Three things you should work on (xpost from SSNL)

[BalugaWhale]

1) get more value out of made hands (bet bigger)
2) play less OOP
3) dont bluff so much


discuss

[BalugaWhale]

also here is a link to their discussion in SSNL.

[Hank Scorpio]

I think the most important factor is bluffing. I've come to the conclusion that it's optimal to purely bluff less than 5% of the time. The ONLY type of bluff that should be employed at micro limits is the semi-bluff (more on the flop than the turn). As for bluffing the river, I see it as almost pointless. You'll get called down way too often to make it even close to profitable.

I think most good players at this level get value from their hands on the flop and turn. They probably don't do enough to get paid off on the river, though. In regards to playing out of position, I think most people now realize that very few hands should be played UTG and UTG+1.
----------------------------------------------------------
As I looked at each point, the more I came to realize that the solid players at these levels are just that...solid. I remember reading a post (I forget the poster's name) that talked about being aggressive from a year or two back. His catch phrase was "raise that [censored] up" when talking about being in position. I read it recently and was just thinking to myself "man this is so obvious, I can't believe a small / medium stakes player thought this was great advice.” Not that the advice was bad or anything, it just seemed something that any micro limit player would know now. Same thing occurred when I read No Limit Hold’em by Slansky. Here is a book original meant for advanced players, and as I’m reading it I’m criticizing some of the examples for things like ignoring pot control. I don’t think anyone could have envisioned 50 BB player being able to do that two years ago.

What I'm trying to say is that the game has really evolved around the past two years than ever before. The number of solid players at ML is astronomical compared to before. I think most players do a pretty good job of value betting and avoiding tough spots like playing OOP. The only possible weak spot may be bluffing just because right when you think a fish couldn't be dumb enough to call a pot sized bet with bottom pair, he does. Sorry to go off topic, but this has been on my mind for quite awhile.

I was actually trying to find what separates medium stake players from micro stake players the past two weeks. I began tracking some of the top 5 / 10 players and comparing their stats to the top ML players to see what makes them so different, because something obviously has to. I don’t wanna get too much in detail, but the biggest difference was the aggression factor on the flop, turn, and river. I’m currently in the process of trying to figure out if that difference is occurring because of the different types of players at those limits, or if those players who are ultra-aggressive / solid at 5/10 have always been aggressive.

What do you think?

[BalugaWhale]

well, you probably dont know anything about my history, but i am a 5/10 reg now and I was a .10/.25 reg about 7 months ago. The difference is tightening up your game and learning how to be aggressive.

uNL "solid" players are not good. In general they are passive and have no concept of position. They are afraid to value bet and bluff awkwardly at bad times.

i think you're way off base if you think most uNL players get good value.

good players read hands, get mad value, apply pressure in position, and dont make as many stupid mistakes.

[Hank Scorpio]

You're probably right. It's quite possible that I'm one of those solid players who isn't good. The problem is I make a good amount of money at .25/.50, so it's hard to tell if I'm good or if the other players are just that much worse.

[Hank Scorpio]

Balagu, say a player makes a video ofa 4 table .25/.50 session and plays "solid" (I know it's hard to define solid, but I think you know what I mean). People in the forum comment "nice vid, you didn't make any mistakes and played ABC poker". That happens a ton at ML. Are you saying that a 5/10 player would be able to easily spot a ton of mistakes that every other ML player couldn't, or do you believe that playing solid, ABC poker is the best way to win money at ML?

[BalugaWhale]

its tough to say without seeing the video itself

but i would bet that a good 5/10 reg could spot a lot of errors or missed opportunities.

[matrix]

there are solid players at uNL ??? where????

I agree with BW and would go so far as to say at uNL (up to and including 25NL at least) just do not bluff.

I'm talking about pure bluffs here - the semi bluff raise with lots of outs to hit on the turn - the flop continuation bluff those types of plays NEED to be large parts of your game.

But bluffing with nothing on the river at uNL just isn't profitable.

I have seriously seriously tightened up my range OOP and in the blinds now I'm back (temporarily) at uNL - I have nittier stats than I used to but I get to win more $ so I'm happy [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I start at a table only playing pp's and AK OOP and add in hands once I get a few reads maybe - yes I know this is too tight - but I think it's much better to be too tight than it is to be too loose.

I still need to work lots on valuebetting and pickig the right size of VB vs the right opponent but I think we can all get away with betting a little bigger and getting just as many calls.

[EMc]

[ QUOTE ]
well, you probably dont know anything about my history, but i am a 5/10 reg now and I was a .10/.25 Play money reg about 7 months ago. The difference is tightening up your game and learning how to be aggressive.

uNL "solid" players are not good. In general they are passive and have no concept of position. They are afraid to value bet and bluff awkwardly at bad times.

i think you're way off base if you think most uNL players get good value.

good players read hands, get mad value, apply pressure in position, and dont make as many stupid mistakes.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Triggerle]

I think 1) an 2) can be applied almost immediately by uNLers as it's quite straightforward advice compared to 3).

The matter of 3), and its collorary (i.e. dealing with bluffs of opponents) require a lot of experience in the form of many played hands.

Thoughts?

Personally, I basically don't bluff at all save for c-bets and the occasional squeeze but have a hard time dealing with obvious bluffers. I mean things like the fact that I almost always choose the wrong times to look up the guy, who check-raises every flop or bets any street if checked to.