What are you doing in that hand?

Bar the shove which was done for lulz to try and get someone to call to see a royal I think the rest is fine? Barrelling the turn may be better as I block his calling range and have lots of outs but people in that pool tend to be very sticky with their hands after calling the flop.

Today's the day, can finally call myself a b/e 5nlz player. It's been a fun journey everyone.



I'll most likely play 16nlz going forward when the pool looks nice and 10nlz before that. Just really wanted to get myself out of a negative 5nlz sample which is probably not optimal in terms of time spent but it helps give me a bit more peace of mind. Don't want to be posting graphs of me crushing 500nlz in a year and still be losing at 5nlz.

I'm pretty close to 100k cash hands in my db so will post everything up at that point. Should hit my gym and poker hand target tomorrow but I've done next to no real study which is poor.

Also if anyone wants to see how much of a rake trap micro zoom is have a look at this.

lol, no. More like 2 hours on hand histories and talking about hands and 0 on really useful stuff.

This is what was tracked on stars.



I also put in at least 2 hours probably more (i.e. 4-5) on runitonce but 1/2 tabling and not tracked. Will most likely just donk about on there when bored to keep an eye on the site.

Put 110 euro on there, withdrew 180 euro and have just under 40 left on there I think. Plenty for 2 tabling 4nl.

Yep, still no idea what I'm doing but it's something I suppose. I enjoy using the leg press everything else meh. I've figured out that playing chess whilst doing cardio on a bike is a relatively painless way to pass the time which is also good. I could probably get some time on zoom in but I don't really like using the stars app on wifi and remembering to dl hands and all that malarkey is a pain.

So I hit 100k hands and this is the breakdown

Overall



2nlz


5nlz


10nlz


16nlz


25nlz


Spent more time playing 2/5nlz than I really would have wanted but starting off running really bad makes that a requirement. Pretty nasty downswing at 5nlz didn't help either but that's poker for you. I played through it all which I suppose is a positive, past me would have more likely said **** it and gave up.

I think I've improved marginally as a poker player over that sample but I still suck and I'm just clicking buttons, just everyone else sucks that bit more at the levels I'm playing. Will I ever put any real time and effort into getting good? Probably not but there is no reason I shouldn't be able to push a little further up the curve with marginal effort and maybe actually being able to make money will be an incentive.

As for life I suppose it's going better in that I'm actually doing something but work takes up so much of my time and that sucks. Whilst I'm there and teaching it's good just all the planning, marking and I've had so many after school things since I started (mostly all out of the way now) that just eats away at my free time.

Still going to the gym a bit, changed to one my friends go to so that should help a bit. Will probably try to find 3x a week routine of some kind that I can attempt, a bit more structure would do me good I think. Diet is much better, lost a few lbs which is good and ideally by summer I'll be around 200lb. Just got to keep away from boozing and it should be good.

Not really played all month as I've been busy with work. Gym was going really well but last week I was really busy and then I was away with work so 2 weeks I basically did nothing. Starting up again today though no point being mad at missed time just do it going forward.

I'm off for two weeks now so I thought I'd actually play a bit of poker, do some studying actually get better. Novel idea I know.

Recently I've really been thinking about BRM and even though I know I've been doing it wrong for so long I haven't made the changes I should.

2nl - below $25
5nl - $25 - $50
10nl - $50 - $80
16nl - $80 - $125
25nl - $125 - $250
50nl - $250+

I think this is probably slightly too nitty for shot taking 25 and 50 but I'll see. My question is should I just carry this on period or does it become ridiculous? The idea isn't to make loads of money it's to get as high as possible as quickly as possible and really work on becoming the best player I can. I kind of assume I'm not going to be winning at 50 or higher currently but that's why I need to get better.

Endlessly grinding lower stakes just seems so pointless and such a trap which is why stopping this at 50nl seems stupid as that's the worst place to be.

Is that not to aggressive for a BRM?

The only place it'd be aggressive is playing 2nl with less than $25 because as much as everyone assume they are crushing 2nlz even with a 5bb/100 winrate swings that big aren't ridiculously uncommon but at the end of the day if you bust $25 what does that matter?

You have to remember it isn't 5BI and you're busto at 25nl it's a few BI there then a few more at 16nl then a few more at 10nl then 5nl etc. If you don't move down as you should obviously you go busto like 100% of the time.

The issue I'm having is where do I stop. For example it's not out of the question that I just sun run my way to 5BI for 200nlz but at that point I would almost definitely be losing in basically any 200nlz pool so it seems silly but at those stakes there is higher motivation to study and that 25-100 spot is a really bad place to get stuck especially when I feel like I'm at the bottom end of that at best currently.

You do eventually start meeting some top players as you move up.

PokerStars - $0.25 NL FAST (6 max) - Holdem - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

BTN: 100 BB (VPIP: 21.05, PFR: 15.79, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 19)
SB: 100 BB (VPIP: 31.82, PFR: 13.64, 3Bet Preflop: 14.29, Hands: 22)
BB: 142.52 BB (VPIP: 20.00, PFR: 20.00, 3Bet Preflop: 12.50, Hands: 21)
Hero (UTG): 101.92 BB
MP: 103.16 BB (VPIP: 14.12, PFR: 14.12, 3Bet Preflop: 6.90, Hands: 91)
CO: 12.88 BB (VPIP: 0.00, PFR: 0.00, 3Bet Preflop: -, Hands: 2)

SB posts SB 0.4 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 1.4 BB) Hero has T J

Hero raises to 3 BB, fold, fold, fold, SB calls 2.6 BB, fold

Flop: (7 BB, 2 players) K J A
SB checks, Hero checks

Turn: (7 BB, 2 players) 2
fold



Bought a PC recently, is it possible to synch pt4 between two computers? Would be nice to have my db on both laptop and pc as I plan on playing on both.

cool hand, but do you even MSM?
I don't, I DMSO.

#suplhur

I'm in favour of an aggressive BRM strategy, but I'm a bit confused by this. Would I be correct in assuming you'd move up to nl5 at $50, and drop down to nl2 at $25? Then move up to nl10 at $80 and drop back down to nl5 at $50? Etc..

Or do you mean moving up to nl5 (for example) at $25? But if this is the case, when do you move down?

I would move up to 5nl at $25 and down if I have less than this. There is going to be some slight overlap unless I put exact rules into play but I feel that's kind of pointless.

Example if I have $83 I'd be playing 16nl but if I dropped to $79 I wouldn't insta shut down every table but if I lost a reasonable pot then I would. It just requires me being aware of my roll which is fine. I was playing 25nl earlier with like $160 lost a flip and then knew that if I lost another big pot I would move down to 16nl.

Gotcha. Seems like you're gonna have to be extremely lucky to make to the end stakes goal though, doesn't it? Cause you don't leave yourself much margin for error each time you move up. You'd need to sun-run at the start of each new stake level.

Have you thought about an alternate aggressive approach (which I kind of contemplated in my thread lol)? You'd give yourself a 5BI shot at each level, but if that fails, you drop back down to nl2. So, for example:


Starting with $25 for nl2 (like your original plan).
Move up to nl5 at $50 -> move to nl2 at $25
Move up to nl10 at $75 -> move to nl2 at $25
Move up to nl16 at $105 -> move to nl2 at $25
Move up to nl25 at $150 -> move to nl2 at $25
Move up to nl50 at $275 -> move to nl2 at $25

Now, obviously, you could change the number of BIs for your shots to suit your needs to be more or less aggressive. But seems like this might be a faster way without needing to sun-run quite so much at each level. Just another idea. Either way, I'll be watching and seeing how you do. And maybe copy you or do something similar haha.

Also, why does stopping at nl50 seem stupid? The rake doesn't seem as bad there. I mean obviously, the rake gets better further up. But is nl50 actually that bad?

EDIT: Or, if you want to be super-aggressive, just alter that approach to 1 BI shots (nl5 at $30, nl10 at $35, nl16 at $41, nl25 at $50, and nl50 at $75 -- dropping down to nl2 anytime the BR goes below $25). Sun-run for 5.7 BIs, and boom, you're at a 1 BI nl50 shot already. Obviously, I wasn't being completely serious about this last point lol, but it is also an idea for an extremely aggro approach. Would be interesting to see you try that. Or maybe I might just try that for laughs, and to see if it might actually make for an interesting approach.

Actually, I just had a brilliant (maybe?) idea to add to that ultra-aggressive approach I edited into the last post. If the goal is to get to nl50 as fast as possible, don't just stop at nl50. Keep taking 1BI shots until nl200. So once you reach nl200 (when the BR gets to $225), play until you win one more BI, so that the BR reaches $425. Then drop back to nl50. You then have $400 to use for an 8 BI shot.

So basically, you hope to sun-run to win 8.7 BIs (if I did the math correctly lol). If you can manage that, you're left with an 8 BI shot at nl50. Obviously, you might want to work on your game more at that point so you don't waste that shot. But this actually seems like a very interesting approach, and I think I might try using that.

Nothing I am doing is aggressive in terms of approach or requires sun running at any point.

The rake at 50nl is about as bad as it gets, I think 25nl is slightly worse but tougher player pool and awful rake.

Your approach is not optimal because your 2nl winrate is awful compares to higher so you don't want that much of a drop. For me I can say 10nl is more profitable than 5nl which in turn is better than 2nl. So dropping low for the sake of it is bad.

Is the small increase in rake% enough to out-weigh the reduction in the rake cap? I know the rake goes from 4.5% at nl25 to 5% at nl50. But the rake cap goes from 8bb down to 4bb. I would think that would make a bigger difference than the extra 0.5%? I haven't worked out the math on that, so I could be wrong.

If you're going by my nl2 graph at the start of my thread, then don't hehe. I wasn't playing the same kind of poker back then, and it does not reflect my current play at all. And it's not dropping to nl2 for the sake of it. The idea is based on spending the least amount of time to grind shots for the next level up. The cost of that is that if you lose that shot, you have to go back to nl2 to start grinding back up. May not be ideal; may not even be as good as what you posted. But it was just an alternative idea that I put out there. Do what you will with it, I was just merely brainstorming.

pokerphilosopher that is an interesting idea of brm you have but i just feel like it would be way too frustrating as variance will strike and knock you down too many times for you to ever get a healthy roll for nl50. i mean even if you did move up like that by the time you got nl50 youd still only have like 4 BI chances are you wouldnt even be able to run it up because of the skill level at nl50 so youd need to not only carry out a heater but carry it out against good players who dont give money away easily.

the only way is through sheer volume it trumps everything if your a winning player youll move up in time but rushing it and taking crazy aggressive shots could offset all/any progress. i personally think a truly good player could start at the nl5 and get to nl50 in 100k hands using 15 BI brm.

Even if you just run the numbers you will see this isn't close to being true.

That comment was aimed at the fact that winning players win more playing higher up than they do lower down usually. If you beat 10nl you probably win more than at 5nl or at 2nl.

ya the 100k was probably not a good estimate i mean if htey ran really good yes. probably 200k though. point is winning players are going ot move up they're going to be consistently winning and thta will get them there eventually.

i dont think the 'good players win more at higher up' is true. maybe if they play like they do higher up a more LAG style w/ bluffs at nl2 then ya it will hurt their winrate. some good players may just not have the patient to adjust to winning at nl2 for the highest winrate which is to play for fat value. tighten up immensely preflop fold to aggression and go for big value on your big hands. youll crush nl2 i would say playing like this you can easily sustain a 10bb/100 winrate. most just dont want to adjust ot htat type of nit play.

Your winrate will drop but your $ amount will (usually) go up if you are winning.

200k hands is a hell of a lot of hands, much more than most play in a year. The reality is that moving up rhetoric is incredibly unopitmal especially as rake gets worse and the games get tougher.

MMSS, the more I think about your BRM idea, the more I'm understanding it and agreeing with it. At first, I thought it would require you to be luckier every time you moved up. But I realize that's not true. Let's say you move up to nl10. You might decide to move back down after losing half a stack in a hand. This might happen several times in a row.

But if you just look at all the hands you play at nl10, ignoring all hands at all other stakes, eventually you're going to get an upward sloping graph (if you're a winning player) in the same manner you would if you had just saved up a bunch of BIs for a shot. The difference is that you'll have spent less (or the same) time at nl2 and nl5 grinding BIs which might not even be needed. So in terms of time spent moving up, you'll either be able to move up quicker, or it will take you the same amount of time. But it won't be slower. And if you lose half a BI (or even a full BI) and have to move back down, it will be a lot quicker, and easier to deal with mentally, to grind that little bit back up than it would be if you had to grind another 5 or 10 BIs for the next shot.

So I'm on board with this approach, and now I think I can see it's probably better than the one I mentioned. I'll probably adopt some version of this.

Ye because if you are winning you would expect just that, to win. Obviously variance can be a sucker and make that take a while. I also find it places a lot less importance on moving up. As I was moaning about earlier in my thread moving up to 5nlz from 2nlz and running awfully twice was a real downer for me and just made me want to stop playing.

Now I'm playing 25nlz, won a few BI so I have a bit more wiggle room, have the chance to move up to 50nlz soon and if I lose and move down no big deal. I'm also a lot more motivated to do work on my game because moving up is a real thing whereas previously I'd get stuck thinking no point studying I beat x limit I just need to grind out hands so I can move up.

This is missing a thousand or so hands where I'm just over a BI down at 10nlz which is on my new computer. I also won like 100 euro on runitonce but that's not part of my roll I withdrew and will think about depositing again if they get traffic/site works.

If that were true, everyone that's half decent would be moving up 3 or 4 limits every year, when it's actually the case that thousands of people have been grinding away at the same limit (or dropped down) for half a million hands or more.
In my own experience (from a few years ago), it was only by taking a crazy 'Got 5 buyins? Let's move up' strategy that I went from 4NL to 50NL in less than 25,000 hands. [Graph in post #1]. I would be stuck at the lowest limit for months if I had to build 15+ buy-ins for the next level up. (Indeed, I've spent the bulk of my "career" stuck in the micros, because I didn't want to take shots unless I was over-rolled, but I don't have the time or inclination to grind millions of hands. These days I don't have the desire to battle the variance higher up, partly because all that time in the micros has destroyed my passion for the game).
A more impressive example comes from Doctor/boifin who posted a few questions in BQ and the poker theory forum when he was at 25NL, then got a coach and took some aggro shots at 200NL when he hadn't even proved he could beat 50NL. Eighteen months later he was stacking RedBaron at 2kNL, and has since played as high as 20kNL. According to statname.net, he's played less than 260,000 hands in total (on Stars, anyway).
Old style bankroll management just doesn't work for moving up. It works better for players that want to know if they are rolled to stay where they are. If you want to move UP, you have to take aggressive shots. But you must have the discipline to move back down the moment you lose a stack or two. BRM (the clue is in the word "management") just stops you from going broke.

EDIT: I am suddenly overcome with nostalgia for 2016. It almost seems impossible that I actually did this: