Live $1/1 Min/max buy-in $20

It's about 4am and Hero just got moved from a broken table so no confirmed reads yet. A few hands have passed since I got to the table, but I've folded most of them. From what it looks, table is passive & quiet, bet sizing is non-existent I've taken down a small pot or two by stabbing at uncontested pots by betting 1/2 pot or c-betting .


SB: $15
BB (Villain): $20 - Just sat down, Asian kid who looks ready to gamble.
UTG: $16
UTG+1: $12
UTG+2: empty seat
MP1: $130
MP2: $18
HJ: $12
CO (Hero): $140
BTN: $40

Family pot pre-flop, All limp to MP1 who min-raises to $2. 2 callers. Hero has 68 Hero calls.

2 more callers, BB re-raises to $4. All call, BTN folds

Pot ($25)

Flop: Q 4 6

Checked around. Hero checks

Turn: 6

BB bets $1, folds to MP1 who calls, Hero: ???

Comments on all streets and pre-flop welcome.

Some issues that were at the back of my head:

1) I had been playing tight and thought I could experiment w/ this hand
(Should I not do this ever due to the eff stacks of ~15bb?)

2) If I CAN do this, does the family pot make it ok or do I need to be 100% sure that the other big stack will be in ?

3) Thoughts for max value if I'm ahead?

4) Thoughts on min loss if I'm behind?

1. Fold pre for the reason you gave

/thread

Thanks, I needed to hear that (no sarcasm). (And will keep it in the back of my head from now on, even when I get ansy)

Now that I'm here, though, what do you think?

You can't play suited gappers when most of the table has less than 20 bb, even if there's one other "deep" stack. As played, you have trips, so raise.

Hero raises to $15.

BB moves all in for $18 ($3 more to me)

MP1 folds.


I called obv, but is bet sizing too big and folding out all hands that beat me?

or does it even matter w/ such short stacks?

find another game and put your skillz to work ;-)

I dropped down to re-build my roll. I lost a big chunk to it on a few bad plays and a cooler at a higher buy-in game in Vegas. (still a break-even/prolly sl. losing player at best)

Right now, my br has enough for only 2 normal buy-ins at a local 1/3 ($200 max) game. So I figured I could drop to the 1-1 and slowly make it back up.

Is 2 buy-ins enough to shot-take at the 1-3?

No amount of buy-ins is enough if you are a losing player, and 2 is almost certainly not enough to give you enough time to become a winning player. Having said that, playing in a $20 will do nothing to improve your skills so I wouldn't suggest that either. Sorry to be so negative.

So how do I get better?

I've been playing online recently .01/.02 thru .05/.10 and have been doing ok (I know, not big enough sample size) but usually I can sit there for a few hours and be up to $30-40 from a $10 buy in or $10 from a $4 buy in. I played live for the first time since I started online and felt I did really well ($20 buy-in cashed out w/ $140) and I only played 7 or 8 premium hands in 7 hours (and about 15 hands total).

I don't mind the negativity, but can I get any suggestions here? I've read Harrington's books, Sklansky's, Brunson's, etc.. and I read this forum a lot and respect you guys a ton for putting most of it out there.
How did you guys start out and then get good?

I started years ago, before the internet/information revolution. The play at my local casino was so, so terrible that I pretty much became a winning player straight away. I probably played £10/20 rebuys for a couple of months before I sat at the cash game but by that point I had learned purely by observing the other winning players. I copied them and became a complete nit. I then read a book explaining the very basic maths of poker (pot odds, equity with draws etc) and that was enough to make me the biggest winner in that game by a long way. I'm pretty sure in my first 6 months of live poker I bluffed 0 times. I think 20, 10 or even 5 years ago the vast majority would have gone through a complete NIT winning phase before gaining the knowledge, skills and experience to open their games up.

Seeing as I haven't played FR/6max online for ~5 years I often wonder what new players learning curve is like, given the high standard of play (even at low limits I believe, although I am always a little dubious :-) and the advanced concepts that are now widely known. I feel lucky that I cane into poker at a time where I've been able to "grow with the game" so to speak and learn and incorporate these things slowly over time. I often imagine that many players must actually confuse themselves with too much info too fast and certainly reading this forum there are endless examples of misapplied and misunderstood theory and of a disconnect between theory and reality.

Possibly this is true of you OP. The good news is that many 1/2 NL games haven't evolved all that much form my very early days (although they will be better believe it or not!!!). Take your two buyins and play like a total NIT. One of the great things about this is that if you are new to live poker this shouldn't be nearly as boring as it would be to most people. If there is not hourly charge you are getting to watch and observe many hands for very little money. Pat lots of attention to betting lines/sizes hands showdown etc.

Obviously, due to variance there is still a decent chance you go broke but if you don't take money out your roll it can build surprisingly quickly. If you do go broke, save and try again. If you are any good you'll get there soon enough in these super weak games.

Good Luck, and be aware, when I say NITTY, I mean NITTTTY!

Thanks for that. I'll take a shot this weekend and see how I do.