Searched but couldn't find a definition. Seems like people know what it is once they know it but it's not defined.

What are the fundamentals and what are beyond the fundamentals?

this is such an open ended question that it's impossible to answer. in one sense it could be answered by saying "fold most hands, don't be a calling station, play within your bankroll", but then on another level that's just saying "don't be ****ing stupid" and too basic

seems like you're wanting a definition for something that doesn't really have it, or need it

I hope people aren't getting tired of me posting these in every single thread I respond to - it's only because I believe the information is valuable:

Here are 3 articles that explain the fundamentals:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/78...7/#post9216858
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/78...ns-bet-645508/
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/78...etting-454494/

And here's an additional valuable link:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/78...table-contents

Well people use the term as if it's well defined.

A thread I read on another site people say one of the keys to beating the micros is to know "the fundamentals".

So what am I supposed to make of that?

Also i'm tired of hearing don't bluff at the micros. It doesn't apply to 50NL in todays game.

Well there is a correction further down the first thread that at 25NL you have to start bluffing a reasonable amount, but above it says NEVER BLUFF AT THE MICROS. Contradictory overall though.

Normally when someone says to me, "I don't know the fundamentals of poker", I tell them, "Well, then read these articles and start playing 2NL and don't move up until you have them down".

If you're already all the way up to 50NL either you understand the fundamentals far better than you think, you're playing way too high, or you have significant discretionary income.

Why do you feel you DON'T know the fundamentals? Are you not winning at 50NL?

No I didn't mean to say I'm at 50NL, I know that today it's not the same as it was at 50NL a few years ago, and more aggressive than even midstakes in 2006.

I have 20 poker books and a subscription to a training site, I'm aware of a lot of skills and concepts but want to know what to focus on at 16NL and then 25NL, I agree with a guy who says work on one area at a time. So when someone just advises learn the fundamentals, have a solid game, have a solid techincal game, that's no help.

I feel I don't know them because poker books, forums and training sites are a jumbled up mess of concepts and advice for players at various limits (even within microstakes when not talking about books), and don't know what to learn first.

Saying that, that's obviously (to me), where the coach comes in and gives direction, but I am going to soldier on, try to pick up a bit more for a couple more months before looking for a coach.

So you're playing 16NL now? How is that going for you? And on what site?

I play 20NL on Cake and I'm still a relative beginner FYI. I've only played 900 hands of 20NL after about 2800 of 10NL and 10,000+ of 4NL, but so far, I don't see that the competition is any stronger at all at 20NL than at 4NL. Maybe it only feels that way because my OWN game has improved, but I still see (and profit from) loose-passive calling stations who will call 3 streets with bottom pair when I hit a set, or deep stacks shoving a 3-bet pre instead of just tripling+ the 3bb raise.

Play a ton of hands, figure out where your leaks are, then work on fixing them. Seems to be the general approach.

Fundamental: Flush is higher than str8
Fundemental: Watch out for river bets and raises they mean different things from different villains

and a bunch of things in between.

Some fundamentals:

* Play within your bankroll.
* Don't play more tables than you can handle.
* Maintain discipline and don't play tilted.
* Plan each hand and have a solid reason for every action you make.
* Bet for value when you think you are ahead, bet as a bluff if you think there is a good chance villain will fold a better hand.
* Fold when you feel there is a good chance you are beat, and you don't have the odds to draw.
* Don't get fancy, slowplay, or try bluffing a calling station.
* Take a break or quit for the day if you aren't playing your best.

All of Arty's advice is good but those 3 are IMHO the most valuable fundamental pieces of advice.

OK, when people give advice such as "do x and y at the micros" and "don't do z at the micros", they are using "at the micros" as a shorthanded way of saying "in games wherein there are a lot of poor players who go too far with their marginal hands, and do not use aggression appropriately." The games for which this qualifier applies varies somewhat and has changed over the years. In 2004, when I started playing, the games for which this advice applies could be found as high as nl100 on Party and the Cryptologic network. Nowadays, it is tough to find such games above nl10 on the Merge network. So when people are giving advice about what to do at nl10 or nl25, be aware that this advice is specific to those stakes AT THE TIME THAT POST WAS MADE AND FOR THOSE SITES THAT THE POSTER WAS TALKING ABOUT.

Certainly, if you somehow found an nl25 table containing Durr, Patrick Antonious, Doyle, Phil Ivey, and nanonoko, you could not beat it using the strategies which have been recommended for beating the micros. In fact, it is doubtful whether anyone, even the above named players, could beat such a table. Conversely, there are many soft live 200nl and 500nl tables for which those "micros" strategies are totally appropriate. So, you have to kind of realize the caliber of the opponents that you are playing against and decide if they are the types of opponents for which the advice you have read is applicable. When someone says "Don't bluff at the micros" and someone else says "Start bluffing at 25nl", they are not necessarily contradicting each other - they are talking about different game conditions and different types of opponents.

What you should learn from strat posts is not only what strategies to employ, but against what types of players those strategies are effective. Once you internalize this information, you will be able to adjust effectively, no matter what types of opponents you face. Unless you face opponents who are appropriately aggressive, difficult to read, and positionally aware, in which case you are better off leaving that table, as you would if you found yourself at the table with Durr, PA, Ivey, et al.