The Übernit

[sivadom]

Did a small experiment at .02/.05 along these lines just now, I didnt follow the rules exactly (sometimes called a raiser w PPs in position without any callers in between, sometimes made a few 3bets not prescribed against bad lags, etc) but i didnt play anything other than 22+, AQ+. Some pf folds felt a little gross, especially otb vs a limper or 2, or in BvB situations. I've never played as tight as this before (8/6.5, ubernit indeed) and i've never played more than 6 tables before either, but i bumped it up to 9-10 for this, but i dont think it caused any mistakes given the simplicity of the system. Obviously I ran pretty hot, didnt have AA or KK cracked once, and actually picked them up above expectation too. Anyway, I think i'm going to play a few thousand more hands and get a feel for what my actual winrate is, i'll post more results if anyone cares. Also, i'd be interested to know if anyone has tried this out at 10nl or above.

[vixticator]

Oh, wait. I misread OP and kept cold calling 22+ facing one raise and no other calls. That explains a lot.

[Lego05]

Good post Gelford though IMO eventually everyone needs to move out of this and add the uncovered dimensions to their game...and as you say "learn a style based on stealing) I still consider that a TAG style....at such a point obviously though it can cross to LAG.

I'm surprised when you said you played like this all year. What were your stats if you don't mind? You never thought about trying to loosen up and such with the goal of moving up through the levels and gaining a bigger edge by being able to profitably play more hands?



I remember when I first started playing cash games you were a somewhat rare poster but somebody for me to pay attention to. I would have thought you'd be playing above 100 now. I'm doing pretty good at 100 right now over a somewhat small sample. If you don't mind...have you tried playing higher?....and what did you think about it?

[Gelford]

[ QUOTE ]
Good post Gelford though IMO eventually everyone needs to move out of this and add the uncovered dimensions to their game...and as you say "learn a style based on stealing) I still consider that a TAG style....at such a point obviously though it can cross to LAG.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure ... I never said anything else, this is presented as a good place to start for those that need something solid from which they can work.

[ QUOTE ]

I'm surprised when you said you played like this all year. What were your stats if you don't mind? You never thought about trying to loosen up and such with the goal of moving up through the levels and gaining a bigger edge by being able to profitably play more hands?


[/ QUOTE ]

No until recently I had no other income than poker and a monthly of around 2500$ (or more if I wanted to do something fun), So my primary concern was just to print money thru volume.

[ QUOTE ]

I remember when I first started playing cash games you were a somewhat rare poster but somebody for me to pay attention to.

[/ QUOTE ]

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

[ QUOTE ]

I would have thought you'd be playing above 100 now. I'm doing pretty good at 100 right now over a somewhat small sample. If you don't mind...have you tried playing higher?....and what did you think about it?

[/ QUOTE ]


I've been playing like this with a profit up to and including 200NL.


I never had the roll to play 400NL, so it's has all just been underrolled shottaking, that never succeeded. The thing with 400NL seems to be that pf aggression is huge, so I end up doing a good bit of flipping often which I don't mind having a pokereducation playing sngs, but it can be heavy on your roll.

I suspect you can grind out a profit like this at 400NL if you do not fall into the gator trap and adjust your bluffing frequencies so they match your opponents aggression and floating (also start to balance your riverplay .. in other words 3 barrel)


But if your question is, do I need to be scared of higher limits, then the answer is no .. there are fairly weak players everywhere it seems, but they do get more and more aggro tho.


Personally I have no longer any need to show a profit anymore .. and thus been experimenting a good deal (I did a 3 month stretch playing lag while shelling out a nice chunk on coaching about a year ago, it's not that I can't get my vpip over 30 if need be). Hopefully I'll be rolled for MSNL at the start of 2008 (Work is unfortunately cutting into my poker time [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] )

[Lego05]

I appreciate the response...and a very good one at that.



You mentioned poker education in sngs. I started my serious/I am playing for money online poker playing at sng's. I did it at Stars and started at $11 regular sng's. At the end I think I had about a 10% ROI at 27 turbos and like 2/3% at 60 turbos.

I'm just wondering what your sng experience was like?

Used SNGPT and the like?

[Gelford]

[ QUOTE ]
I appreciate the response...and a very good one at that.



You mentioned poker education in sngs. I started my serious/I am playing for money online poker playing at sng's. I did it at Stars and started at $11 regular sng's. At the end I think I had about a 10% ROI at 27 turbos and like 2/3% at 60 turbos.

I'm just wondering what your sng experience was like?

Used SNGPT and the like?

[/ QUOTE ]


Yeah, SNGPT and the works ... I used to cruise the Party 22s-33s, but then disaster stuck finally with me losing a zillion flips in a row (good, bad whatever, I lost it) and dropping 40BI. ... so I needed a break and hit 25NL .. and found that I could replicate an equal hourly on a much smaller roll

SNGs are a good learning place, since you can get by on pushbotting ... and the sheer volume of it can give you a lot of experience (and the creapy crawly nature of wa/wb lines in sngs make you actually also develop reads and skills after a while as well)


That being said, unless you're a poker noob or bigjoe, I can't see a good argument for playing sngs [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[HighOctane]

I play 10NL and the tables are very loose preflop and aggro post flop. Typically, your bet on flop with TPTK/TPGK or overpair (you were agrgressor preflop) will get raised on flop if villian hits TP (even middle pair) because 1) they overvalue their hands and 2) they don't believe you and so they think they are value betting and 3) they bluff too much. The villian's behavior is +EV against good opponents that can lay down good hands. It makes it hard ot play against players who are playing correctly for the wrong reasons. Even c-betting seems to be -EV against these guys when you miss. But the ubernit strategy is really effective against them because their preflop calling standards are super wide. In essence, at 10NL, villians create huge pots withought much thought and call preflop raises with anything. It makes it harder to hand read. Playing for stacks is much more common than at the higher limits (I think...I don't play the higher limits). So the ubernit strategy works because you need a hand against people who are looking for any opportunity to call, chase, and go to the felt. Here is my question:

1) Is there any place in the ubernit strategy for limping suited connectors, suited aces or small pairs after limpers(instead of raising small pairs).

2) Why not cold-call with small-mid PP if you are th first caller since you can get peoples stack more than in the higher limits (I am assuming 10:1 implied odds or so would be +EV since 7.5:1 isn't because villian won't always go to the felt)?

[Gelford]

[ QUOTE ]

1) Is there any place in the ubernit strategy for limping suited connectors, suited aces or small pairs after limpers(instead of raising small pairs).

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are at a passive table where people tend to limp pf, and you are sure that the implied odds actually exist for you, then sure, limp it all .. but make sure you have implied odds (that is with the Axs' and SCs, small pairs you can always overlimp)

[ QUOTE ]

2) Why not cold-call with small-mid PP if you are th first caller since you can get peoples stack more than in the higher limits (I am assuming 10:1 implied odds or so would be +EV since 7.5:1 isn't because villian won't always go to the felt)?

[/ QUOTE ]


Again, that is judgment on your part ... it has been discussed to death in SSNL and everybody agrees that implied odds do not exist usually, but if you believe that they do at a particular table, then go ahead. ... As a generel rule, it is nothing I'd advice tho

[_dave_]

Ubernit rules... great fun [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

TYTY Gelford.