from mediocre players at SSNL, would bring in money much faster if the blinds were multiplied by 10 or 20.

No. I made a conscious decision not to move up once I was able to comfortably support myself during college in smallish middle stakes games. But I know enough about the game and have enough experience against good players to know that poker is in many ways more of a glorified guessing game than the sophisticated chess match that successful players tell themselves it is (something which is probably motivated primarily by their egos).

Originally Posted by dsaxton

I agree with some of what mixchange is saying. A lot of the supposedly sophisticated strategy discussion that takes place amongst "good" poker players (I'm referring mostly to players who belong to the online poker culture that has developed over the last couple years) is pure masturbation. Most of your money in poker comes from fairly straightforward plays made against people who make very bad decisions, and once your opponents are able to stick to a sound basic strategy, there isn't a lot you can do to take their money at a rate that isn't painfully slow. This is true regardless of whether or not they make statistically optimal adjustments to players who reraise preflop with garbage, or other "advanced" plays.

hu for rollzzzzz????

and as a stipulation i promise to 4bet bluff u once every 2 hours or more on each table we play and to make one value bluff every 2 hours but not on each table. i will also merge my range liberally and value bet 2nd and 3rd pair a lot.

i will also masturbate while playing

Originally Posted by sauce123

i will also masturbate while playing

I figured I would get at least one response like this for not kissing high stakes degenerate ass. You shouldn't be offended that not everyone thinks you are as talented as you do.

Originally Posted by sauce123

lol at ISF being tricky

I didn't say he *was* tricky, just that he was obsessed with tricky plays ;p thats like half of what he posts about.

no dsaxton, i will not play u live wtf

o yea and if ur opponent is posting on the 0th level u have to look only at ur own 2 posts to beat them.

200nl regs, even the best one, is ridiculously exploitable, it's just a matter of thinking about the game and how to do it.

dsaxton, your post kind of weirds me out because it's as if you don't even want to think about deeper levels of the game. Yes, you're right, as aba says and as many will agree, 99% of hands are super standard (although if you really think about it, 1 in every 100 is a good amount). However, there are aggressive strategies and thin value you can employ that look ridiculous to a lot of players but really shouldn't be ridiculous at all if you think about the hand thoroughly.

"I'm referring mostly to players who belong to the online poker culture that has developed over the last couple years"

This sounds like one of the 80 year olds i play with live who talk about "ONLINE PLAYERS BET $40 ON THE FLOP! I MEAN WHO DOES THAT? AND THEY HAVE NOTHING!!! WTF!!"

"once your opponents are able to stick to a sound basic strategy, there isn't a lot you can do to take their money at a rate that isn't painfully slow."

This isn't the case and once you actually look into how you'd make a killing of 200nl/100nl regs, who do employ basic strategy, you'll realize there's a lot more to the game than you thought.

I don't mean this to be condescending or spawn some huge HU 4 rollz thread, I'm just telling you what i think.

dsaxton you dont have enough gamble in you to beat good players. luckily, there are plenty of fish in the small games for you.

Originally Posted by dsaxton

I made a conscious decision not to move up once I was able to comfortably support myself during college in smallish middle stakes games.

I've made the same decision before, it's a totally legitimate one and I think people are out of line if they make fun of you for it. Not everyone is willing or able to put the same amount of effort into the game.

At the same time, how can you say you know enough about playing against good players when you just got done saying you made a conscious effort to avoid playing them? I remember you saying somewhere awhile ago (on IRC maybe?) that you were bored with poker, do you think that's because you never made an effort to think past the first level?

Originally Posted by gabe

dsaxton you dont have enough gamble in you to beat good players. luckily, there are plenty of fish in the small games for you.

it was going to take me about 3 paragraphs to say this hyachachach

Originally Posted by dsaxton

I agree with some of what mixchange is saying. A lot of the supposedly sophisticated strategy discussion that takes place amongst "good" poker players (I'm referring mostly to players who belong to the online poker culture that has developed over the last couple years) is pure masturbation. Most of your money in poker comes from fairly straightforward plays made against people who make very bad decisions, and once your opponents are able to stick to a sound basic strategy, there isn't a lot you can do to take their money at a rate that isn't painfully slow. This is true regardless of whether or not they make statistically optimal adjustments to players who reraise preflop with garbage, or other "advanced" plays.

ok last post was borderline so i want to explain my thoughts:

i feel this would have been very true a couple years ago, and still is to an extent in the low-midstakes games online. but as you move up people stop making these 'very bad decisions' and opening up your game by 3-betting lighter, 2-barreling, raising people's bets etc., actually becomes very good, sometimes ideal strategy. They aren't really "advanced" plays although they may have been tagged with that label long-ago. When you start playing in tough games and people can put you on a fairly reasonable range, you can't play ultra-nitty and expect to have an edge in short-handed NL games.

Originally Posted by dsaxton

Originally Posted by mcatdog

Honestly dsaxton, have you played a significant number of hands of HSNL? (I don't know whether you have or not, I'm not accusing you of anything). I haven't so I don't consider myself qualified to comment on the source of people's profit in those games. But I'd imagine that what might be a "painfully slow" way to take money from mediocre players at SSNL, would bring in money much faster if the blinds were multiplied by 10 or 20.

No. I made a conscious decision not to move up once I was able to comfortably support myself during college in smallish middle stakes games. But I know enough about the game and have enough experience against good players to know that poker is in many ways more of a glorified guessing game than the sophisticated chess match that successful players tell themselves it is (something which is probably motivated primarily by their egos).

lol @ glorified guessing game

Originally Posted by Lukie

Originally Posted by dsaxton

I agree with some of what mixchange is saying. A lot of the supposedly sophisticated strategy discussion that takes place amongst "good" poker players (I'm referring mostly to players who belong to the online poker culture that has developed over the last couple years) is pure masturbation. Most of your money in poker comes from fairly straightforward plays made against people who make very bad decisions, and once your opponents are able to stick to a sound basic strategy, there isn't a lot you can do to take their money at a rate that isn't painfully slow. This is true regardless of whether or not they make statistically optimal adjustments to players who reraise preflop with garbage, or other "advanced" plays.

ok last post was borderline so i want to explain my thoughts:

i feel this would have been very true a couple years ago, and still is to an extent in the low-midstakes games online. but as you move up people stop making these 'very bad decisions' and opening up your game by 3-betting lighter, 2-barreling, raising people's bets etc., actually becomes very good, sometimes ideal strategy. They aren't really "advanced" plays although they may have been tagged with that label long-ago. When you start playing in tough games and people can put you on a fairly reasonable range, you can't play ultra-nitty and expect to have an edge in short-handed NL games.

This thread is titled let's beat 100/200NL so I thought my post was pretty pertinent. The majority of people that post here that aren't beating 100/200NL have small pot leaks just as I did. That's all i was trying to say, I know I would have to step my game up and play differently to go up to higher stakes. But the thread still is how to beat 100 and 200NL, which are beatable with nittish careful play.

mixchange, thats what the title says but the discussion has changed. if you can beat fish and not lose to good players than you can beat 100 and 200nl.

this discussion is way more beneficial anyways.

Originally Posted by mixchange

Originally Posted by Lukie

Originally Posted by dsaxton

I agree with some of what mixchange is saying. A lot of the supposedly sophisticated strategy discussion that takes place amongst "good" poker players (I'm referring mostly to players who belong to the online poker culture that has developed over the last couple years) is pure masturbation. Most of your money in poker comes from fairly straightforward plays made against people who make very bad decisions, and once your opponents are able to stick to a sound basic strategy, there isn't a lot you can do to take their money at a rate that isn't painfully slow. This is true regardless of whether or not they make statistically optimal adjustments to players who reraise preflop with garbage, or other "advanced" plays.

ok last post was borderline so i want to explain my thoughts:

i feel this would have been very true a couple years ago, and still is to an extent in the low-midstakes games online. but as you move up people stop making these 'very bad decisions' and opening up your game by 3-betting lighter, 2-barreling, raising people's bets etc., actually becomes very good, sometimes ideal strategy. They aren't really "advanced" plays although they may have been tagged with that label long-ago. When you start playing in tough games and people can put you on a fairly reasonable range, you can't play ultra-nitty and expect to have an edge in short-handed NL games.

This thread is titled let's beat 100/200NL so I thought my post was pretty pertinent. The majority of people that post here that aren't beating 100/200NL have small pot leaks just as I did. That's all i was trying to say, I know I would have to step my game up and play differently to go up to higher stakes. But the thread still is how to beat 100 and 200NL, which are beatable with nittish careful play.

hey I never said you or dsaxton were wrong, I just havn't found what you guys are saying to have worked for me. My honest feeling is that many taggs' biggest leak is exactly opposite to what you are saying, and more specifically that they aren't putting ENOUGH pressure on people (ie not 3-betting enough pre, firing multiple barrels postflop, not value betting thin enough, etc). This is something that is blatantly obvious between the winning regs at 1KNL and the winning regs at say 200NL. The former are generally much more aggressive, merge hand ranges (and read hand ranges) much better. Just my experience from playing everywhere from 1/2NL to 25/50NL in the last year, take it fwiw.

I don't see how these things have anything to do with level, there are players at .5-1 and 1-2 whom it's profitable to play over-aggro against and (I assume) players at 1KNL whom you should play ABC poker against.

Originally Posted by mcatdog

I don't see how these things have anything to do with level

Idk, the discussion seems to be that you shouldn't be thinking at a high level in low stakes, and i disagree, especially because most decisions require a high level a thinking to really understand, and a lot of players don't think that's the case.

Originally Posted by gabe

mixchange, thats what the title says but the discussion has changed. if you can beat fish and not lose to good players than you can beat 100 and 200nl.

sure its changed, but I added a point I think is important. maybe it needed a new thread, I don't know.

pressure is important, I am just advocating reviewing when pressure worked and when it didn't, people leak a lot by applying pressure at the wrong times, thats what I'm saying. I found a lot of the pressure I applied in small pots didn't make sense or was in the end ev- I did not mean became a passive onlooker, but become perceptive of your small pot game leaks which add up frequently. People usually remember a few big pots at the end of their session, but their session may have been won or lost in a lot of these small pots. Maybe the way to play them was to be aggro, maybe it was not to bother with the pot. But people forget about their leaks in alll these tiny pots. I'd double up a few times and then leak the money in a few hrs in small pots and wonder what happened.

I don't think a lot of losing 100/200nl players even understand a lot of the stuff posted in this thread and are too shy to post. Before you can get into some of the more complicated plays you need to make sure your standard small pot game isn't leaking badly and makes sense. If you're getting caught in a lot of these small pot bluffs your more complicated plays later will reek, if you can even understand them really

I was looking at this thread from my perspective 2 months ago, and what might help me back then, thats what I posted. But what you guys are saying might help me right now to progress and move on. make any sense?

Originally Posted by gabe

dsaxton you dont have enough gamble in you to beat good players. luckily, there are plenty of fish in the small games for you.

I don't recall ever playing at a table with you before.

Originally Posted by Lukie

When you start playing in tough games and people can put you on a fairly reasonable range, you can't play ultra-nitty and expect to have an edge in short-handed NL games.

You can beat "tough" 5+ handed games with a tight pre-flop strategy by abusing the fact that anyone with a 3-digit IQ doesn't want to play a big pot with you. It also helps to have a better starting hand than your opponent on average.

Also, it's worth noting that a lot of the nosebleed stake games are often Heads-up, sometimes 3-4 handed.

Originally Posted by dsaxton

Originally Posted by gabe

dsaxton you dont have enough gamble in you to beat good players. luckily, there are plenty of fish in the small games for you.

I don't recall ever playing at a table with you before.

lol, u guys are all retarded...sorry

applying pressure, fancy plays etc only only work if u apply them at the right times. how do u apply it at the right times? ur better at reading hands, metagame, using ur image, preflop play, postflop play, tilt control, more competitive... being a better poker player.

Originally Posted by Fnord

Originally Posted by Lukie

When you start playing in tough games and people can put you on a fairly reasonable range, you can't play ultra-nitty and expect to have an edge in short-handed NL games.

You can beat "tough" 5+ handed games with a tight pre-flop strategy by abusing the fact that anyone with a 3-digit IQ doesn't want to play a big pot with you. It also helps to have a better starting hand than your opponent on average.

Also, it's worth noting that a lot of the nosebleed stake games are often Heads-up, sometimes 3-4 handed.

Wait, you're saying in order to win as a nit you need to widen your range? Hmm, I don't get it.

Originally Posted by Alexos

Originally Posted by dsaxton

Originally Posted by gabe

dsaxton you dont have enough gamble in you to beat good players. luckily, there are plenty of fish in the small games for you.

I don't recall ever playing at a table with you before.

lol, u guys are all retarded...sorry

I wasn't calling him a fish, if that's how it sounded. I was saying that he doesn't have much basis for his claim that I'm some sort of super nit because he's never even played with me before.

Originally Posted by sauce123

applying pressure, fancy plays etc only only work if u apply them at the right times. how do u apply it at the right times? ur better at reading hands, metagame, using ur image, preflop play, postflop play, tilt control, more competitive... being a better poker player.

QFT

Originally Posted by sauce123

applying pressure, fancy plays etc only only work if u apply them at the right times. how do u apply it at the right times? ur better at reading hands, metagame, using ur image, preflop play, postflop play, tilt control, more competitive... being a better poker player.

yeah, I'm basically saying people can't get into the fancy plays until they can stop leaking in small pots. there's a foundation to be laid before we can get fancy. And I think many break even or losing 100nl/200nl players read these threads and worry about 3bet ranges, 2 barelling when they have bigger fish to fry...

Originally Posted by mixchange

Originally Posted by sauce123

applying pressure, fancy plays etc only only work if u apply them at the right times. how do u apply it at the right times? ur better at reading hands, metagame, using ur image, preflop play, postflop play, tilt control, more competitive... being a better poker player.

yeah, I'm basically saying people can't get into the fancy plays until they can stop leaking in small pots. there's a foundation to be laid before we can get fancy. And I think many break even or losing 100nl/200nl players read these threads and worry about 3bet ranges, 2 barelling when they have bigger fish to fry...

i completely agree, a lot of the conditions required to make fancy plays "good" also arent present at 200 and 100nl.

Originally Posted by Cocco_Bill

Originally Posted by sauce123

applying pressure, fancy plays etc only only work if u apply them at the right times. how do u apply it at the right times? ur better at reading hands, metagame, using ur image, preflop play, postflop play, tilt control, more competitive... being a better poker player.

QFT

Originally Posted by Fnord

Originally Posted by Lukie

When you start playing in tough games and people can put you on a fairly reasonable range, you can't play ultra-nitty and expect to have an edge in short-handed NL games.

You can beat "tough" 5+ handed games with a tight pre-flop strategy by abusing the fact that anyone with a 3-digit IQ doesn't want to play a big pot with you. It also helps to have a better starting hand than your opponent on average.

Also, it's worth noting that a lot of the nosebleed stake games are often Heads-up, sometimes 3-4 handed.

couldn't 'abusing the fact that people want to shy away from playing big pots with you' more simply be called aggression, aka not playing ultra-nitty?

btw don't confuse aggression with looseness, they are two seperate issues.

The problem I found with more advanced plays is that I didn't know what I was doing or why - I started threebetting pretty light (down to SCs on the button) and cbetting for about 60% if they tagged along but I didn't know why, I just found it made money and was fun.

Is this bad shit?

Originally Posted by Ash256

The problem I found with more advanced plays is that I didn't know what I was doing or why - I started threebetting pretty light (down to SCs on the button) and cbetting for about 60% if they tagged along but I didn't know why, I just found it made money and was fun.

Is this bad shit?

No, it just makes you really cool.

Originally Posted by Ash256

The problem I found with more advanced plays is that I didn't know what I was doing or why - I started threebetting pretty light (down to SCs on the button) and cbetting for about 60% if they tagged along but I didn't know why, I just found it made money and was fun.

Is this bad shit?

Your in the same boat with a lot of people I think, however, when I started figuring out why I wanted to do certain things, a whole wealth of nowledge opened up and I immediately became a 10 times better player.

Hey,
on the 2p2 ssnl forum a guy named cowpig is doing a well, I found one post from him really summed some things up perfectly I thought it'd be good to paste here. It's his thoughts on various levels.

1/2 6-max vs lower levels: I found that here, not everyone was a spewtard anymore. You avg opponent is no longer a complete beginner/donkey, and so playing your own cards is no longer enough, really. Most of the regulars, though, have huge leaks at this level. What I had a hard time doing was adjusting my betting to specific opponents, rather than just play top pair for value, etc like a robot. I was really stubborn about multi-tabling, and 8+ tables became harder and harder as I moved up, and my competition became more and more varied.

2/4: The big thing I noticed here is that the regulars were actually TAGs or LAGs, rather than weak-tight or weak-loose. I think there are very few aggressive players at 1/2, and at 2/4 there are a ton. I, however, have always been very aggressive so I was able to adjust rather naturally. 3betting preflop, value betting lighter against people with wide ranges, and playing hyper-aggressive against people who got in over their heads in reraised pots are adjustments that came naturally to me, but may be more difficult for others.

Here's the link to the thread, this guy clearly knows his shit IMO, I suggest you keep watch.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...=all&vc=1&nt=5

I dunno about this guy ISF. I haven't read the thread too deeply or far, I'm playing tables right now. But it looks possible that this guy is running good. He hasn't been doing a lot of this for very long.

Originally Posted by Galapogos

I dunno about this guy ISF. I haven't read the thread too deeply or far, I'm playing tables right now. But it looks possible that this guy is running good. He hasn't been doing a lot of this for very long.

Yeah your right but what he's said strategy wise so far in his thread makes me think he's for real.

Originally Posted by mixchange

Originally Posted by Ash256

The problem I found with more advanced plays is that I didn't know what I was doing or why - I started threebetting pretty light (down to SCs on the button) and cbetting for about 60% if they tagged along but I didn't know why, I just found it made money and was fun.

Is this bad shit?

No, it just makes you really cool.

May I get on your boat Mr Ferryman,

I also havent gotten to a point where I GET most of what Im doing