P-Stars NL .01/.02 - First deposit of $25 gone in 2 days... help?

[JereLock]

So I threw in $25 yesterday after having played like 20k play money hands, trying to see how I could hold up.
48 hours later, gone.
I've left pokertracker running, but I haven't bought it yet, so I only have 1000 hands or so on it.

I'd play $1 buy in at those limits, and kept increasing, but every so often I'd lose big.

I'm not sure what I'm looking for, how about some advice...

[RapidEvolution]

You really should start with 20 full buy-ins so you can ride out the big losses.

[Ironic]

Read the stickies in the micro stakes or fullring forums (depending where you play).

I would recommend starting with fullring. A simple tight game demolishes 0.1/0.2 NL at poker stars fullring. Make small bets with small hands and when you hit a monster just get it all in, shoving it all in at the river if necessary; don't worry you will get called a decent percentage of the time.

Unfortunately until NL25 it isn't very profitable, which is also where the players start to get good and you notice tonnes of regulars.

Just play tight poker. If you still lose you're either not playing tight enough, are too weak with your strong hands or too strong with your weak hands. Honestly that's all there is too it at that level.

Also remember bankroll management. Don't play at a level where you have less than 20 times the buyin - if you experience a downswing and you are not properly rolled then it could wipe out your earnings before you know it. However at NL2 and NL10 I wouldn't worry so much about that. $80 at Nl10 was enough for me [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[RapidEvolution]

[ QUOTE ]
Read the stickies in the micro stakes or fullring forums (depending where you play).

I would recommend starting with fullring. A simple tight game demolishes 0.1/0.2 NL at poker stars fullring. Make small bets with small hands and when you hit a monster just get it all in, shoving it all in at the river if necessary; don't worry you will get called a decent percentage of the time.

Unfortunately until NL25 it isn't very profitable, which is also where the players start to get good and you notice tonnes of regulars.

Just play tight poker. If you still lose you're either not playing tight enough, are too weak with your strong hands or too strong with your weak hands. Honestly that's all there is too it at that level.

Also remember bankroll management. Don't play at a level where you have less than 20 times the buyin - if you experience a downswing and you are not properly rolled then it could wipe out your earnings before you know it. However at NL2 and NL10 I wouldn't worry so much about that. $80 at Nl10 was enough for me [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

ditto! (I was just feeling lazy to type all this)

[JereLock]

If I'm playing $1 buy in, and I started with 25, am I not covered?

Also, could you define fullring? I thought this to mean the opposite of 6max, a 9/10 seated game?

[kayaker]

If you lost $25 in two days at NL2, I can tell you straight off that your main problem is that you are playing WAY too many hands. Until you can win a little more consistently, make the following the only hands you will play:

EP (Positions 1-4): TT+, AT+, KQ, KJs, QJs
MP (Positions 5-7): Add 88/99, KJo, QJo, KT, JTs, T9s - Only if the pot is unraised for the non-pairs
LP (Positions 8-10): Add 22+ and suited connectors down to 76 - Only if the pot is unraised

If you miss the flop with any non-pair (meaning if you don't at least have a flush or straight draw or have paired the board), be ready to dump the hand. If you have a mid- to low-PP (77 and down), be ready to dump the hand if you did not get a set.

Unless you have a big hand (TPTK can qualify, but only if there are no draws), be very careful if you're running into aggression.


Finally, and perhaps most importantly, read some books. Theory of Poker should, IMO, be the first book purchased by anyone looking to improve their poker game.

You made the right call to come here and ask questions. While these forums can sometimes get a little feisty, many here are happy to try and help out aspiring players. And we were all where you are once.

[kayaker]

[ QUOTE ]
If I'm playing $1 buy in, and I started with 25, am I not covered?

[/ QUOTE ]

The 20x the buy-in rule is for players wanting/needing to have a dedicated poker bankroll that has no chance of being refilled from outside sources. If you're putting in $25 at a time and playing NL2, I wouldn't worry too much with that.


[ QUOTE ]
Also, could you define fullring? I thought this to mean the opposite of 6max, a 9/10 seated game?

[/ QUOTE ]

Full Ring is 9-10max and is much more forgiving than 6-max. For a player just starting out online, I strongly suggest you don't try 6-max. It's much more aggressive and you will likely get run over.

[DorianGray]

If you are on a budget and are also just starting to learn, you might try playing sit and go tournaments. It is a pretty good way to learn while limiting your downside.

[JRBluff]

[ QUOTE ]
So I threw in $25 yesterday after having played like 20k play money hands, trying to see how I could hold up.
48 hours later, gone.
I've left pokertracker running, but I haven't bought it yet, so I only have 1000 hands or so on it.

I'd play $1 buy in at those limits, and kept increasing, but every so often I'd lose big.

I'm not sure what I'm looking for, how about some advice...

[/ QUOTE ]

havent heard this yet, so i'll throw this in:
You sound like you are sitting with a dollar, run it up to $3-$5 then lose a huge pot leaving you with nothing. Read the jesus FT $0 to $10k story. he gives good points about when to leave a table when you have profited. I'd recommend sitting with a buck and leaving the table when you get to $3. go sit at another table with a buck.

[Quicksilvre]

[ QUOTE ]
Only if the pot is unraised for the non-pairs

[/ QUOTE ]

I would add AK and AQ suited as well. Of course, if you're playing a well-known villain that raises a ton, then you could expand that, but I think I would play the big aces for a single raise (but probably not a re-raise).