Is it even worth playinig micro-limit HE online?

[jukofyork]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, yeah, so they play ok preflop. That's great. I haven't read SSHE in a while, but I believe it also says that after the flop is when the real money is won and lost in Texas Hold'em. Even at tough site like Full Tilt, the microlimit and small stakes players suck after the flop. A good player can easily profit from the other player's poor post flop play.

[/ QUOTE ]
If they aren't entering the pot with J2o anymore then there is much less scope for them to make huge costly postflop mistakes and for you to profit significantly.

If 4BB/100 was possible for good players back in the days of 7 to the flop and 15BB pots, then I guess now an excellent player might just be able to eak out a slightly +ve BB/100 while paying about 2-3BB/100 in rake by outplaying rocks postflop at F/R LHE.

Alternatively you can play micro-limit 6max where their might be more fish potential, but ultimately you just end up paying 4-5BB/100 in rake and that soon kills of the extra winrate.

Juk [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[crazyhands]

I pretty much got the replies I was expecting. The profitablity of the games goes WAY down when there are 2-3 to the flop vs. 5-6 or so.

One reason I posted this is because I just came back from playing some juicy $2-4 live. This was the first time playing in live in a casino since reading small stakes HE. The cards ran very cold towards the end of my last session and got a few beats put on me and still finished about 18-20bb up.
After comming back home and playing some micro-limit, it was a shock to me how different the games were. Pretty much like night and day.
I do agree that NL allows others to make MORE COSTLY mistakes, which allows you to make more money, so I might consider the switch.

[wrschultz]

I think that learning a very basic strategy for how not to be a big loser at limit is pretty easy and more and more people are able to do it now. Of course you can adapt and become an insane LAG if you want to, but as jukofyork said, "If they aren't entering the pot with J2o anymore then there is much less scope for them to make huge costly postflop mistakes...."

As someone who played almost exclusively limit for 2006, and has switched to almost exclusively nl for 2007, I can say that it is MUCH harder to become a 'decent' nl player, and the games are much much better.

[MicroBob]

Just because 3 people are in the pot on every hand doesn't mean the table isn't good.

Not super-duper juicy. But to just think that all the players are roughly of equal skill and are just passing pots back and forth because they all do the same thing is REALLY incorrect.
There are lots of mediocre to not-complete-horrible limit players online. There really aren't many who I would descirbe as 'pretty good'. And even fewer who are even sharper than that.

Seriously, there are so many post-flop decisions to be made and SO many of them are NOT automatic.
If you aren't seeing SEVERAL mistakes in just one orbit at almost any table (iffy call-downs or semi-bluffs, checking-through when there was clear value in a river-bet, etc) then you just aren't looking hard enough...or, more likely, you just don't know what to look for.

The games are incredibly beatable.

Many tables with averages of 22/10 or something will still have a couple players who are in the 14/4 range which is extremely exploitable as well as some 33/8's who make lousy post-flop mistakes.


This isn't to say that NL isn't 'better' or 'more profitable' or whatever.
Just arguing against the notion that all these limit players are pretty much playing the same game and are therefore mostly unbeatable against each other.

Want to beat these games? Get better (and run hot too, that always helps).

[ckmo]

micro-limit is a low risk way to build a bankroll. If you are willing to put in the time and effort, it is more than worth it IMO.

It also teaches you to deal with all the retarded things that happen when everybody is in the pot. Not sure what site you're playing, but it seems to be as full of bad players as I can remember at stars.

If you are going to be playing 2/4 live alot, you'll need to be numb to getting sucked out on. That or you'll just whine alot when it happens. I've played in live 10/20 games full of players just ast bad as .05/.10 fullring on stars.

[MicroBob]

I forgot to mention all the pre-flop late-position open-limpers and all the pre-flop cold-callers, even from the small-blind.

I can barely EVER find a 4 or 5 handed table that doesn't have at least 1 player still open-limping from any of the non-blind positions....or routinely cold-calls in the small-blind against a button steal-raise.

Now some players might be good enough to get away with plays like this.
But it's my opinion that for most of the shmoe's playing these games they just are being too passive.

Huge oportunities that they are practically begging for you to get into the pot in the first place.

These are just SOME of the errors I routinely see on almost every table.

[malo]

In addition to the points MicroBob made, I still see some incredibly bad hand selection. Sometimes it is even from a player with a reasonable VPIP.

If it happens once, it might be a misclick. When it happens more than that....all I can say is the cards must be running very cold for them to have a fairly low VPIP with the hands they are showing down.

[that_guy_33]

LHE is still alive and well. For every one solid player (and by solid I mean not borderline retarded), their are 2-3 donkeys, and that is profitable enough for me to still crush low limit games.

[Nsight7]

[ QUOTE ]
So move the hell off of full tilt if you have trouble beating the game. When I played there, I couldn't believe how much thought some of these 25NL players had put into their game. I had to find a site where people just came to gamble and play jerk off poker...so I tried some other sites and found they were much softer.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is amazing how true this is. On another site I crush the $25 and $50 NL games. On Full Tilt, I find the $10 NL games much more challenging than the $50 NL on my primary site. It is sick.

However, I am starting to migrate my action to Omaha and Omaha/8 because that seems way more beatable on Tilt.

[superpokermon]

[ QUOTE ]

Quote:
So move the hell off of full tilt if you have trouble beating the game. When I played there, I couldn't believe how much thought some of these 25NL players had put into their game. I had to find a site where people just came to gamble and play jerk off poker...so I tried some other sites and found they were much softer.



It is amazing how true this is. On another site I crush the $25 and $50 NL games. On Full Tilt, I find the $10 NL games much more challenging than the $50 NL on my primary site. It is sick.

However, I am starting to migrate my action to Omaha and Omaha/8 because that seems way more beatable on Tilt.



[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, when I gave up on Full Tilt 25NL, I went straight to 50NL at another site. Life suddenly got better.

But Full Tilt is def a great place to play Omaha...I imagine all the non TX Hold'em games are probably good on Tilt.