I have propped for a while at my local casino which I prop both a 3-6 limit game with 2-2-3 blinds and a 6-12 with 6-4-2 blinds. Both games run loose like your typical low-limit game would with a slight exception of the 6-12 game being a little more agressive "preflop only" and then runs similar post flop to most 3-6 games would.

My issue with the perfect strategy has caught me between a rock and a hard place. One of the dealers there, a so-called exceptional low limit player has offered me a one strategy which he claims to give you the highest winrate while David sklansky's strategy in small stakes limit holdem counteracts the dealers advice. Both theorys make sense and here they are.

DEALER states that you should not be raising AK, AQ tt's and jj's preflop and especially not after a couple limpers for the this reason

1) You dont want to give them odds to call with there middle or bottom pair (5 outs) which case you'd be giving them odds to call if you had raise preflop.

SKLANSKY states that you should always raise those hands preflop. Which leads to giving you opponets odds to call with those same 5 outs which they would be calling with regardless since low limit players dont adjust to pot size.

My question is what mistake is greater for your opponents. The mistake that opponents make by calling your preflop raise with a marginal hand and giving them odds to call after the flop, or limping in with those hands which gives your oponnets a discount to see the flop but increase their post flop mistakes by not giving them odds to call after the flop?

your friend (and maybe you) badly misunderstands/misapplies some basic limit holdem concepts.

no offense meant to either of you obviously.

probably the best i can distill it is to say that you should be viewing this game in terms of: winning money > winning pots.

i'm gonna move this to the halp/noob/wut thread for further discussion, and there may be some related posts already in there.

good luck and welcome to the forum.

formula72,

preferably try to do both. try to have them put in a bunch of money in preflop with worse hands, and then try to make it unprofitable for them to call with their draws postflop. it may take some creative postflop play to make this happen (see Miller/Sklansky's book for more details).

the proof though is that the "exceptional low-limit player" is dealing, while Miller/Sklansky are playing bigger games and winning more money.

when i used to play 2/4 at foxwoods $40 seemed like a fine buy in, so settling on 10 big bets i used that when i started to play 4/8 buying in for $80. I have been a winning 4/8 LHE player every session ive had at the woods. next time i go i plan on playing 5/10 no kill. It seems like $100 seems nitty, should i buy in for $150 or just add on if i get short.

You're buying in way too short. I stick to 30BBs for my buy-in. So that would be $120 at 2/4, $240 at 4/8, $300 at 5/10. If you don't keep at least 12 BBs on the table at all times you are making a mistake.

10 BB is too short, lose one pot and you're really low. Having to have 12 BB is a rare occurrence, but you don't want to miss out.

Typically I buy in for 1 rack of whatever chips they use, so $100 at 2/4 and 3/6 and $200 at 6/12. If you get down to around that 12 BB mark you should add on another $100.

From a winning player to a great player. I play 3/6 online for now, and when I stick to strong starting hands and bet relentlessly with them I am often ahead at the end of the session, but not necessarily by a lot. It seems like I'll do that for a week, and then convince myself that I'm good enough to loosen up and play more hands.

But I'm not.

Because invariably I'll lose all of my winnings from the week in some terrible session. I'll play more off suit hands like 10K, KJ, etc. I'll start limping with any pocket pair utg, etc, where I might normally pass with 22-66ish. I'm still not calling bets cold unless I have a real good hand, and even then I'd probably just raise. But I feel like I'm making way too many second best hands when I do this. I guess I don't know how to release a good hand yet?

So what changes should I be trying to make to become a big winner? Or at this level is it really more about SSHE fundamentals? Almost every session I've been up is when I'm seeing 13-17% of flops, just playing tight and aggressive. Suggestions welcome.

Not to state the obvious, but if you're making money playing tighter, and losing it all when you open up, maybe you should stop opening it up. Refine your game, and don't be impatient to make "the leap." It'll come in time, as long as you don't do anything prematurely. Sometimes you have to go from good, to pretty good, to very good before you can even think about being great.

Online 3/6 has not become any easier over time. Knowing SSHE fundamentals is very important but you often face heavy aggression in the games you are playing. You might do well to read "Winning in Tough Hold 'em Games".

Also, I think that you are making a mistake by reading too much into your session results. The success of your strategy can only be evaluated over many thousands of hands. Stick to what you feel you are successful with and slowly make adjustments when you can clearly rationalize that they are more profitable. Just playing more hands is a poor strategy if you don't clearly understand the what, why, and how. Although, just jumping in can be a good learning tool, if you can afford it.

Really don't know where else to ask this so if I shouldn't be putting it here mods just erase.

I occasionally play a live 2-5 limit game and I am wondering if the rake is to high for it to be profitable. They take out for every hand 10% up to $3.50 plus $1.00 for the bad beat jack pot. So if the pot is $25 they would take a total of $3.50. If the pot was was $80 they would take $4.50 because that is the max they take. I am not sure if this is enough info for people to make an accurate assumption but maybe someone can give me an educated guess.

I was just debating it with someone and I was telling him I would be surprised if many people were beating the game at all. I am not blaming the rake for my loses cause I know I am not any good at limit just wondering if anybody can beat that kind of game?

This is the right spot.

I started out playing 2-5 spread limit in Colorado. I know that there were many winners with a 10% rake capped at $3 + $1 BBJ drop. I probably won 2-3BB/HR + in these games. As long as the competition is poor and the pots are much larger than the cap, it matters less.

The games moved to $4 + $2 BBJ and then to $5 + $2 BBJ, and somewhere in there, I believe that they became unbeatable. The issue is that the fish go broke so quickly versus the drop that you need a constant stream of new bad players to make the game playable. Even if it is only another $3/hand, that rake kills the game.

Given that your rake schedule is more like 5% up to $4.50, the game should be quite beatable. Most people underestimate the edge that a good player has an a spread limit format. If you have fish making $2 raises and calling $5 ones, an expert in this edge has a much larger edge than a fixed limit player. Since the turn bet doesn't increase, the biggest mistake that many "trying to play well" TAGs make is to fold to much. That's right, they fold too much. Your backdoor draws, your 5 outers on bottom pair, and the like often have the odds to continue. In this sort of game, your big draws really matter, and you need to jam them.

GL,

Doug
PS. My experience that online poker is much more profitable than these small live games. You should check out the microstakes forum and consider making a small deposit to play online.

TY sir. That's the info I was looking for.

Isn't it more profitable to play the games listed above in casinos than playing low stakes online???
From what I have observed the players on microstakes online are far better than the live players listed above.
is it just preference, cause it seems better live.

opinions and clarifications please!

Playing at equal levels live v online is much different. For example, 2/4 live is filled with fish. 2/4 online is much tougher. Probably the players at .1/.2 online are equal to 2/4 live. Difference is, you can play a lot more hands/hour online, and no tips or killer rake.

I'm at my wits end here. I hear people talk about how this game is a "skill" game, and quite frankly, I don't see it. I don't say this flippantly, on the contrary, I say this hoping someone can help show me the error of my ways. I have tracked my stats for this year and it's almost creepy (in my mind). I, obviously, don't track every single stat but I track a number of stats to help me know how well I'm doing. I don't play "full time" because I have another job but play at least (usually more than) 20 hrs a week. Here are my stats for this year along with what I think are the actual probabilities (correct me if I'm wrong), this would be for about 200 hours of poker (actually 187 if it matters) at a live game that I have counted to play approx 40 hands an hr:

Dealt Pocket Pairs: 219 (actual prob 1/17 - reality = 1/34)
Dealt AK, AQ (suited or not): 104 (actual prob 1/41 - reality = 1/72)
Flopped Trips (w/pp): 12 (actual prob 1/8.5 - reality = 1/28)
Flopped One Pair or better with AK, AQ: 27 (actual prob 1/3 - reality 1/4)

The only stat that's even close (for me) is flopping one pair or better with AK or AQ. This does not even take into account bad beats or cold deck scenarios which can be too complicated to measure. I have managed to have some winning sessions this year but they have all been because of high percentage bluffs and semi-bluffs. I'm not sure if I want someone to tell me if this is typical or not. Perhaps I just want to know if anyone out there in the poker community is experiencing anything like this.

you, sir, have an insufficient sample size to overcome the mighty powers of variance. play 250k hands and your stats will start to converge.

yeah...I agree but for example I was at commerce watching a game of 4/8 and i was shocked the micro players are better. Despite the rake, toke etc... isn't this more profitable (4/8)???

It's more profitable per hand to play live. It's far more profitable per hour to play online

Most posters here tend to believe that your stats aren't even worth talking about until at least 10,000 hands, and you probably need 50,000 minimum before any one session isn't causing significant changes in your records. You have, according to your math, 7,500 hands.

In other words, keep repeating to yourself, "The long run is long. Really, really long." Let that be your mantra.

is it possible to beat the 2-4 and 3-6 (9 handed)games on fulltilt? I have beaten the low limit games in casinos for years but can't seem to do well online. Is it possible to beat it? any advice?

yes it's possible. online games are much harder than live games. i suggest you start out at lower games online that you are more comfy in, and work your way up. post hands here and people will help you with strategy questions. welcome to the forum.

what would be the best book to read the beat 2-4 and 3-6 online?

start by beating lower games online

winning low limit holdem is a good beginners book

small stakes holdem is a good intermediate book

both will help, but there's no magic bullet

I've have come to learn that one of the most important skills in LHE is learning how rationalize and accept the massive variance that is an inherent part of the game. For a live player a bad stretch can easily last weeks, months or even years as those of us who play online have learned that it is very possible for solid, winning players to have losing streaks that last many tens of thousands of hands. The best advice I can give you is to continue working on your game, try to play each hand to the best of your ability and don't get too discouraged... we've all been there. Some of us as recently as this afternoon!

Realize that in the long run you will reach the average for starting hands and hitting flops.

There are also some errors in your maths. If you have flopped trips 12 times and been dealt 219 pocket pairs then you have hit trips more than one in 28 times. Also, are you considering the times you were dealt pocket pairs and folded preflop?