Why do I suck at poker?

[JackAll]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks. I understand the concept of broll mgmt. I guess my point is that I feel that I cannot play correctly at low limits because the amount of money in play is not meaningful to me. Or rather, that I cannot play correctly over long periods of time at low limits. I can certainly play good over certain periods of time, but whenever i start to lose over an extended period of time, or even in a session, whether through bad play on my part, bad beats, cooles, whatever, my discipline breaks down and sometimes I become a tilt monkey.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are 2 points in that response:

1. Low limits are too boring for you;
2. You tilt after a string of bad beats.


Regarding the first point - this is rediculous. Poker is about odds, semi-bluffing, putting your opponents on hand ranges and representing a stronger hand when your hand is weaker, and repping a weaker hand than them when your hand is stronger. This doesn't change at higher limits. And to be honest, you sound a lot like a gambling addict by saying that the amount of money is not meaningful at lower limits. Moreover, any *SUCCESSFUL* player started at lower limits and made sure they could beat it by being able to build up their bankroll so they could play the next limit without going busto from a string of bad beats. Then they made sure they were good enough to beat that level by winning enough to increase their bankroll to support a try at the next level before moving up with that big enough bankroll such that a string of bad beats wouldn't make them busto there; etc. It sounds like you just jump right in because 50nl *sounds like an interesting amount of money*. Do you see how you disregard skill level by thinking something like that?

Regarding your second point - I have issues with this. After a few bad beats, I may very well make one or two big mistakes which each cost half to a full buy-in. The only solution I found here (since I have no control to leave the table which is obviously the best thing) was to tighten up. Just dump any non-premium hands pre-fllop so that I am much less likely to get into trouble in the first place. Also not bluffing beyond a c-bet in this tilty situation.

[ QUOTE ]
My real question is whether I am making a mistake by putting relatively small amounts of money (to me) online and trying to grind small stakes? Maybe I'm not cut out to grind small stakes because the money is not meaningful to me? I understand that the winrates in poker are low. I don't have expectations of winning lots of money playing $25NL. I guess I am just trying to see if there is anyone out there like me who could not muster the discipline to play properly and grind at low stakes, but who fared better playing at higher stakes where winning or losing a buy-in would be meaningful? Or would I just be setting myself up for disaster?

[/ QUOTE ]

Playing over a limit that you never conquered for at least 20 buy-ins is a mistake. And I don't think your mistakes are because they are small amounts of money. You really need to focus on pot odds, putting opponents on hand ranges, etc., as I said above. $50 buy-in online is as tough as $200 buy-in live in regards to skill. Focus on the game itself and 1bb is still 1bb no matter whether the ig blind is 25c or $10. And for what it's worth, yesterday I went down from my normal limit to play at the same table as a friend of mine who is testing out 50nl after doing well at 25nl and building his roll up (i.e. he has *proof* that he is good enough to beat 25nl). I found that 50nl is filled with quite a few really good players. I can see how a small mistake against a good player can end up costing a lot of bb's. So you don't need many bad beats combined with only a few small mistakes to lose a few buy-ins. Assuming that 50nl is the right place for you because $50 sounds like a *good amount of money* and disregarding skill level of each limit is absurd. Do you see why yet?