Micros you can play straight foward using a bit of guidance from a basic hud, nothing too deep.

Bankroll, just keep doing what you're doing. Can be a more aggressive with BRM in the micros and open it up more as you move up stakes.

Zooms good for volume but the rake and nitty feild, Conversly normal tables break alot.

Use controlled shots, set a stop loss and drop down when you hit it. Avoid tilting and jumping up stakes to regain losses, busted my micro roll few times grinding up from vpp too 500 then getting drunk and jumping in the 500pl pool lol.

Your hud should be working at zoom - consult your provider bc this is important

Hi you need to figure out what is better for you and your mindset respecting bankroll managment; I mean, if you can have the discipline to go up and down in stakes when needed without throwing away money by tilt and improving constantly your game, you can have a much more aggressive aproach (e.g. 25BI of PLO5 and shoots to PLO10 with 5BI until you get 30BI of PLO10, or many other aggressive approach). I just want to leave you a thought: microstakes are to learn the game, study hard to have a solid play, and get out of there as fast as possible.

I'm not the perfect example of that, because I still play PLO25 with shoots to PLO50, so I haven't success at all to get me out of microstakes jejejeje, but I honestly think that having a more aggressive bankroll managment can help you to stay motivated to play hard and study harder.

Regards

I wouldn't recommend playing with 5BI ever. There is so much variance in PLO it's not that rare to lose 5 BI in a session. Also if you play with a large portion of your bankroll you are more likely to play scared.

I presume you're less good but also a nittier than I am so higher variance from the 1st less from the 2nd, still I'd say 50-70 buyins

plo 10 and 5, more 10

I would strongly recommend not waiting for 50BIs to move up from the smallest stakes - although variance is high, you can always drop back down if things go badly and escaping the HUGE rake of those games is gonna be good (also, the skill differential between levels is limited to begin with).

I would probably say move up when you have 25BIs for the next stakes, drop down if you fall below 20 until you reach 25PLO. Then probably start thinking about moving somewhere closer to 50 for the next stake before you move up. I just can't believe forcing yourself to earn up to $1,250 from 5 and 10PLO before you get to 25 is either optimal or necessary.

You could even consider moving to 50 and 100 faster through a graduated plan (e.g. 25BIs to play 25PLO, 35 to play 50PLO, 50 to play 100PLO. Each time dropping back down when you fall 5 below that threshold).

Why even ask for advice if you're crushing 30bbs/100? :P It's 25 50 in a week w/o bad run. I just figured if you win like 5-10bb/100 you can go on 20 bi downswings tilt take shots and bye bye roll. But in you're case Tom's right, 600$ for 25 is solid

I studied books and played some over one year of mostly plo10 at stars and elsewhere. I was able to beat the rake, using mostly a medium stack. Beat it more on stars as they have a lower rake, but with a full rake all I beat was the rake that for me was about 1k in 35k hands at easy plo10 games. But I played with a medium stack start and reload.

With a bigger stack play one likely gets on green as I have seen that to be the case with some players I was playing with though I have also seen that big or normal stack play will produced enormous fluctuations in some cases as some score ridiculously huge at least still at 10k or 20k hands, that would not have happened to me, though my games were not much of aggro games but more like loose passive (but often aggros also), though some more aggro at stars (much depending also on who were there, plus players there open raise more often and you might face a raise more often if you limp, and a lot of players fold up to too often, and these were ring games that are looser than the zoom ones, especially if you table select) and some less bigger multiway pots, but bigger multiway pots also can produce more variance (I got big holes at times at some full ring play and also got big ups and the scores are unreliable at such games, or till one starts to play for big value mostly), that partly explain why at some super loose games the variance can be enormous.

I had no huge problem variance at any 10k hands, at least breaking even, and my losing streaks, though often in few hours, when bigger were 10 medium stacks both at stars and elsewhere. So, a 20 stacks medium stacks roll was and is enough for me. If using a big stack one would need maybe just a 15 big stacks roll in non aggro semi easy games with a semi aggro non nit style (it doesn't mean there should not be any possibility of going busto).

My last 35k hands (a different 35k hands at different site) at plo10 stars beat just the rake but I run unlucky (and as a result played some bad also) and some 25 medium stacks under all-in EV, and if that would have been my first run in relatively tough games or so (that is a reasonable possibility as I played just some five times that many hands), it would have busted something like a 25 medium stacks roll with break even skill, losing something like the amount of the rake during a 35k of hands.

In easy games, I wouldn't worry about the roll too much, and it is more important to play every limit long enough to think one is good enough to try a higher limit, and other than small shots at good higher games before that, I would and will now go for busto there as they often run bad for a start and the variance will put one out too easily if having just 10 or so stacks, and 5 would be a donation as it has no long run. It is true it is all a long run but in the short run it is more like a semi donation not being rolled enough when moving up as it is so much about luck then, making it more gambling.

I think one should play a level one feels one fits into, e.g. the current limit might usually be too comfortable too easy, that has its problems, like when one plays too tough games to feel comfortable enough.

My results at plo25 has so far been just beating the full rake (profits from possible rakeback only), though a bit better lately, and I might not get to big stack only play as I have usually run very bad (unlucky) when playing a big stack only, losing the flips, but I think I might play most of my time already with a big stack (and my luck has improved as a good relatively experienced player tends to be more lucky, counting out the beginner luck other than when trying to move up) as I am there any time I double and triple up (for a long time used to be closer a double up and leave) and possibly longer if the game (seat etc.) is good for it, and might have no limit for it in the future until too much is bad for it. More time at bigger stacks also seems to have improved my win rate a bit in spite of the game being a bit (more at stars but haven't been playing there) tougher than it was at plo10, and the rake being relatively about the same or maybe a bit less.

Playing a medium stack start (the big stacks won't like it though they about never said anything about it and at some sites such stacks are not too much out of the usual in easy games. The sites don't offer medium cap tables but at winning network I think, and stars tolerates it some 10 or so double ups only) also has the goods that one is able to play it better and against such better, and the stats get mixed, and the 3b pots might not happen all that often to make big stack play smaller, to get as much of that practise, one running into it more in more aggro or tougher games (there has been aggro tables where I had to use a bigger stack or there was just flipping) and the ranges tend to be different.

Plo has been a some more tilting game for me than nlh, though some of the time it seems I have got more used to it, but plo might not be for one who can't even with time get his tilt under reasonable control, but then can be a good game for those who can.