Top 5 Tips for Low/Micro Stakes Players
Posted by Patrick Sekinger
Video Player is loading.
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Resume Video
Start from Beginning
Watch Video
10
Loading 26 Comments...
All good tips - especially regarding the rake. Rake at the microstakes is devastating to a win-rate (upwards of 9bb/100), and I do think a low size, high frequency betting strategy works well. Should we also avoid calling as much postflop due to the rake? I've recently been x/calling more to allow players to keep bluffing (with a subsequent win rate decline) and david sklansky mentioned in his book (very outdated but the theory holds true) that we should only be calling postflop about 10% of the time we fold or raise. I wonder what are your thoughts on calling postflop in these high rake environments? Would a x/fold or x/raise only strategy be viable at these stakes? Thanks for the video.
Hi camikaze,
Yes, some of our very close to 0ev (threshold) calls postflop become folds due to the rake. The best way to see the difference would be to run identical Pio sims, but in one leave the rake structure blank and in the other include the rake structure of the games in which you play.
I'll admit i, not familiar with Sklansky saying we should only be calling postflop at x% of time and should fold/raise more. I think that this is likely to be outdated thinking. Imo call/raise/fold freqencies should probably be more liquid depending on how ranges interact with the board and changes in the board on different streets and how we might expect our opponents to be constructing their ranges.
I expect that playing only xr or xf strategy would be a big leak since we will very often have hands that are bluffcatchers against a polar range - it makes no sense to xr or xf only here
What is node locking? I never heard this term before. Is this something about running a simulation in a solver?
Node locking is a function of PioSolver - it allows us to fix the strategy of 1 player at a specific node of the simmed tree. It is helpful if we think the solver plays particularly different to population at a node. We can then see how Piosolver would play optimally vs a strategy more similar to what we might see in the games we play, rather than what is seen at equilibrium.
Great Video Patrick im very interested in the rake effect. i ran identical sims 0 rake and 4.5% with a $0.50 cap like 5NL at Stars. and was suprised at the results. (though not sure i fully understand them) i noticed an equity decrease not sure why? and an obvious EV decrease. so are you saying BDFD's and GS's floats are negate -EV at this Rake structure?
My best guess as to the equity decrease is just because the two sims you ran are solved to different degrees of accuracy. I'm not a walking solver so take this with a pinch of salt but i would expect we still get to call hands like gutshots and good bdfd hands on earlier streets even with the rake effect. The effect of rake will instead affect hands closer to threshold in 0 rake environments, such as weakest high card floats or more speculative calls
Can you make your next video or series of videos be about how to construct a linear 3b/f range? I don't mean you spoon feed us with a chart (bc I don't think it's very helpful at all), but maybe you could explain/show to us the factors you considered when you constructed your own range.
EDIT c'mon essential subs, heart this comment if y'all also interested ; )
Hi,
I'll take this into consideration, if it is something that others would also be interested in seeing. I suspect you mean for all positions rather than just SB where it is more common?
hehe of course
Yeah esp from the HJ, CO, and BU position where we're not closing the pf action and we're likely to get squeezed by players left to act if we call vs the open raise. I mean you don't really have to do it for each position bc as long as we understand the thought process behind it, then we can surely just apply the concept(s) to other positions as well.
As an update, have recorded an episode including some preflop poker, but may have to wait a little while before it is released as there is some content due to come out beforehand :)
can' wait ; )
did someone end up making a video like this? :)
Great vid as always, thanks! In terms of bet sizing. Small C Bets get overcalled in smaller stakes in my experience. Wouldn't it be better to increase a C Bet size to get more folds and thus reduce the rake paid? What's the best method of finding the right C Bet sizing/frequencies in relation to the rake?
bbrickk,
I admit that it's been a while since I've played micros, however would be shocked if people are overdefending to small cbet sizings. I'm not sure there is a correct answer to your question, I think it'll come down to intuition a lot.
How I would approach this spot would be to run some aggregate analysis and if you want to really be thorough use population analysis and compare equilibria with the data you have. It might be the case that people underdefend on some boards and overdefend others relative to equilibrium. It may be that they play too inelastic to certain sizings or sizings at all.
If you dont have the aid of a solver then you should be able to find content in the 'Continuation Bets' section of the 'Learning Paths' on this site that will direct your learning.
Hope this helps
Nice vid, patrick. A somwhat off-topic questions:
I am a long time zoom player consdering a move to regular tables. I know a lot of the above questions are depending from factors like vpip, capabilty to multitables, etc. But a rough estimation would already help me.
Thanks in advance!
Hey Pape,
Hope this helps
Thanks a lot for the answer
Great video.
How would one develop a sound flop strategy for the micros using a solver? I watched your other video about creating a 3bet/fold linear pre-flop strategy so I think that's straightforward enough with some experimenting, but once we see a flop, how do we then know which hands to put in bet/check ranges on different textures, how often we should c-bet each texture etc.? Should we try to approximate the equilibrium strategy suggested by the solver, even if our opponents (I play 25zoom on stars) are playing nothing close to optimal? How do we know which % of range we should be checking/check-raising/check-raise bluffing etc? I mean sure I can go pick different flops and play around with a hand matrix, but how do I know how many combos of each hand I should be placing in each category so that my flop strategy is (at least somewhat) balanced? Or maybe I shouldn't be balanced at all due to the population over-calling, so I can actually play an unbalanced strategy with more value hands against the whole pool to gain max EV? Is it all just trial and error or is there some systematic way to develop a solid winning balanced strategy that I can then deviate from? So many questions. Keep making these videos though they are great!
@ 10:00'ish: I mean, playing smaller stakes than you've already developed a threshold to but against better opponents (tougher network, for example) or simply one tabling a stake up against better players should definitely help one improve at the game, no? If you can afford what you're doing, why not?
Nice Video, what do you think about a 3-Bet Only Strategy in the Cutoff and Hijack in high Rake environment games?
Seems a good adjustment to make
Thank you Patrick for this video. Great content!
To me personaly mindset is a top1 tip. The ability to stay focused, fold relative weak hands and focus on constant improvement is the key.
I've got a question about FPS - not sure if I understood you correctly. You mean that human brain is not a computer, and by working with solvers we see that "perfect" play would be to mix some combos to fold/call/raise. As we are only humans we tend to deviate from solver solutions but not by simplyfying the strategy but by making more fancy plays and actually making fishy plays?
Or do you mean that sometimes in a spot that we haven't worked out yet we tend to play fancy / mix plays because solver probably would do so, but we do not really know how this should be done and we do not understand what we are doing?
I played at NL10 at least 100k hands and I can confirm that after switching to a strategy with no cold-call in MP, CO and BTN the rake i paid is decreased from 15bb/100 to 11 bb/100. Consider that i play on italian site with 5.5%rake.
Using a 3bet/fold (no cold-call) strategy in MP,CO and BTN will save you at least 3-5 bb/100 in rake.
Overall very nice video with a lot of interesting insight to increase your winrate.
GJ Patrick
Very good video :)
if possible i want to learn more about thr RAKE and the importante of tighter ranges is micros
Using a 3bet/fold (no cold-call) strategy in MP,CO and BTN and in SB !
right ?
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.