(LC) Moving on up - this morning's theme.

[bobbycharles]

In keeping with this morning's theme, I want to thank this board for helping in my 2006 endeavor.

To review a previous post, my goal was to start off at the PokerStars superdupermicrodonk level of .02/.04. My idea was to play 10,000 hands to make sure I can beat the level. Based on some of your comments, with which I agree, 10,000 hands at .02/.04 is torture. So with that in mind, I decided to use a hypothetical 300BB roll of $12 and would play until I had 300BB for the .05/.10 superdupermicronotasmanydonks level.

I don't yet have PokerTracker, so I kept track manually playing at every 100 hand mark. Most of the time I was 3 tabling.

I'm happy to say I have moved up to the .05/.10 level. The numbers are as follows:
Total number of hands played: 7756
Total BB won: 453.5
BB/100 = 5.85
Best Heater: +164.5BB over 700 hands (23.5BB/100)
Worst Draw Down: -59BB over 400 hands (-14.75BB/100)

All in all, I'm moderately pleased with my results. I would have liked to get there sooner, in fact, I was within 9BB of my goal when I experienced my big drawdown! God the frustration!

7700 hands was pretty much torture, but it was also an excercise in patience. I wanted to make sure I could beat the level before moving up. My past history had been play a little at various different levels, without full knowledge of what my win/loss rate was.

Generally, over 7700 hands I saw some VERY attrocious play and suffered too numerous suckouts to count. But I also was able to punish them severely at other times.

The biggest battle I had was with myself. It is SOOO important to define your opening hands and stick to it, without trying to mix it up in early position with 56s on a tight table, just because I haven't played a hand in two rotations. I donked off more than my fair share of BB doing things like that against my own better judgement.

All in all, again, MANY THANKS to all of you. I plan on keeping you posted on my trek to the .10/.20 level and I will post some hands along the way.

[train.]

nh, good work

[sg23]

[ QUOTE ]
It is SOOO important to define your opening hands and stick to it, without trying to mix it up in early position with 56s on a tight table, just because I haven't played a hand in two rotations. I donked off more than my fair share of BB doing things like that against my own better judgement.


[/ QUOTE ]

hehe, i did this too when i was starting out at .25/.50. a good leak to get rid of early. just out of curiosity, what constitutes a 'tight' table at .05/.10?

[shadow.]

[ QUOTE ]
The biggest battle I had was with myself. It is SOOO important to define your opening hands and stick to it...

[/ QUOTE ]

I strongly disagree with this statement.

[bobbycharles]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The biggest battle I had was with myself. It is SOOO important to define your opening hands and stick to it...

[/ QUOTE ]

I strongly disagree with this statement.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please clarify....I think I understand your drift in that one should be somewhat flexible based upon table conditions etc. However, I think a range of hands to play/not play should be considered on both tight tables and loose tables.

[bobbycharles]

[ QUOTE ]
just out of curiosity, what constitutes a 'tight' table at .05/.10?


[/ QUOTE ]

LOL...I hear ya....not many out there that's for sure. Maybe only 3 - 4 in the pot PF...??

[shadow.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The biggest battle I had was with myself. It is SOOO important to define your opening hands and stick to it...

[/ QUOTE ]

I strongly disagree with this statement.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please clarify....I think I understand your drift in that one should be somewhat flexible based upon table conditions etc. However, I think a range of hands to play/not play should be considered on both tight tables and loose tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

Under the right table conditions every hand is playable; under the right table conditions only AA is playable. Becoming stuck in hand ranges, or hand charts will definitively stagnate your growth as a poker player. To play poker at the highest levels, one must be able to think dynamically and creatively. Practicing rigid play, even in these lower limits, will dicatate that you stay in these lower limits.

[Hume]

[ QUOTE ]
under the right table conditions only AA is playable.

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

Edit: Also, a beginning player in the microlimits hardly needs to worry about "playing poker at the highest levels". For the vast majority of people starting with hand charts and learning the basics first is by far the best option.

[Dunkman]

That's tight in the .50/1 I've been playing, I was thinking 5-6 would be tight at .05/.10

[USDaniels]

[ QUOTE ]
That's tight in the .50/1 I've been playing, I was thinking 5-6 would be tight at .05/.10

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, I think you'd be surprised at how many nano players are actually trying. I mean, don't get me wrong, you can still find whole tables or uber LAGs (people who seemingly find it relaxing to play at 80% vpip - yuch [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] ), but you'll also find a large class or thinking (albeit inexperienced) players.

It kind of makes sense. TAGs are not born, they're made. Aaaand (typically speaking) TAGs are not TAGs because they desire pure gamble, they desire being better at the game than you. They have to learn to minimize risk and push edges. You'll find people who are trying to minimize risk during the learning process in nanos.

When playing .25/.50 I sometimes try to find tight games. While I am trying to build a bankroll, I'm also trying to learn enough to use that bankroll effectively at the next level. Finding all different kinds of tables and opponents feels like good practice to me. I may be wrong and am just giving up value, but I'd rather be doing that now, in nanos.