I ate a pear once. It tasted awesome!

we all like pandabears!

NSC, bitter much?


Ah, he cashed out several thousand more than he deposited, so yeah, he beat the micros.

If you're expecting a *complete* description of everything to do to beat the micros, I would suggest you need to revise your expectations rather than pick on how the post was titled.

...which is pretty appealing to someone who is not a breakeven player.

Jeezum crow, don't be such a hater.

I asked for a thread lock <<<<and a removal of the past page of posts with no content>>>>

good form?

I like.

I don't want this thread to turn into some sort of flame nonsense. But I did want to respond to this:

1.) The word that matters in the title is "beating". SC never said he would teach you how to be the biggest winner at the levels, nor was it implied. He gave you a guide to not lose. A launch pad for future poker learning. How did SC never win at the micros exactly? Just because he quit doesn't mean he didn't beat them...

2.) Anybody that played pre-UIGEA can tell you that strict fat-value definetely worked. I mean hell, strictly going for fat-value worked in 2007 when FR was just coming back, same in 2008. Ever hear of "Smasharoo Theory"? Yea...that worked for years upon years.

3.) Again, this guide never promises making someone the biggest winner in the games. It gives you a framework to grow upon later. But you have to build a foundation before you build upwards...this guide helps with that framework.

4.) If you don't like the discussion in the thread...then don't read it (and one could make the argument that "well *Split* if you don't like the convo, why are you posting here?"...I'm posting here because this thread is an important one for micro beginners and it is important that they are able to learn in a very positive and nurturing environment. That is why the overall forums are fairly flame-free and why things like "COTW" and "micro sweat sessions" are there)


*SS*

I'm not locking this...but will be keeping a closer eye on this thread to make sure the tone stays appropriate. I also changed a few posts (sorry if you disagree with what I put in them, lol)...but decided to keep NSC's post as, even though the tone is negative, it can bring discussion to light.

How can you complain about something that is free?

WTF, Split - I didn't give you permission to change my post.

What's up with that?!!!!

fyp

*bana-split*..... pears ???

Do the best microstakes grinders play 2NL?

Importantly, AND ON TOPIC, I used the principles in this thread to get to the point of being a winning player at the micros. I play both 6 and FR, but the principle is the same. Start off nitty, gradually expand. Make about one advanced play every 300 hands; only when the situation calls for it.

I loosened up a bit, and made much more profit. Then I loosened up a bit, and started losing. So, I went back to basics, playing the style advocated in this thread, and slowly expanded again, conscious of what I was doing, trying not to expand too much or too fast.

This thread is not the definitive guide to making a billion dollars an hour by playing the micros that many of you wish it were. Many whine about not being spoon-fed a simple strategy that will earn them enough to quit their job. This is insulting (but not tilting). If a monkey could really make 100k/year with no variance by playing online poker, they all would start playing online poker rather than flinging poo (not that you can't do both - which is particularly helpful in live games).

This thread provides great starting point, and a grounding point from which you can approximately break even while safely building or re-building a strategy that works for you. You may not accomplish your goals, but whose fault is that?

I would like to expand to what I think you are driving at as your quote is essential to understanding this thread's value.

Using me as an example, if I were to play the next 30K hands at 2NL, my winrate might be close to 10ptbb/100 (this is double what HEM shows as bb/100 and "used" to be the industry standard....not so sure anymore). It also might be higher, but probably not lower. But I have +1M hands under my belt. Would I be the BEST microgrinder? Hell no, I suck. But at 2NL, I would be above average because many beginners and strugglers truly have leaks bigger than an elephant.

A beginner (or struggler) should consider having a positive winrate at 2NL as a good thing.

This guide provides the foundation (1) for those players and (2) others that need to solidify their strat at the cusp of their expansion.

I'm pretty sure ptBB/100 is still the standard.

Not so sure since most use HEM and bb/100 is what is listed on their standard charts....

If unsure, take your HEM number and divide by 2 for the ptbb/100 "old" style.

Yeah, but I don't expect HEM to have as the standard something that is named ptBB/100 - their main competitor.

From what I've seen, most of the people that post their stats and discuss w/r still talk about it in ptBB/100.

Absolutely right. Winning 1bb/100 is a good starting goal. Then you can adjust from there.

My point was that the other poster was asking what the best players achieve at 2NL, and my answer is that the best don't play 2NL.

I'm nowhere near good yet, and I only play 2NL when I want to try out new things such as table ninja, cascading rather than tiling tables, etc.

But, if it helps, my 5NL is more than 3,000bb/100.*

See if you can top that!





*Sample size is 3 hands. I wanted to play long enough to make my HEM report look good, such as 30bb/100. I stacked someone on the third hand, and went back up to 10NL.

Wasn't chipstar playing $2NL for the longest time and crushing?

Ye, there are plenty of people who beat $2nl for 12pt over 1m hands at 2nl and havn't moved up for various reasons other than not being good enough to beat higher stakes.

Don't correct me in public when I'm wrong.

Nice thread big help

Hi, new here. Thanks for the thread! =)

Hey, I'm new to these forums, so maybe I'm missing something, but with the starting hand chart guide being:

Raising first in:
UTG/UTG+1: AQs, AK, 77+
MP1: AJ+, 55+
MP2/3: AJ+, KQs, 22+
HJ/CO: AJ+, KQ, QJ, 22+
BTN: A8s+, AT, KQ, KJ, QJ, 22+

What would you suggest the starting hand values be for a 9 handed full ring table? I know that this probably seems tedious as more things than just the starting hand chart are going to make or break your success, but what would be a good starting point for someone who wants to beat $0.01/$0.02 NL cash game? I like the thread and the points that it makes.

Also, I didn't see anything about raise sizes. Is it best to open for 4x the blinds or 3x the blinds? Are they the same? I heard that you change it up in higher stakes games to give off different plays so that you don't play predictably, but should you care about this in the weakest level?..or is there just a standard raise that you should do because no one is paying any attention to anything but their own chance to hit some part of the flop?

Sorry that's a decent bit of questions, but I'd appreciate any feedback, thanks!

It is not clear to me what you mean by "starting hand values". Maybe you can elaborate.

As for raise sizes there are a lot of different opinions around. Most say you shouldn't vary the raise size by your hand strength because you could be exploited. However, at NL2 nobody exploits you. Some raise more in late position, some raise more in early position, and there are mathematical reasons for both. 2+2's standard strategy used to be to raise to 4BB (plus 1BB per limper); I do 3BB (+1) and it works for me. In general I'd say that tighter players should raise more than looser ones.

Hope this helps.

Fat value baby!

After reading this, I stopped trying to bluff and get people to fold TP so much and my win rate has gone up a ton! I've actually started to win haha.

Just want to say thank you for posting this. This is a basic foundation for the begining player. After learning this only then should a player expound on these principles. Thanks again!

Thanks for the help! Yeah, I thought it would be something like that because that's how I reraise in tournaments to 3+1per. With starting hand values I meant the actual values of the hand on the chart. What I mean is, if you have a table of UTG, UTG+1, MP1-3, HJ, CO, button, SB, B then that's ten players. This chart shows the starting hand value quality that should be open raised for ten people. How does this chart adjust to a 9 person cash game? I thought 9 person cash games were somewhat standard and that pokerstars just does 10 player games? Same thing goes for sngs. Hopefully this clears up what I meant, otherwise I just rambled