An objective analysis: Why doesn’t small ball work at micro stakes?

[jonyy6788]

I should just mention that I totally agree with Marshall28 here. Anything above 20/16 is really really unnecessary at NL25 and below. It becomes a little bit more important to start raising more at NL50.

The only bad thing about playing ~17/13 is that when you hit NL100, you might need to revamp your game a little bit to be more aggro. This will lead to postflop play that people will be unfamiliar with. Basically, I'm advocating just grinding out NL10-->NL25-->NL50 and then really really consider working on your game once you're getting close to a bankroll for NL100 (I'm not moving up until at least 3,000 and it will be more likely my BR will be 3,500+ before hitting NL100 this time around). While it may be good for development to try to play 25/22 at NL10, it's not the most profitable for most people and the game at NL50 and up is gonna play way different pre and post flop.

[noob_sauce]

[ QUOTE ]
Marshall,

1) its the internet, who cares? it's going to happen regardless of how awesome your post is (or isn't).

2) the only one flaming you is noob_sauce, and he's flaming you for your overreacting, not the post

3) seriously though, you are way too oversensitive

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously... maybe I was a bit misunderstood. Thank you for taking time to post this. I think it is definitely of value, and I appreciate the effort that you put into it...

but with that being said, I just read you being hypersensitive to smurf's response, which in my opinion had a valid point. I was left with the general disagreement that he seemed to have after reading the entire OP and thought it was awfully lame for you to be soooo sensitive.

oh yeah, and quit being a crybaby you big douche...
wah, i knew i'd be flamed, wahhhhhh ... cry me a river suzy

[prodonkey]

OP I have almost 8k hands of you in my db.. at 25/20/3.5 you border on maniacal at times.. and are way too willing to play for your stack with crap when you think you can make people fold.

[Sean Fraley]

[ QUOTE ]
I should just mention that I totally agree with Marshall28 here. Anything above 20/16 is really really unnecessary at NL25 and below. It becomes a little bit more important to start raising more at NL50.

The only bad thing about playing ~17/13 is that when you hit NL100, you might need to revamp your game a little bit to be more aggro. This will lead to postflop play that people will be unfamiliar with. Basically, I'm advocating just grinding out NL10-->NL25-->NL50 and then really really consider working on your game once you're getting close to a bankroll for NL100 (I'm not moving up until at least 3,000 and it will be more likely my BR will be 3,500+ before hitting NL100 this time around). While it may be good for development to try to play 25/22 at NL10, it's not the most profitable for most people and the game at NL50 and up is gonna play way different pre and post flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm 24/18 and beat NL2 for 29 PTBB/100 (admittedly running hot), NL5 for 10, and NL10 for 8. I think the issue is really with game selection and learning to quickly build a functional profile of how any given opponent plays. Not to mention, I've distinctly noticed that being aggressive does a really nice job of creating a table image that causes opponents to let you build a nice pot with your big hands since they tend to think that you are a lot more spewy than you really are. Yes, your opponents will make the mistakes for you, but why not do what you can to induce them to make even bigger mistakes more frequently?

As an example from today's session at NL25, I was to the immediate right of a guy for about 45 minutes who was a complete nit when I got there. After a bit he obviously got really sick of my blind steals, raising his c-bets when I had position, and my tendency to semi-bluff OESDs and flush draws. By the end of the his session at that table, he had called me down with TPWK and 4-bet all-in with QQ against my AA. Opening up your game in a deliberate and intelligent fashion causes your opponents to open up theirs in a haphazard and impulsive fashion.

Also, why would you want to learn a new playing style at $50 a buy-in when you can do it at $10 a buy-in and have the mistakes you make learning it be less costly?

[Phytopath]

I will say that alot depends. There are times when I log on to my usual site and it is just loaded with fish at NL50/100 (the stakes I am comfortable with) and then small ball poker certainly doesn't work I just sit back and play my aggressive value betting style against fish and value calling against the lagtards.

However, other times it seems there are loads of nits with very few live ones, then you need to small ball them to death. This isn't as profitable as swimming with the fishes however it certainly also works.

[jonyy6788]

b/c playing 25/22 is different at NL10 than it is at NL100

[Poker Gestalt]

[ QUOTE ]
Those stats are not nit they are still TAG IMO.

[/ QUOTE ] -talking about 16/11/3 or something...

i disagree with this. what is standard? its like 20/12/3? something like that. 4% is alot; and i consider it nit.

on another note i have been playing a 21/19/3ish game for the past 35k hands at 25nl with a winrate of 10ptbb/100. idk if you consider those stats lag or not but this has worked great for me. I do make moves and play small ball quite a bit but as others have said you have to know how your marginal hand matchs up with villians range/actions/board etc.

...on another side note i start 50nl tommrow [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]


EDIT: [ QUOTE ]
Opening up your game in a deliberate and intelligent fashion causes your opponents to open up theirs in a haphazard and impulsive fashion.

[/ QUOTE ] GOLD

[bsheck]

I don't think what OP is describing is small ball. It isn't about LAGging it up and trying to outplay everyone, it's exactly the opposite. It's sitting back and picking your spots. Instead of playing power poker you play a little more passively and play smaller pots, unless you have a big hand of course. You avoid putting a lot of money at risk in marginal situations.

I consider myself to be a smallball player and I've had success playing it. Mainly I make two adjustments. The first is preflop. While I will raise a fair amount, I rarely ever come over the top. I flat call with hands like AK and JJ. I like to learn more about my opponent's hand before committing a lot of money.

I will say that I basically do abuse the button, if you want to call it that. I will call with a lot of hands, any connector down to 54, any suited one gapper down to maybe 75s, any pair, and any suited ace. I'm looking for a big payday if I hit big of course, but I will also take my fair share of small pots because of my position. So I will call a raise with those hands.

Out of the blinds I will play more tightly, flat calling with some good hands (again, not coming over the top), calling with small pairs, and folding everything else.

After the flop my major adjustment is that I tend to bet small. I will rarely hit the bet pot button, I like to keep it at 2/3 of the pot, sometimes even less if I can get away with it. That way I can still charge draws, but don't tie myself to the pot. I will also on occasion check behind on the turn with top pair hands and such to control the pot size.

I'm not saying this is the best style, but it works for me. I enjoy playing after the flop. I don't like to put a lot of money at risk unless it's warranted. I think I'm better off giving up a small immediate edge preflop by playing more passively and using my postflop edge.

[Stake Monster]

Like everything else in poker it all depends on the players around you. There is no style that is a "winning style", the only way to win consistently at ANY limit is to vary your play according to how the people at the table are playing.

(that disregards the very micro limits where people don't really think much.)

[prodonkey]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think what OP is describing is small ball. It isn't about LAGging it up and trying to outplay everyone, it's exactly the opposite. It's sitting back and picking your spots. Instead of playing power poker you play a little more passively and play smaller pots, unless you have a big hand of course. You avoid putting a lot of money at risk in marginal situations.

I consider myself to be a smallball player and I've had success playing it. Mainly I make two adjustments. The first is preflop. While I will raise a fair amount, I rarely ever come over the top. I flat call with hands like AK and JJ. I like to learn more about my opponent's hand before committing a lot of money.

I will say that I basically do abuse the button, if you want to call it that. I will call with a lot of hands, any connector down to 54, any suited one gapper down to maybe 75s, any pair, and any suited ace. I'm looking for a big payday if I hit big of course, but I will also take my fair share of small pots because of my position. So I will call a raise with those hands.

Out of the blinds I will play more tightly, flat calling with some good hands (again, not coming over the top), calling with small pairs, and folding everything else.

After the flop my major adjustment is that I tend to bet small. I will rarely hit the bet pot button, I like to keep it at 2/3 of the pot, sometimes even less if I can get away with it. That way I can still charge draws, but don't tie myself to the pot. I will also on occasion check behind on the turn with top pair hands and such to control the pot size.

I'm not saying this is the best style, but it works for me. I enjoy playing after the flop. I don't like to put a lot of money at risk unless it's warranted. I think I'm better off giving up a small immediate edge preflop by playing more passively and using my postflop edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.. I've played with him a few times.. he's very quick to 3 bet and try to bludgeon people with his stack... that is not at all small ball.