Bob, my advice to you is to play 10/20.

This has nothing to do with your knowledge of the game. It has to do with how you may react to a moderate to big loss at 20 psychologically.

Instead of taking a shot, use the opportunity to make 10/20 your regular game. Beat it and then work your way up to 20/40 naturally. A one-off, whether you win or lose, doesn't really do much for your overall game and place in poker. A loss at 20 will hurt much more than the win will feel good.

This is your chance to get off the treadmill that is limit poker below 10/20, where nobody really wins except the casino. Again, this has nothing to do with your skill or knowledge of the game and everything to do with my read of your psychological makeup and what this money could mean for you if you manage it properly. gl

This is an excellent point and one that I take to heart. My worst losing night ever was when I worked up 400 into 1200 at 10/20 in a matter of three hours only to lose almost all of it back. I was pretty mad at myself for that, but it was by no means a low point in my life, relatively speaking of course. I've had some very low points and losing money just doesn't compare.

Maybe that's just my way of rationalizing it because deep down I wanna play 20/40.

Based on your last comment I feel like we are talking differently about what a "big" win or loss would be. I mean it is pretty routine to be +or- $2k in a long session. Downswings of $10k or more probably aren't unheard of.

So imo I feel like $8k-10k is a good sized roll to move to 20/40 if you can replenish as needed. $20k probably ideal if you can't. I certainly wouldn't be taking a shot with less than $5k cause I feel like I would have to set a stop loss (which can be really counter productive).

-hf

If you ended with "regularly," I would agree.

I actually like this advice best

Your skill level, indicative of your post quality, versus the games you play, simply does not jive. 10/20 is certainly a beatable game, so I'd focus on that. Or maybe 3/6 Bovada games.

Fact is, the 20/40 games you want to be playing are the exact ones where you may lose the most $. And as my 2015 20/40 experience shows (I'm down $, thank God for 40/80+ and online run good), you can get tortured in these kind of games when you juice the pot 5+ ways on a draw and miss, when you get runner runnered for the billionth time, and so on. Psychologically, it's just easier to play against boring nits who make folding mistakes.

Less strat more John Locke fantastical foosball automatically curlish fails.

Doug that game sounds super fun!

Thanks for all the advice guys. I think it's going to end up being a question of game availability and game quality.

If seeing a few known fish makes you feel better, fine, whatever.

But winrate-wise, there's not a huge differwnce between being the worst player at the table and being the second worst. Your winrate is determined by how you fare against the field, and if there's 1-2 people heads and shoulders above or below the mean, that affects your winrate only marginally.

One of your goals when you take a shot is to realize the game is not fundamentally different, people will make the same mistakes but just less frequently. The other is to start innoculating yourself against large monetary gains and losses.

Play your A game, have fun. Leave while you're still having fun.

The good Dr said that fun was had.

From what I saw in the BH poker thread, it went off more than once. I think it did show up on Bravo. I'm guessing that for good LAGs it was a gold mine. For that bad LAG regs, is it better than standard blinds? If so, does this come at the expense of any bad TAG or nit that will play? I've been trying to think about how the ante impacts a LHE game. It isn't "pay any number of bets on any street until you're positive you're beaten".

It only went once I think. I believe they are trying to discourage the game so it doesn't weaken the 30/60

Just thinking that it'd probably make sense to have a rather big cold call range in this game. Like MP opens and you hold 86s OTB? You're getting 2.75:1 immediate. Would really muck w/ preflop strategy for me.

No you would 3 bet, getting the blinds out is a huge victory

I would prob hate ante games for same reason I hate must straddle games.

Basically if you have a guy that's gonna play every single hand and now he's going to play every single hand with antes he's just gotten much better. Same with forced straddles, get a few stuck people that are going to straddle every hand regardless, now force everyone else to do it so their straddles are neutral EV.

Sure the TAgd will have to adjust, but their failure to do so likely worth less than what bad players gain. Take JDR example, he guy that cold calls 6-8s probably loses, now the same guy that cold calls 6-8s wig or without antes is borderline correct without making one adjustment to his play

Well, I managed to lose a >20 big bet HU pot today. I think that was a first for me - so gonna cross that off the bucket list and not do that again.

-hf

Current status:

Yes, but BB for example is getting a sick price even without any more $ voluntarily put in (4.25:1). Essentially that game sounds like a massive s**t show where everyone is either light raising one another, or every flop goes off 8 handed. Though I can see that being pretty fun...especially if you run good .

Which should be fine for the most versatile players.

When raising light is the right play, most people venture well outside of their dynamic range. Most people can tell the difference between a 10% raiser and a 20% raiser. But what about a 80% raiser and a 90% raiser? If asked to raise 60%, most people would probably have a hard time getting within 20%.

On the contrary, the most versatile players know what 60% is. Furthermore, they know what to 3-bet against a 60% raiser, and how that 60% range fares on various flops.

Someone - Doug, I think - likes to point out that any rule change tends to favor the player that can arrive at the solution the fastest. That's pretty appropriate here.

I'm on with jon_locke that this change makes some bad players lose less. It could also keep a segment of decent players out. Still, it sounds like it went off once or maybe twice. Could have been a fun crew on a random Friday.

It could also make some bad players lose more. And some good players win less. And of course some good players win more.

Home games are always kind of a fun experiment in these things. You lose the Kh and end up playing with a 51-card deck. Sure, you can make the argument that good players disproportionately play or need the Kh. You can also see people overadjusting like folding AK because there's a king gone, creating huge leaks that didn't exist before. Ultimately, how does the balance of power tip? Unless I have specific math that indicates otherwise, I bet on the most versatile player as a general rule.

Putting extra money blind does cause calling station play to be less wrong. But it makes a bigger pot so thin edges mean more, making good play more valuable. Could it be that the former outweighs the latter? Maybe. But I assume everyone who cares to has Stoved the ante game preflop ranges so that they know exactly how to compensate and how to exploit overcompensation should it come up in their own experience. There's only so many things a casino would let you do and most are well known - antes, rock, straddle, etc.

You might be missing the information that these games tend to be way more LAG than your 20/40 or 40/80 game at Bay101. On a great night (i.e. one where the 50/100 is going to go off), the games are super LAG to begin with. Change your answer?

I go to a drive through and order a sandwich and dr pepper, they ask if I would like to add chips or a Cinnabon to the order and I pass. I get to the window and they ask if I want to donate $1 to help fight childhood diabetes.

They're clear on cause and effect?

Those $1 donations annoy me, because I know the company pushing them is more than likely getting either a cut or a tax break for our donations.

Recently I was at Panda express and they upped the annoyance by asking if I would donate 25 cents. I said no out of principle. **** you guys and trying to guilt people into donating to make more money for your company.

I generally ask them to match any donations to charities I support.