I'm doing it (moving up to NL25, advice please)
Posted by whiteshark
Posted by
whiteshark
posted in
Low Stakes
I'm doing it (moving up to NL25, advice please)
So after some decent results at NL10z I am finally moving up to NL25z, a limit at which I haven't played a single hand yet. Since from other people I have heard a couple of times already that they have been crushing NL10 but struggling at NL25, I wanted to ask for any kind of tip or advice from those that have been doing this transition lately. Any major differences between the two?
Also: Which impact does it have on my game that the SB actually only pays 0.4BB on 10ct/25ct rather than the typical 0.5BB? I guess we should slightly tighten up our SB opening range since hands that had an EV of e.g. -0.48BB (and were slightly profitable opens when the alternative is losing -0.5BB) now become unprofitable. Or does the overfolding from the BB (that I assume to be at place) compensate for that and we just change nothing?
Loading 11 Comments...
Honestly
The differences between nl10/16/25/50 are somewhat marginal.
The regs are getting stronger but the recs are as bad as at the limits before.
And we are still far off from needing to work out complex strategies to beat the good regs as there is still a lot of bad players around.
So if you beat NL10 just keep doing what you are doing at NL25 and stay confident.
In theory you might be right that we should tighten up our SB RFI-range, but in practice esp in zoom format ppl underdefend their BB quite a bit.
So i guess i would also advise to keep stealing a lot even for the worse price…
theres no difference, just play the same as you did
using your intuition to adjust is still better than trying to find some high level gto optimal strategy
yes the 0.4bb changes sb ranges a little but the fundamentals dont really change, just raise your best hands and fold everyone else
the fact that you notice this difference and know there ought to be adjustments is good and shows your level of theory understanding is beyond 25nl, but everyone else at 25nl don't care and will play the same ranges in practice so just continue to do what works for you in practice as well
#1-Don't let it freak you out. It's the same game. The vast majority of the other players will be recs, there will be some bad regs and some solid regs. Plenty of gambling recs that snub their nose at games under 25NL. The are just as bad as the 10NL guys.
#2-Figure out a way to always play in BB's and not the $$$$$. This can lead to freaking out.
#3-The guys that are putting effort into the game are going to be better at constructing their ranges and some bet sizing stuff.
#4-If you are playing a trackable environment. Set up your note taking when you analyze post session. This is critical to have done before hand in Zoom/Zone Games. Try to come up with a short hand way that you can glance at and know what he has done in the past. Especially go through showdown hands and note the guys you can pick on with turn/river pressure.
Thanks a lot you three for your comments! HawksWin playing in BB rather than $$ is definitely good advice.
At least in the first session it really didn't seem like the gameflow is very different from what I'm used to. Few 4-bets pre, few overbets post, etc. I actually know some of the regs there already from NL10. Surprisingly it's those that I always classified as being the weaker ones
I guess these guys are the perfect example for what was said in this thread.
Even if you play a 2008-super-ABC-style you will be able to beat this limit. All you would need is time and patience and thats what these super bad regs makes winning players.
If you play 1 billion hands for 0BB/100 you will beat even NL50 in the long run due to a tiny bit of rakeback.
And im pretty sure you are way better than that!
There is the potential that you will start to find the games easier to beat due to things making more sense.
With respect, what "decent results at NL10z" u consider?
I think this depends highly on the limit. At NL100z, I guess 2bb/100 are already decent results. At micro stakes I would feel really good about anything beyond 4bb/100. Though also depends on the rake you pay in your specific format.
I personally moved up from NL10z after >5bb/100 over a bit over 40k hands
Variance is brutal with less than 3-4bb/100. Games are beatable for a lot more than most people think. 7bb/100 at 100z is not even that hard if you know the overall exploits and can think a bit about ranges while playing.
I'd aim for a 30-50k sample of 4bb/100 or more before moving up. Lower than that, it's a good idea to find more exploits and improve fundamentals. Variance could make you stop playing and a bit unlikely to stick the landing at the next stake.
Some very smart and experienced guys say that it's easier to learn and improve playing reg tables. Easier to pick up on player patterns, exploit fish better and fish lose at a much higher rate there. Something to consider if you have thoughts about becoming a pro or want to move up quickly.
Regular tables are where it is at. The key to wining at poker is play against people who suck at it more than you do. Not only is the overall pool softer at regular tables, but so long as you make it a point to switch seats or tables to make sure you spend as many hands a possible against bad recreational players you will see a tremendous boost in your winrate. Even if you could squeak out a bigger hourly volume wise at your current stakes playing zoom, it is probably not as much as you could make hourly playing one or two levels higher at regular tables. Play regular tables, work to position yourself with the fish one or two seats to your right, and use your HUD stats to pound the other players for every exploitable weakness you can find, and make bank.
Be the first to add a comment