P-Stars NL .01/.02 - First deposit of $25 gone in 2 days... help?

[JereLock]

So I threw in $25 yesterday after having played like 20k play money hands, trying to see how I could hold up.
48 hours later, gone.
I've left pokertracker running, but I haven't bought it yet, so I only have 1000 hands or so on it.

I'd play $1 buy in at those limits, and kept increasing, but every so often I'd lose big.

I'm not sure what I'm looking for, how about some advice...

[RapidEvolution]

You really should start with 20 full buy-ins so you can ride out the big losses.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
You really should start with 20 full buy-ins so you can ride out the big losses.

[/ QUOTE ]
No. The problem is not that the OP didn't start with 20 buy-ins. The problem is that the OP is not a winning player yet. A losing player will lose any amount, 1 or 2 dollars at a time. This was almost certainly a downward trend, not a downswing that could be survived with a large enough bankroll. A solid winning player will have an extremely low risk of ruin with only $20 at NL $2 (or NL $5 with a $.02 big blind).

Having a bankroll that would make an expert safe does not turn you into an expert. Bankroll mismanagement is often a scapegoat when a loss is the result of poor play.

One nice thing about soft games is that the long run is shorter. It doesn't take long to see if your skills are weak, and once you improve, you will see the results rapidly.

[tarheeljks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You really should start with 20 full buy-ins so you can ride out the big losses.

[/ QUOTE ]
No. The problem is not that the OP didn't start with 20 buy-ins. The problem is that the OP is not a winning player yet. A losing player will lose any amount, 1 or 2 dollars at a time. This was almost certainly a downward trend, not a downswing that could be survived with a large enough bankroll. A solid winning player will have an extremely low risk of ruin with only $20 at NL $2 (or NL $5 with a $.02 big blind).

Having a bankroll that would make an expert safe does not turn you into an expert. Bankroll mismanagement is often a scapegoat when a loss is the result of poor play.

One nice thing about soft games is that the long run is shorter. It doesn't take long to see if your skills are weak, and once you improve, you will see the results rapidly.

[/ QUOTE ]

sage advice. someone give this man a custom title, like "bankroll sage" or something

[Ironic]

Read the stickies in the micro stakes or fullring forums (depending where you play).

I would recommend starting with fullring. A simple tight game demolishes 0.1/0.2 NL at poker stars fullring. Make small bets with small hands and when you hit a monster just get it all in, shoving it all in at the river if necessary; don't worry you will get called a decent percentage of the time.

Unfortunately until NL25 it isn't very profitable, which is also where the players start to get good and you notice tonnes of regulars.

Just play tight poker. If you still lose you're either not playing tight enough, are too weak with your strong hands or too strong with your weak hands. Honestly that's all there is too it at that level.

Also remember bankroll management. Don't play at a level where you have less than 20 times the buyin - if you experience a downswing and you are not properly rolled then it could wipe out your earnings before you know it. However at NL2 and NL10 I wouldn't worry so much about that. $80 at Nl10 was enough for me [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[RapidEvolution]

[ QUOTE ]
Read the stickies in the micro stakes or fullring forums (depending where you play).

I would recommend starting with fullring. A simple tight game demolishes 0.1/0.2 NL at poker stars fullring. Make small bets with small hands and when you hit a monster just get it all in, shoving it all in at the river if necessary; don't worry you will get called a decent percentage of the time.

Unfortunately until NL25 it isn't very profitable, which is also where the players start to get good and you notice tonnes of regulars.

Just play tight poker. If you still lose you're either not playing tight enough, are too weak with your strong hands or too strong with your weak hands. Honestly that's all there is too it at that level.

Also remember bankroll management. Don't play at a level where you have less than 20 times the buyin - if you experience a downswing and you are not properly rolled then it could wipe out your earnings before you know it. However at NL2 and NL10 I wouldn't worry so much about that. $80 at Nl10 was enough for me [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

ditto! (I was just feeling lazy to type all this)

[JereLock]

If I'm playing $1 buy in, and I started with 25, am I not covered?

Also, could you define fullring? I thought this to mean the opposite of 6max, a 9/10 seated game?

[kayaker]

[ QUOTE ]
If I'm playing $1 buy in, and I started with 25, am I not covered?

[/ QUOTE ]

The 20x the buy-in rule is for players wanting/needing to have a dedicated poker bankroll that has no chance of being refilled from outside sources. If you're putting in $25 at a time and playing NL2, I wouldn't worry too much with that.


[ QUOTE ]
Also, could you define fullring? I thought this to mean the opposite of 6max, a 9/10 seated game?

[/ QUOTE ]

Full Ring is 9-10max and is much more forgiving than 6-max. For a player just starting out online, I strongly suggest you don't try 6-max. It's much more aggressive and you will likely get run over.

[DorianGray]

If you are on a budget and are also just starting to learn, you might try playing sit and go tournaments. It is a pretty good way to learn while limiting your downside.

[Quicksilvre]

[ QUOTE ]
If I'm playing $1 buy in, and I started with 25, am I not covered?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would say you are covered--a good player would be covered with $20 at NL2. However, if you lost $25 a dollar at a time in a couple of days down there, your game needs work. It is indeed quite likely that you are playing too many hands, so check out kayaker's hand start advice.

Here's another opinion from Pokey in the micro NL forum, albeit one that's more intended for NL10 and NL25:

[ QUOTE ]
1. From EP, play tighter-than-tight. I play any pocket pair, AK, AQ, maybe AJ and KQ (depending on the table and my image); that's it. I'm raising with AA-TT and AK, AQ, AJ, and KQ (if I play them). Sometimes I'll raise 99 and 88 as well.
2. From MP, I don't open-limp. If the hand is good enough to play, it's good enough to raise as the first player in. I'll add suited connectors down to T9s into my lineup, and unsuited QJ or JT. I'll also consider open-raising any two if my table image is tight and the players behind me are tight preflop and/or horrible (or even just weak-tight) postflop.
3. From LP, if it's folded to me, I'm open-raising with any pair, any ace, any king, any two honors, any suited connectors down to 54s, any unsuited connectors down to 87o. I make steal attempts a bit over 1/3 of the time, and it's wildly profitable. I also follow up ANY steal attempt with a continuation bet, regardless of the board or my hand. I will, however, quickly release a garbage hand if I'm reraised preflop or bet into on the flop; there's no reason to stick around if you get caught stealing.
4. From LP after limpers, I tighten up a bit on my raising standards but still play very loose: I'll raise any suited ace, any pair AA-TT, AK, AQ, AJ, KQ, and QJ; I'll add in any other pair and suited or unsuited connectors if I'm feeling frisky and my image is tight. I'll at least limp with suited connectors and any pair regardless.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...age=0&vc=1