Starting out with $100 - advice needed

[lucky_mf]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey Lucky, thanks for replying. I would like rakeback but already have a play account on FTP, and a money on UB. That leaves PS for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think your play money accounts preclude you from getting rakeback at those sites. I would advise checking with a reputable affiliate on this.

[ QUOTE ]
I would consider myself more than a beginner. I have been playing for the past 3 years so I have a good handle on ABC poker.

So you feel cash games are the way to go rather than Sng? Thanks again!

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a lot of variance in 9 and 6 handed sngs which means that you would have to play fairly low. For this reason I don't like them much.

HU sngs are low variance and if you are good at them they are easy money. If I was trying to build a roll from close to nothing I would mix HU sngs with cash.

Lucky

[SellingtheDrama]

Go with whatever you think you have the best chance at beating - cash or sngs. Pick one thing (you can dabble around until you find this one thing, but be looking for it) that you want to build in, and go there. Don't be constrained by TV preconceptions, many people are better outside of holdem than within it.

I would skip MTTs entirely until you have established a more comfortable bankroll, the varience isn't worth it at this point.

[Snoh84]

The best way to beat microstakes is bonus whoring/rakeback. You can be a profitable player, but at the stakes you're playing, you'll make just as much through bonuses. If you haven't made a real money deposit on sites, usually you still qualify for bonuses.

Far and away the best advice I can give you to build up your bankroll from $100 is if you ever lose more than $10 in a given session, quit. When you are first starting it is super-easy to lose it all in one day tilting or not caring.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
The best way to beat microstakes is bonus whoring/rakeback. You can be a profitable player, but at the stakes you're playing, you'll make just as much through bonuses.

[/ QUOTE ]
While bonuses and rakeback may boost your win rate slightly, they are not worth much to a player with only $100. If you get 20% rakeback, then to get $100, you need to pay $500 worth of rake. For that to happen before you lose $100, you need to beat the table average by a lot. It's much more important for someone with $100 to concentrate on finding a game to beat.

People get really excited about rakeback, but this often comes with a higher rake. Further, in NL, win rates of solid players are much higher than the rake, and thus many times larger than rakeback. Winning small stakes LHE players often have lower win rates than the rake, which makes getting a good rakeback deal (on a site which doesn't charge extra rake to cover it) more important.

[ QUOTE ]
Far and away the best advice I can give you to build up your bankroll from $100 is if you ever lose more than $10 in a given session, quit.

[/ QUOTE ]
That might help to prevent tilt, but it will only slow down the losses (and learning) of a losing player or the downswings of a player who is underbankrolled, such as a marginal winner playing $3 SNGs or $3 MTTs. It's all one long session.

It's much more important to learn to beat the game. No betting system will turn a -EV game to your advantage, since no sum of negative numbers is positive.

[crystalallen]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

While bonuses and rakeback may boost your win rate slightly, they are not worth much to a player with only $100.

[/ QUOTE ]

My bonus at FT amounts to 42% rakeback. In addition to that I will be getting rakeback through an affiliate.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

While bonuses and rakeback may boost your win rate slightly, they are not worth much to a player with only $100.

[/ QUOTE ]
My bonus at FT amounts to 42% rakeback. In addition to that I will be getting rakeback through an affiliate.

[/ QUOTE ]
How many cents per hour would even 100% rakeback be worth to someone playing NL $2? My estimate is about 10-15 cents/table-hour, although it depends on a few factors; 42% rakeback would be worth 4-6 cents/table-hour. That is a lot less than the achievable win rates at that level, say 60 cents/table-hour. I stand by my statement that rakeback is not worth much to someone trying to build up from a $100 bankroll. It is much more important to find game you can beat for a good rate.

Rakeback at Full Tilt is worth a bit more to a microstakes NL player, since Full Tilt takes 10% rake at NL $10 instead of the normal 5%. However, that's not a good deal overall.

[ElBandito]

Either way, though- it is sage advice to sign up for RB in the beginning.

[crystalallen]

[ QUOTE ]


Rakeback at Full Tilt is worth a bit more to a microstakes NL player, since Full Tilt takes 10% rake at NL $10 instead of the normal 5%. However, that's not a good deal overall.

[/ QUOTE ]

I play $5 and $10 SNGs - While I'm clearing my bonus I get to play the 5 for .29c instead of .50 and the $10 for .58c instead of $1. That's how I look at it.

It's really making a difference too. I wasted a bunch of time and money on UB.. Which, by the way: if anyone plays mainly SNGs UB is NOT the place to be. There is no rakeback for SNGs on UB.

[I-Love-Poker]

OK here is my expierence starting with $100, which I have done multiple times, and have great sucess many ways.

#1, I suggest you DONT play 2nl or 5nl, it is not even poker with 20xBB raise is standard, and every1 is all in. You will not learn anything from it, and it will only worsen your game.

#2) Wanna take a chance? Here is my #1, way of playing. I go to 50nl HU, and just win like no other, b/c most fish are at low stakes HU. I win about $300 and I go 3 table 50NL, and just build up from there. But it is risky starting out.

#3) S&G's, I would start out with $5 6-max S&G's where many fish come to play. Easy wins, and you can make $100 in a day playing that.

#4) Do some MTT. If you do like $1 rebuys or something, and keep it to $4 or $5 max per game, you can make a killing with one Top 3 finish.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]

I suggest you DONT play 2nl or 5nl, it is not even poker with 20xBB raise is standard, and every1 is all in. You will not learn anything from it, and it will only worsen your game.

[/ QUOTE ]
Many good lessons can be learned even at the lowest stakes. Some of the most profitable situations at NL $1k come when you realize someone is playing the same way you might have learned to crush at NL $2. That happens a lot more than you might think, since contrary to the common misconception, losing players at every level generally deposit at that level. They did not win their way up from lower levels, so they are not necessarily avoiding the mistakes from lower levels.

It is also good to have the possibility of rebuilding from $20 by playing penny-ante NL as a safety net.

[ QUOTE ]

Wanna take a chance? Here is my #1, way of playing. I go to 50nl HU,


[/ QUOTE ]
Playing NL $50 HU on a $100 bankroll is close to the opposite of rational bankroll management. It's gambling on a game where the OP is likely to lose.

[ QUOTE ]
Do some MTT. If you do like $1 rebuys or something, and keep it to $4 or $5 max per game, you can make a killing with one Top 3 finish.

[/ QUOTE ]
$100 is not necessarily a sufficient bankroll to play even normal $1 tournaments. You might make a killing, but you don't get much feedback about what you are doing wrong before you bust out. A lot of the advantage in MTTs comes from playing well at the final table, since a large fraction of your profits comes from winning, not just making the final table or cashing, and you don't get much final table practice even if you play a lot of MTTs.