DONE!!! / NL25 finishing blow together with Thor - help me deliver it!

Post#2 updated (results).

Again negative. Played some while traveling (been out in Europe the whole week), maybe it might influenced the not-so-well play.

Basically, I see this pattern in my play over and over again - I can maintain several small winning sessions in a quite long row (~5bb/100, which I think is quite ok), then everything is ruined by one massive loosing session (I quit after I loose 5 BIs, but still - it's a HUGE kick into my bankrolls balls).

Moreover, I seem to play my normal game for myself at those sessions, I can't see anything that I would make differently during them. Can't be just the regular variation, the pattern is too obvious. Any insights/comments on this?

Back to NL10 for some sessions to regain my faith in game

Feels real softer, seem you can easily get away with profit playing ABC. Or maybe I'm overplaying NL25 too? The idea about playing too complex for the limit (and maybe it is the real problem) keeps getting into my head and I find lots of learning material confirming that. What are your thought?

I've had several sessions in NL10 where I can maintain level red line with blue one going up - looks like an overall "winning graph" in micros (the general pattern, I mean).

I totally agree. Your graph is a textbook example of how I would like my graph to look like, but on NL25 you need pretty good postflop game to maintain that red line BE... (or at least I think so, cause I'm still on NL10 )

GL @ the tables

First things first:

Related thoughts:

1) The idea about possibility to maintain that level red line obsessed me. It seems it really IS the key to beating micros. I find quite easy to have sessions with such graphs quite easy at NL10 (still mystery why it's so difficult at NL25 for me, player pool isn't that different there).

2) When I concentrate really hard on things that help me maintain that holy red line flat - I seem to run good with my blue one automatically. Seems postflop winnings come as a bonus for not making small, but stupid things preflop (and on the flop)

So I focused really hard on situations and patterns of play that really pushes the red devil up. Seems ABSOLUTELY ALL OF THEM must be mastered to quite a perfection if you really want to start crushing micros - if you fail and make poor plays on any one of them, it will kill the red line and the blue one won't be able to compensate that. Seems you really MUST have it flat or going down very slightly if you're about winning, true?

I grouped those skills into two categories, since the line can be influenced in two ways:

BY WINNING CHIPS:

• Stealing a lot from BU and CO + SB when all folded to it.
• Squeezing, especially against several players.
• Never missing a C-bet on right conditions (player folds more than 70% to it + flop can represent strong hand)
• Double-barreling even with mediocre holdings when turn card allows it.

BY SAVING CHIPS:

• Playing very tight from EP and MP (and generally avoiding OOP play).
• Avoiding calling raises preflop, even with position. Much better is to raise or fold.
• Same goes with postflop - if you can't maintain initiative (e.g. bet yourself), you should not be calling much.
• Forget bluffing.

So, to make this post constructive, can we discuss on following thoughts:
1) Does my idea about "necessary flat red line" make sense?
2) Is my "List of skills" complete? Can we add/remove something here?

Post#2 updated. +189 combined from NL10 and NL25 play.

Playing some NL10 sessions really felt so much easier - and it really took of some pressure of me. I guess it might be a reason why I felt real good when back into NL25 for a couple of sessions.

And I also give credits for this result of this week for my discoveries about the "Red line theory", give it a look, one post to the top. I found myself especially week on Double Barreling - can somebody point me more info on that?

yah, i like "winning chips", don't like "saving chips" so much.

calling is a fine and necessary part of the game though micro players in general just play mostly terribly against raises, so i guess that 3betting is often (not always) more profitable. and by "not bluffing" i guess you actually mean "not spewing"

Erniastukas where do you find such players who folds 70+ cbets on zoom?
Because most of the time I am againsts total calling madness who are calling with 3rd pair when I have something only high card on total missed board and when I hit they are just folding. Some of them are practising some voodoo poker imo ♦

sentin1ty, yah it happens so often in micros that this idea about voodoo poker spells often get into my head also. Or some cheating software that shows opponents hole cards (even googled for it, found nothing :]). Or a site being "rigged" - but I'm trying to throw this idea out of my head since it really interferes with your actual play - you start blaming "other things" and not looking into your game, and that's not a way to progress in this game.

But I find zoom tables quite tight and straight forward - they either have something or will give up quite easily. That's why I like to c-bet or c/r (if I'm OOP) a lot directly on the flop - it really gives a lot info about what opponent has.

Tomaloc, i do call IP with small to medium pairs and any two broadway cards, sometimes high suited A. But then playing after the flop is quite straight forward - you either have it or not. And since you "have it" only in 1/3 of the time I find quite hard to win the pot that, well, doesn't really belong to me without showing strength pre-flop.

And by "complete bluffing" I mean responding to opponents aggression with even bigger aggression when you don't have anything. I don't consider "bluff" a C-bet or a DB even if I don't have anything, but opponent plays passive - these, I think, should be treated like normal game "instruments".

well yeah, to win by calling you also need to take pots where you don't have it and/or villain doesn't have it. ofc when neither have it the side with the initiative has the easier time, so the art lies in doing it without being too spewy

Hello cowboys,

Post#2 updated. Terrible week again. Seems I'm overdone something by pursuing that redline. Or simply running bad - plenty of hands losing with KK for AK, etc., but there are some bad play for sure too.

I has inevitable effect - I'm moving down. And you know what - to NL2! That's the purpose of this challenge (it continues, you thought it's over??? I never give up!), anyway - to learn how to CRUSH fish. Not to "win" against them, to CRUSH them. And I should have thought about it later - you can CHEAPLY learn that in NL2, where you have at least 3 of them at one table.

I've lost a battle, but war still rages. I will have to patch my bankroll up, repeat some basics (which, it seems, I was able to forget somehow) and fight my way back to NL25.

Post#2 will get updated further as the journey to $1000 continues (it seems it will take a while, though ).

THE QUESTION: I've lost more than 12 BIs in one week. Is it normal, does it happen to you? I will repeat myself - I felt playing quite solid, without big bad decisions, etc. In other words - when you CAN allow yourself to blame the variance for such weeks and when it's 100% you're doing something wrong? Any long-term stats to evaluate that (some kind of "normal expected variance" number)?

By playing 1000-2000 hands daily what would you consider normal variance? 5 BI? 10 BI?
How many losing sessions in a row you usually experience and treat it normal?

I think knowing such numbers (or we could call them "expectations") really helps to keep a calm head, since having an expectation which is far from reality very quickly turns ones mind into "I'm a loser" when it's completely normal and vice versa.

Post#2 updated with results.

Plan is working. At 6max NL2 tables you're usually against min3 fishes, some passive, some aggro. Really a perfect platform to remind (or learn, because it seems I never truly knew how to do that) how to play against both types.

I was really overplaying and overthinking against them.
I was bluffing too much.
I thought I was value betting with TPTK when it was obvious he's on flush/straight ("nah, he doesn't have it").

I would be really thankfull if you guys would share your thoughts on my previous post.

BTW, one of my original questions remain: given that I'm struggling with fish, how the hell I win tournaments??? Just took down one of PS 1K Depositors FR in first place last week, ending with $208, but for the sake of correctness of this challenge, I won't include it into my Post#2 bankroll.

Hi, 12 bi in one week can very well be a variance. To only have a clue how you are doing 50k hands is minimum. And only after 200k you could make some conclusions about your true winrate. As for fish: just let the aggro ones to bluff. And value bet thin enough vs passive ones. Easy game

Originally posted by dooleslovs
Hi, 12 bi in one week can very well be a variance. To only have a clue how you are doing 50k hands is minimum. And only after 200k you could make some conclusions about your true winrate. As for fish: just let the aggro ones to bluff. And value bet thin enough vs passive ones. Easy game

Was about to say the same.

Also remember fishes hit flops too so they dont need to bluff everytime so try to loose less money to them by being selective when your pursuing fishes. Dont play them every hand or call them down with a low pair everytime.

Post#2 updated with...great results

I understand you need a large sample to evalueto your winning rate, but to crush fish I needed two things:
1) Playing against Loose-passives: never bluff, value bet strong (exploitation - they call with very weak holdings too far just to see that showdown).
2) Playing against Loose-aggros: just let them hang themselves - they will spew chips around with ANYTHING (exploitation - keep calling and overbetting when holding a strong hand).

Seems following is true in micros, it really helped my mindset to start winning, I keep telling to me while playing:
"First, you need a hand...". All the moves you've red about goes after that.

Originally posted by Erniastukas
Any long-term stats to evaluate that (some kind of "normal expected variance" number)?

I think most poker players can't imagine what variance really is. Me too! It helpes me to look at this graph. You can see the worst and best run from a 8bb/100 winningplayer. The Std. Dev. is here 80 and depends on your style.

You can see that this player could be a BE-Player or a 15bb/100 Winning-Player over 100k hands.

And now imagine someone post a 100k BE-graph here in the forum. Everyone says work on your game, you have big leaks etc.
But when someone post his graph with 15bb/100 winnings over 100k hands everyone mean that he is a very good player and some ask how he play, if he can give some advise etc.

But they can be exact on the same poker level!

hey erni, I`m playing nl10 and I`m pretty much in your situation :). will follow your evolution from now on, pm your skype if you don`t mind changing some thoughts and hands and shitz ♦

Hi all, as always - post#2 updated, pretty good results.

been out for a good week - too some time completelly off poker. My play seems to benefit from that - more joy while playing = more concentration. This must be one of the most undervalued tips in poker - take your breaks, let the info and experiences settle in your head and lay down to make a complete picture.

I think I'm moving to NL5 to check how the situation is different there. I'm really happy about my decision to start it from the very bottom. Forcing myself to play at NL2 (although feeling way too good for it) gave these benefits:
A) I stopped profit-oriented play / I used to check my winning very often during a session and it really is a distraction. Since the profits in NL2 are so small - I felt no urge to check the digit every 5 minutes.
B) Really got into methods for exploiting both aggro and passive fish / It's actually very simple and easy - the problem is, it requires discipline. Yes, it's that hard to cross bluffing our completelly
C) Quite stopped losing to them / As I think I was inflating pots too much with mediocre holdings. As I've already stated in my previous post - just keep repeating mantra "first, you have to get a good hand" and you'll be fine against fish

Moving to NL5, we'll see what changes there

Post#2 updated.

In NL5 I find it's becoming necessary to change tables quite often, isn't it? I'm quite surprised that even at NL5 you can find yourselft at the table with nobody but regs. Of course those can also be exploited, but it's out of this challenge

Hey there, I find it from my experience that NL10 tables are lot softer than NL5, weird right?
But with marking opponents and good table selection you can find people to exploit for sure

Any chance to see some of Thor's pictures? He has surely grown a lot since the picture on your first post?

GL @ the tables

Post#2 updated. Results stable

Thor is growing in my eyes, I'll post some pictures soon :]. I'm really getting anxious about the idea that he will be a fully grown up dog when I'll finally beat that NL25 Need to put in more volume to counter this, I guess

On the other hand - pulling volume down and devoting more time to learning proved to be the right way for now. I tend to get tired after 1-2 hours of playing and finally I can notice myself starting to play my B game.

How long your sessions take, guys?