|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 2/13/2012 9:41:07 PM PACIFIC |
 NL bankroll, ReMMy, 19. Nov 2003 19:04 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi guys, just looking for some opinions. I play tons of NL tourneys so I'm very familiar with the game. Lately I've started sitting at NL ring game tables more frequently. Mostly for kicks when I don't have an hour and a half for a 2 table SnG... I've been playing the .25/.50 tables and buying in with $20. You know the deal, pretty much always double it, sometimes triple it, however I often take decent sized hits later in the session, which may be due to my aggressive tendancies. I'm pretty sure everyone will tell me that switching tables and starting back with $20 is a bad idea but I just wanted to hear your input. Should I have more confidence in my game, or is it possible that my playing style is more suited to not having the largest stack... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: NL bankroll, ReMMy, 19. Nov 2003 19:06 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| As I think about this more, its quite possible I'm posting due to a couple extremely bad beats I took, KK beaten by AK when we were all in preflop and AA beaten by AK when we were all in preflop. I have a feeling if I put in more time at the tables I will do better with a larger stack... So maybe I should be buying in with the maximum stack at the start? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: NL bankroll, LKP, 20. Nov 2003 00:38 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| When you said you were very aggressive, does that mean people fold a lot? I find every now and then when I go to a table and play super aggressively, it's not uncommon for me to double or triple up and then lose it all later. Possibly a lot of it has to do with my table image. Knowing that I am so aggressive, people are more inclined to slow play me, or to try and check-raise. People are also less inclined to fold (which isn't necessarily a bad thing). Another thing is that that's just poker man. Bankrolls take massive swings in NL, especially on the short term at one table. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: NL bankroll, ADAM THE EXPERT, 20. Nov 2003 08:55 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| WELL, THAT FACT THAT YOU HAVE RECOGNIZE THAT STACK ] SIZE, C'EST TRES IMPORTANT, IN NO LIMIT, MEANS YOU'RE ON THE RIGHT TRACK ON YOUR EDUCATION TRAIN. THE BIGGER OUR STACK, THE MORE CAREFUL WE MUST BE, WHEN UP AGAISNT ANOTHER BIG STACK, FOR TWO REASONS: (1) THE BIGGER OUR STACK, THE MORE WE CAN LOSE. (2) WHEN OUR OPPONENT ALSO HAS A BIG STACK, HE WILL ALSO BE AFRAID OF LOSING IT, AND WILL THUS HAVE A MUCH MORE POWERFUL HAND, WHEN HE COMMITS SAID STACK. OK, NOW BACK TO YOUR GAME. FIRST OFF, IF YOU ONLY WANT TO PLAY TWENTY ($20) DOLLARS AT A TIME, YOU SHOULD BE IN THE .10- .25 BLIND GAME. PLAYING A GAME, WHERE THE BIG BLIND IS 1/40 OF YOUR STACK, IS NOT A GOOD IDEA. THE WHOLE OBJECT OF NO LIMIT, IS TO BE ABLE TO BUST SOMEONE, WHEN YOU CATCH THEM WITH A SECOND BEST HAND. IF EVERYONE HAS $50 (THE USUAL MAXIMUM FOR THIS SIZE GAME) AND YOU ONLY HAVE $20, YOU WILL LOSE BIG TIME, WHEN YOU HAVE THE WINNING HAND, ESPECIALLY IF MORE THAN ONE OPPONENT WAS INVOLVED. AS A WINNING PLAYER, YOU DO NOT TAKE THE "CHICKEN SHIRT" APPROACH. BUYING IN FOR ONLY TWENTY, WOULD BE LIKE GOING TO WAR, WITH ONLY THE BULLETS IN YOUR GUN, AND NO SPARE MAGAZINES, THINKING "WELL, I'M PROBABLY GONNA GET KILLED IN THE FIRST MINUTE, SO WHY BOTHER CARRYING EXTRA AMMO?" WHAT DO YOU THEN DO, WHEN YOU DON'T GET KILLED, BUT NOW YOU DO, BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T HAVE EXTRA AMMO? EXAMPLE: YOU BUY IN FOR YOUR TWENTY, AND GET THE MUCH-COVETED " ANT ANTENNAS" (A TERM JUST INVENTED, BY ADAM THE EXPERT) YOU MAKE IT FIVE BEFORE THE FLOP, AND GET THREE CALLERS. NOW, THE FLOP COMES GOOD FOR YOU, AND YOU BET FIFTEEN, ALL IN. A PLAYER WITH A MEDIUM-STRENGTH HAND, WHO WASN'T GOING TO CALL, HAD YOU HAD ANOTHER $30 TO BET THE TURN, NOW DECIDES TO GO FOR IT, AND YOU GET SUCKED OUT ON, BECAUSE YOU COULN'T PROTECT YOUR HAND. BUY THE MAXIMUM, OR DON'T PLAY NO LIMIT. IN FACT, YOU SHOULD TAKE THAT THE NEXT STEP FURTHER: SEEK OUT SITES, THAT HAVE THE BIGGEST MAXIMUM BUY IN, OR: START PLAYING "REAL" NO LIMIT, WHERE THERE IS NO MAXIMUM BUY IN. ADAM THE E XPERT HAS DISCOVERED A SITE, WHERE THEY HAVE AN UNHEARD OF: 200X BIG BLIND MAXIMUM BUY IN, BUT, OF COURSE, SINCE I DON'T KNOW TO WHAT DEGREE THEY PROTECT THE PLAYERS FROM PARTNERSHIP PLAY (SOMETHING I, OF COURSE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT, ON PLANET OR U..B) I CANNOT OFFICIALLY AS YET RECOMMEND IT. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: NL bankroll, ReMMy, 21. Nov 2003 08:22 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Thanks for the reassurance. Of course if I think my game is better than a majority of the players there I need to maximize my chances with a full bankroll. I switched to starting with a full stack and I am finding it much more enjoyable. Now after I win my first big pot I'm usually the biggest or second biggest stack at the table, which means when I do finally end up with a hand thats beat, I'm not losing my original buy in, just some of my winnings(not that won money isn't mine now, but you get the point). I guess I'll hang around at the .25/.50 tables for a while and see how profitable they starting w/ a full stack before moving up a level. Anyone know what levels on PokerStars you'll start running into the higher caliber players? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: NL bankroll, Jordan, 21. Nov 2003 10:50 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| i haven't played cash games on poker stars cuz i've come to the conclusion party poker is much, much better for cash games and poker stars is much, much better for tourneys Party Poker is so much faster and thus allows for more hands in cash games which is most important Poker Stars starts you off with more chips and lower blinds which is much better for tourneys, also turns hands face up and actually gives you time to see what hands win I know this doesn't really answer your question about how skilled players are but I just felt like commenting on a somewhat related issue. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: NL bankroll, ReMMy, 21. Nov 2003 12:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Yah, I agree that PokerStars has superior tourneys which is why I play them. I defaulted to their NL ring games since I was always already signed on. I've only tried 15/30 at Party but maybe I'll give their NL ring games a shot, thanks for the advice. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network | Find Vancouver Businesses |
|