A few beginner NLTRN questions

[larry31]

I have only been playing poker for two months and have found my favourite game to be heads up sit and gos. I am a poor student so have started with a bankroll of $40 on pokerstars, I have got this up to $70 dollars by playing $2 sit and gos.

So far I have played about 20 and have won about 16, whilst having a 12 match unbeaten run. I know from reading the forum for a few weeks that this sample size is too small to conclude anything.

How much of difference in skill is there between $2 and $5 SNG's? What sort of bankroll should I get to before trying the $5?

I have played in one 128man $2 winner takes all tourny which i finished in 5th place. Do you think it is worth trying to play these everyday trying to take the big score of $256 considering it takes possibly 4 hours to complete. Do you think luck is too much of a factor?


I live in England and am able to play on any poker site. Do you think partypoker has weaker competition that pokerstars for heads up?

So far I have been trying to play small pots with marginal hands and just waiting for players to make mistakes when I hold great hands. I have generally kept my bet size same size regardless of my hand strength. The majority of the time i check/fold to a flop bet when I have missed out of position, unless i have ace high or something and the player is making small bets. Is this a good strategy or a big leak that will be exploited at higher limits?



cheers sorry for the long post hopefully someone will take there time to answer my beginner questions!

[ChicagoRy]

Yea at the lower levels eliminating big mistakes in your game and just waiting for them to get it all in with any sort of draw or 1-3rd pair is a fine way to play. I'd try some 5s when you get to 100 dollars. Don't play the 2 dollar winner take all HU MTT, the variance is too high.

Pokerstars should be fishy enough for you in the near future, I wouldn't worry about moving sites unless Party has rakeback or something.

[hra146]

- dont play on party, rake eats you

- pokerstars and FT is equally soft at these stakes. Play there.

- at these stakes money comes from merely avoiding mistakes. The rest will be done for you by your opponents.




Poker Stars
No Limit Holdem Tournament
Blinds: t15/t30
2 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
SB: t1140
hero: t1860

Pre-flop: (2 players) hero is BB with 6[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 3[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]
SB calls t15 <font color="aaaaaa">(pot was t45)</font>, hero checks.

Flop: 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] T[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] (t60, 2 players)
hero checks, <font color="#cc0000">SB is all-in t1110</font>, hero calls t1110 <font color="aaaaaa">(pot was t1170)</font>.

Turn: Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (t2280, 1 player + 1 all-in - Main pot: t2280)


River: J[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (t2280, 1 player + 1 all-in - Main pot: t2280)


Results:
Final pot: t2280
<font color="#000000">hero showed 6s 3s
SB showed Th 3c</font>

[TNixon]

My own experience may be different from others, but here's my view on the comparison of various levels on Full Tilt, which is where I play.

During multiple climbing/bankroll building phases (I had to start over from $20-$30 multiple times, because I play ultra-agressively with my bankroll when it's small and easily replacable), I played a LOT of $2 tourneys and a lot of $10s, but very few $5s. That fact alone would tend to indicate that there is very little difference in play between the $2s and $5s, which matches my recollection pretty well, because I advanced through the $5s pretty quickly every time.

The $10s are a bit tougher, but not fundamentally different, I don't think. Same with the $20s.

I ran into an impassible brick wall at the $30s and $50s, though. It seems weird that there could be such a difference between a $20 and a $30 game, but for a long time, I was a fairly big winner at the $20s (62-63%), and a big loser at $30s.

Thinking back over what happened, I think I was beating the lower level players by playing their game, and just being slightly better at it. When they went all-in with middle pair, I had top pair. When they were in with top pair bad kicker, I had top/top, etc.

It took me a super-long-ass time to get over that and start playing at least semi-correctly, to the point that I started having a positive ROI at the $30s.

Anyway, the short answer is that I don't think there are huge differences from the $2 all the way through $20, but for me, at least, there was a huge shift necessary to be a winner at the $30s, and at the $50s (and maybe higher, I haven't played higher than $50s on a regular basis yet) you're basically playing the same game as the $30s, only you have to be slightly better at it.

But if you make sure while you're progressing that you're learning good heads-up play, rather than just how to beat a donk at his own game, you should be fine.

On the other hand, the good news is that you can be a 60%+ winner at the $20 level on Full Tilt even if you're a semi-donk.

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[soop]

Hmm, I had the exact same experience TNixon; crushed the 10's and 20's and then ended up basically breakeven over 100 sng's at the 30's.

So naturally I'm curious what changes you made and what you mean when you say beating the donks at their own game.

[ChicagoRy]

I tightened up a ton when I hit the 33s on Stars and ended up winning about 66% over a few hundred games. People were getting it in so light I basically gave up on a lot of other parts of the game and just focused on getting decent hands and getting it in ahead of their range, they were absolutely not playing against my image at all, it was gross.

The leaderboard guys in the 33s are all super tight it seems, so that may be the optimal way to play in those, at least on Stars. I played fairly laggy against them and they seemed very predictable for the most part. But against the average player I played very tight, as they played against me.

[TNixon]

When I say "beating the donks at their own game", I mean that I think I was winning at the 20s by playing fundamentally poorly, but by being against mostly players who played even more poorly. My biggest offenses were building medium to big pots with one pair, and making big allin calls with weak hands *far* more frequently than I should have been.

I was way worse than breakeven though. I think at one point I had a -10% ROI at 30s over a couple hundred games, and I didn't even try to step back up for a *long* time after my bankroll would have supported it. Yes, I really am that slow, that I could play multiple hundreds of games at a level and still manage to be a loser. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I also switched from a more passive/patient/trappy style to a more aggressive one using smaller bets (my standard preflop raise is 2.5x, and my bets either with a hand or without are 1/2-2/3 pot), and between those two things, I've been able to start winning at the 30s and 50s.

That strategy works at the $20s as well. Since my last big drop (which was part really bad run and part tilt, probably more tilt than running bad, although I did take flopped two pair into flopped straights more times than any human ought to have to bear), I've played around 175 games spread through the $20, $30, and $50 levels, with an overall winrate of 65%. (66% at 20s, and 63% at 30s and 50s) So, it seems that correct play will carry you through the lower levels as well.

Now if I could just get my tilt tendencies under control, maybe I could actually hang on to a bankroll after building it.

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[soop]

Interesting responses - thanks guys.

I am likely making too many hero calls as well. I was consistently getting these right at the lower levels, but not nearly as much at the 30's. Playing a bit tighter is something I will definitely try (at least until I get better at reading hands)

OP - sorry about the threadjack. My one bit of advice to offer would be don't be scared to move up. You clearly had luck on your side to win 80% of your matches, but nobody wins at that rate without having some skills. Be able to move back down if you lose a few games though (even if/especially if) it is just from bad beats.