One typical player's progress (very, very long, boring)

[kazana]

Recently, I have noticed a couple of beginners asking questions in the general form of "How long does it typically it take to become a winning player?" or "How much do I need to expect losing while learning poker?"
While the only and correct answer is that it depends on the player him/herself, I would like to give you guys an example: me.

Since I have started playing almost exactly 6 months ago, and it's been about 5 months since I've joined 2+2, I thought it might be fitting to give this example as a "thank you" to 2+2 for how it has helped me to get to where I am.

Be warned: This article is addressed at the absolute beginners. If you've got the couple of thousand hands under your belt, you most likely will find it very boring.

First off about me: I'm a pretty normal guy, I'm fairly smart, but no where near exceptionally intelligent. I do have a rather good mathematical background, due to my studies in Computer Science. But as I've said, nothing out of the ordinary.

I always thought poker was a typical gambling game, meaning no matter what you do, in the long run the house will take your money. So, I never gave it a second thought and never played it.
This changed when I started to work for my former employer, a bookmaker who is also running a poker site. My job was to test the software and make sure that everything is going alright.
During the first weeks I had hardly anything to do, so I came across a few of their poker articles. Since I had nothing better to do, I just read them all. This is when I realized that poker is not a pure gambling game and that by studying the game and improving your skill you could actually beat the game.

Shortly after I entered online poker to give it a go. I had some money on my old Ladbrokes sportsbetting account, so I used that to get started on the Prima/Ladbrokes poker site.
My first phase was what I would call the "first contact" phase.

Phase I, first contact (March 2006):
When I started out, I decided to try out different forms of hold'em, SNGs, MTTs, limit, no-limit. After fooling around for a while, I found the game very interesting. I searched and signed up to a few poker sites and started learning what it is all about. I'm talking pure basics here, which hand will beat which, pot odds, outs, stuff like that.
When I had enough of fooling around, I set up a plan on how to get a bankroll going. I decided the best would be to deposit $50-$100 a month to grow my bankroll slowly since I fully expected to lose while playing initially.
After having tried out the different forms of hold'em, I made up my mind that I want to do some bonus whoring while learning limit.

Phase II, limit (End of March):
This is when I started to strictly adhere to bankroll management. I also had plenty of time to study the game (reading forums, various other articles, and last but not least SSHE). I knew my maths skills are good enough, but I lack in the hand reading department. Mainly due to a lack of experience.
I was able to keep my bankroll more or less even with the help of bonus money, my deposits, and some very minor winning limits.
I also dipped my toe into multitabling, but no more than 2 or 3 tables at once.
After a slw progress in limit, I thought it rather boring and a frustrating bonus whoring expedition where I ended up only cashing out 40% of the bonus money, I decided to try to get into NL. Also, because I knew the WSOP ME would be aired within a few weeks, so I wanted to get my feet wet to be able to profit from the new players who undoubtedly would dip into NL first.

Phase III, NL (May 2006):
When I first entered NL, I was playing a fairly scared weak-tight game. I could remember too well how I have lost a few stacks during my "donking around" days in phase one.
I ordered NLTAP the day I decided to move to NL, just to get more valuable input. I also started to religiously study the Beginners, SSNL, Theory, and Texas Hold'em forums here on 2+2.
Soon, I was able to shrug off the scared part, and with a bit of extra time I got rid of the weak part, too.
At this stage I considered myself TAGish, but from what I know now, I still have been too loose preflop. Especially calling raises with KTo and rubbish like that.
Nevertheless, I started to improve my game bit by bit at the NL10 fullring limits. After a while I felt confident enough (and had the roll) to move up to NL25 fullring.
This was the time where I read a lot about 6-max, and how you need to play more aggressive there, and that it'd be easier to make money at 6-max than it was at fullring. I was very sceptical about that at first. After all, I just started having some very modest winnings at fullring.
But after a few weeks of brainwash, I was prepared to give it a go. I dropped down a limit to test the waters at NL10 6-max.
To my surprise, my (by then) very tight game proved to be very successful. After only a few hundered hands I thought I could cope with the increased aggression, and moved back to NL25 for which I had the roll.

Phase IV, 25NL 6-max (End of May 2006):
Things really went well at 6-max for me. Soon, I decided that I will move from fullring to 6-max exclusively. I played a few thousand hands woth some moderate success and felt confident about my game.
This is when the second "fad" drew my attention: LAG style. I have always had a ton of respect for the LAG guys who dragged one big pot after another, pulling off daring bluffs and succeeding at them more often than caught with their pants down. So, I started reading up on that topic to get an idea of the does and donts of playing LAG style.
Then one fine day, I decided to give LAG a go.

Phase V, LAGging it up (End of July 2006):
When I started my LAG adventure, I soon realized my weaknesses, namely hand reading skills, and knowing when your opponent is pushing back at you with nothing vs villain holding a big hand.
It just always seemed as if villains knew exactly when I was FOS and when I had a big hand, while I never knew whether villain is bluffing or betting/raising for value.
After dropping a few hundered PTBBs and analyzing my results, I decided to go back to the nitty style that I felt more comfortable with.

Phase VI, back to nitsville (Mid August 2006):
After returning to LAG style, I immediately realized that the lost PTBBs weren't lost for nothing. My hand reading skills have improved vastly, frequently being forced to make decisions for your stack while playing LAG.
Suddenly, I was able to run at 8+PTBB/100, although I would account for a 2-3 PTBB increase due to running good.
Soon enough I was able to clear the rest of my sign-up bonus at Full Tilt of which I initially thought I would never be able to clear it all in time. That padded my bankroll enough to be able to move up to NL50 6-max.
And this is exactly where I'm at right now. And I feel confident that while I'm not killing the games, I'm able to turn a tidy profit at playing my nitty style.


So much for the history of my game. I would like to point out a few habits that I thought helped my game tremendously, followed by a few mistakes I have made, that are avoidable. I'll only list 3 each. Those were habits that had a big impact on my results.

Good habits:
- Reading a lot. By a lot I mean 2 hours or more per day
- Always analyzing the hands where I had my stack on the line. Whether it's a bad beat or lucky beat or whatever. I try to see where I made a mistake or where I reacted well.
- Never assume the players at your table are donkeys. Many of them may be. But I want to have proof first. A good LAG initially looks like a donkey. But only until he takes your 2nd buyin.

Bad habits:
- Clearing boni, when I couldn't sign up for the full amount. I did this twice, and I've left money out there. Don't do it. Clear another smaller bonus, then return for the bigger one.
- Calling that river bet, when you know you're beat at NL. I've lost a lot of money by calling that last 1/2-full PSB on the river. Even though I was certain I would be beat, hoping for a miracle. Miracles don't happen often enough to do this routinely.
- Not raising preflop when out of position (especially SB or BB). This has been a big leak in my NL game. If anything, then you want to take down the pot preflop with rather goodish hands. By not raising, your FE is reduced which is so essential for cbets with air.

Final words: This text should be long and boring enough to provide answers to many of the generic "How to turn into a winning player" questions. But it's also important to notice that this is but the progress of ONE player. Myself.
This does not mean that it will happen to you in the same way, too. But, it IS the progress of a typical player. And while I'm still reluctant to say that I'm a winning player, my PT stats seem to point in that direction by now. Only a couple tens of thousands hands more will bring more certainty.

The resulting advice is pretty simple. By studying the game you lay the foundation to turn yourself into a winning player. By playing a lot and applying the stuff you've learnt, you can turn knowledge into a weapon at the table. Each and every piece of knowledge pushing that PTBB/100 metric another fraction up.
Keep studying, don't expect wonders and you'll be fine. Some day.

[kazana]

I want to add two graphs for completeness' sake.

My lifetimes' Big Bets graph:


I don't like to display how much I've won, but for the sake of this article I will do so.
Please don't take this as brag or reason to flame.
I think it will illustrate how long it took me to get into "the black".

Winnings by Month graph:

[AKQJ10]

What use is a "big bets" metric when the limit portion of the graph appears to end at hand 14k? It's apples to oranges.

Thanks for the post, though.

[kazana]

[ QUOTE ]
What use is a "big bets" metric when the limit portion of the graph appears to end at hand 14k? It's apples to oranges.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thank you for the positive feedback. I'm surprised you managed to read it all before falling asleep. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

It is indeed apples and oranges.

It's not indended to show how many big bets have been made in limit vs nl. It's just to point out the tendencies (does the graph move up or down?). And when/how the movements occurred on a timeline.
Furthermore, if I had chosen real amounts as metric, it would be misleading by looking as if you have to move up to experience any success (unless I'd use a logarithmic scale, but I don't know how to do that with poker patterns).

I was thinking of seperating limit and nl, but that would have taken it out of chronological order. That's why I've chosen one graph to rule them all.

[zhouerz]

mmm I read this all. This kind of mirrors my progress in poker. i would guess im at your may 2006 stage with a bit less play experience. great post, sir.

[engineer_mba]

Hi,

Thanks for sharing this. It was very nice to hear how someone who has been playing a little longer than me is progressing.

Cheers,

Leo

ps. You have done quite a bit better than me, so congratz!!!

[kazana]

@ zhouerz & engineer_mba:
Thanks for the positive comments.

I hope this post might answer a couple of the generic beginners questions. Furthermore, I think it might be encouraging for people just starting out to see that there is a light at the end of the tunnel. It just takes time and effort to get there.

[kidpokeher]

Nice post kazana. Wasn't boring at all!

[Tiki]

Nice post. I hope your last graph gets forever steeper (as long as my money isn't helping).

[RoyalMag]

Nice post. It pretty much mirrors my own poker progress, although I have stuck with 6 max from the start (Bar a few hundred hands trying FR, which was enough for me to move back).
I am at the stage you were when you started NL, and am also playing a weak/tight game [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]