NL25 10K hands

I beat NL10 even with the retardedly high rake over 20K hands for a shitty rate, so I'm surprised here
Especially at how little I raised from the button or LP

[xX zorrito Xx]

the adjustment from 10NL to 25NL is something i'm not looking too forward to either...

this is where you can start to bluff people of pots and you have to actually think and switch some gears instead of going at it on cruise control like in lower stakes...

No, people don't really bluff as much as you would think

[spoonitnow]

Play less hands out of position.

Maybe play more hands in position.

Play less hands out of position.

Stop open limping if you're only going to do it with an obvious range.

Play less hands out of position.

Work harder at putting your opponents on a range.

And finally, play less hands out of position.

[xX zorrito Xx]

that's the point... i think that's where some profitability can start to be made with an occasional bluff with a really scary looking board...

the players here can fold sets, two pair, or a sucker ended straight given the board and situation... you don't get that in micros...

at least this is something i got from personal experiences while i played 25NL a while back...

[bjsaust]

People dont fold sets at 25nl. I've been called down on 4-flush, 4-straight boards by a set before when I thought what a swell thing it would be to setup a believable bluff at 25nl.

They have their hand, they play it.

POKER FUCKING HATES ME

[aka_red]

POKER FUCKING HATES ME

unfortunately this is not the case. you are leaking.

POKER FUCKING HATES ME

unfortunately this is not the case. you are leaking.

I have leaks, but I'm better than the people I play against

[swiggidy]

I have leaks, but I'm better than the people I play against

That's something Slevin would say

[Robb]

I have leaks, but I'm better than the people I play against

That's something Slevin would say

LoL.

But let me ask redzilla a question. Sklansky bucks calculates, for hands where villain's cards are KNOWN, if Hero got his money in while ahead. But, we see villain's cards only a small percentage of the time. So the green line (total winnings) can be negative while the Sklansky bucks is ++ if Hero is losing his ass in non-showdown hands.

I like numbers and math and shit, but these friggin' Sklansky bucks drive me nuts. Did I get the interpretation of the winnings graph right?

We're only running bad if showdown winnings is much less than Sklansky line. Overall winnings doesn't necessarily track with Sklansky bucks, amiright?

[swiggidy]

You definitely have the right idea Robb. Except every time you get all-in you do see the villains cards. They're in the HH even if they muck.

He's running down $200 of equity in all-in confrontations, but is actually down $1600 cash in non-showndown pots.

BTW, the sklansky is probably close to ideal long term, but there could be some variance, especially at microstakes where someone will call with 1/4 pot left, and hit on the next card. So it looks like you got your money in bad even though you really didn't.

{edited for clarity}

[spoonitnow]

{double post, damn connection}

[spoonitnow]

I have leaks, but I'm better than the people I play against

That's something Slevin would say

LoL.

But let me ask redzilla a question. Sklansky bucks calculates, for hands where villain's cards are KNOWN, if Hero got his money in while ahead. But, we see villain's cards only a small percentage of the time. So the green line (total winnings) can be negative while the Sklansky bucks is ++ if Hero is losing his ass in non-showdown hands.

I like numbers and math and shit, but these friggin' Sklansky bucks drive me nuts. Did I get the interpretation of the winnings graph right?

We're only running bad if showdown winnings is much less than Sklansky line. Overall winnings doesn't necessarily track with Sklansky bucks, amiright?

Re: Bold; This is correct. Sklansky bucks can only be calculated from HHs if we see Villain's hands, and we generally don't in non-showdown pots.