Not saying its unbeatable. Am saying we have alot working against us. Where the same winning patient game will provide higher reward at marginally higher lvl with lower variance & rake.
But as luvvy has pointed out my online cash record is woeful.
In Response to Re: why i cant beat nl4. Sigh. some BBY but want advice. sick of losing at this level. : Regret the day I told you to join, I do :P Elements of truth I guess, but think post has truth also. Playing 2nite? Posted by AMYBR
Speaking from experince my NL4 game is not the same as my NL20 game overall
but if I find the same kind of player at NL4 and NL20 then I adjust
NL4 overall is so easy, NL20 by comparison is difficult
Jump on any NL4 table and you will print money, maybe you will run bad and every station will hit the gutshot but long term if you play a solid ABC TAG approach and raise 4x as standard you can't go wrong
It's very basic stuff if you have a table of laggy/stations - then charge em more
Seen as Doh is crying, I'll join in and say of course 4NL is beatable. I used it to build my roll up quite a bit a while ago. As people have said, it's about patience and solid ABC poker. Yes it can feel sick when you're running bad and you keep losing when you're 70%+ favourite but I'm sure this is true at any level and it will never last.
to put it simply, you're not good enough. and if you're asking proven winning online players for advice, and then ignoring them, then I cannot see that changing
Ok im not saying ive ever played perfect poker at NL4 but i could pick you 000's of hand i have a monster outdrawn by any random two. NOT JUST AT NL4 but most of them well be. Everytime this happens, Everyone says folding these monster hands is bad because i beat so much of his range since his range is any two cards. As a result i look like a complete pleb losing the max.
Ive beaten much harder opponents consistantly yet i cant beat NL4, Im not saying im perfect, im just better than the players calling massive raises OOP with ATC and getting lucky. Im not saying that i should just find £200 out of nowhere and start playing NL20. But im telling you at least ill be allowed to 3bet fold my AK v a tight player. Ill be allowed to fold my aces on a board that reads T29K3 because im allowed to put them on a set or two pair as it now makes up a "massive" part of their range.
IMO micro stake poker isnt poker. Yes its the same game but no matter what hand you hold 3 - 6 way your odds are reduced massivley. As a result you get a player like me. Stuck unable to beat a level because hands that should be HU hand between me and one other person suddenly gets every guy in the world thinking "ohhhh ive hit bottom pair in a 9bet pre flop action i must go all in here" turn gives them to pair. Now im the fish.
to put it simply, you're not good enough. and if you're asking proven winning online players for advice, and then ignoring them, then I cannot see that changing Posted by SHANXTA
This a pop at me? I dont think my posts on the matter could have been more balanced and fair and I'm pretty sure I dont deserve the tone your using.
But thats your choice. I suggest you read a bit more before making a rude remark
It's obvious where you're going wrong you just need to look at it. I've only just started to show a minor profit at this level after playing them since July last year.
You're making so many mistakes pre and post flop IMO.
The key to breaking even at this level is to play strongly with your strong hands and fold anything where you're less than 100%. For instance, going all in with the JJ. With the re-raise coming you're only ever going to be behind, so shoving is horrendously bad i think (people may disagree). I've found with hands like this to see a flop, check for no scare cards and then gauge your opponents reaction - doing this in position is key also. If nothing comes then it's no shame to just bin them if you're getting bad odds to call given the pre-flop action. People at this level usually only bet when they've got it.
Another thing i've noticed about my own game - i've lost an awful lot on bad pre-flop cards when i've been allowed to limp in with them on the big blind and have caught a piece of the flop. "GREAT!" you think, when you've hit top pair. Only to find out you're outkicked. The thing about betting with anything less than massive premium pairs and face cards when you've been allowed to limp in is you have absolutely zero idea of what your opponent is holding. Now i will often fold top pair, mid-kicker when facing a large bet if i've been allowed to limp in. People might say this is crazy but it seems to be saving me money.
Some of the hands you posted are coolers and some are just plain unlucky but a fair few of them are down to bad play on your part.
I think you need to tighten up your range at this level also
It's obvious where you're going wrong you just need to look at it. I've only just started to show a minor profit at this level after playing them since July last year. You're making so many mistakes pre and post flop IMO. The key to breaking even at this level is to play strongly with your strong hands and fold anything where you're less than 100%. For instance, going all in with the JJ. With the re-raise coming you're only ever going to be behind, so shoving is horrendously bad i think (people may disagree). I've found with hands like this to see a flop, check for no scare cards and then gauge your opponents reaction - doing this in position is key also. If nothing comes then it's no shame to just bin them if you're getting bad odds to call given the pre-flop action. People at this level usually only bet when they've got it. Another thing i've noticed about my own game - i've lost an awful lot on bad pre-flop cards when i've been allowed to limp in with them and have caught a piece of the flop. "GREAT!" you think, when you've hit top pair. Only to find out you're outkicked. The thing about betting with anything less than massive premium pairs and face cards when you've been allowed to limp in is you have absolutely zero idea of what your opponent is holding. Now i will often fold top pair, mid-kicker when facing a large bet if i've been allowed to limp in. People might say this is crazy but it seems to be saving me money. Some of the hands you posted are coolers and some are just plain unlucky but a fair few of them are down to bad play on your part. I think you need to tighten up your range at this level also Posted by Pipunch
I suggest you look at these hands where i am "limping" again. ALL OF THE LIMPS ARE CHECKS. This is obviously different.
The Q9 is a fold, suspect i was on tilt by that stage and the 84 i played badly post flop.
In Response to Re: why i cant beat nl4. Sigh. some BBY but want advice. sick of losing at this level. : Myehh... Nice post bud. Kind of humbled me. You could easily have been less pleasant about it, thankyou for such a balanced inciteful reply. You prob know more about the inner workings of my game than anyone here - so might see why that level of grinding/patience may be beyond me. Your right about adapting being a key skill - and put it very well. I suspect your totally right, but have to counter it with - how much effort would it be to adjust out of it? But I imagine the correct answer is that that is another key skill. I didnt mean to imply that micro is worthless, which is probably how it came across. What I was really trying to say is that if you have a winning game at micros, that same game would almost universally translate to higher levels being mid level. So I question the value of grinding the micro when we can grind higher with the same game and less variance & rake. Posted by AMYBR
I struggled when i moved up to NL8 and was suddenly the fish on the table which was full of decent NL4 rgs attempting to move up but with time and help in the clinic i got the hang of it and have won approx 15 BI's at NL8 after losing quite a few at the start. My NL8 game transfers well at NL10 and i havent had a go at NL20 yet although it doesnt hold many fears from what i have seen, although no doubt it will be tougher still.
I think adapting your game is vital in poker whether you are playing NL100 or NL4. If, for some unknown reason, i found myself on a table with the regs at NL4 when i was there (dudeskin, thedon, rancid, junglegeek,zedsdeadba, tintin, harding10 etc) i would know they would be good enough to lay down top pair on certain boards whereas if i am on a table of your 'kamikaze's' i would know i couldnt get them off and just wait for a better spot. I suppose when you play at a live event you will quickly realise the players who are unbluffable and adjust your game when heads up with them. Its the same at NL4/NL8/NL10. Some players are better than others and you have to know if they are capable of a big laydown or not. Thats your edge.
I know you were'nt implying micros are worthless but it does rankle slightly when some people say its unbeatable when it is probably the easiest level you can ever play. Whats not to like about people refusing to fold hands? Give me that every day of the week. One hand i remember from months ago was i had AA in the big blind and pretty much everybody limped (it was a 10 handed table), i shoved 100xbb in the middle and got called by 2,3 hearts. He obviously hit his flush but how good is that? Who doesnt want him on the table. He got there that time but let me tell you that he must have passed a fair amount to me over the few times i played him both before and after. I was actually quite happy about losing as it meant he carried on playing for a few more months. If they dont get lucky then they will never play again.
In Response to Re: why i cant beat nl4. Sigh. some BBY but want advice. sick of losing at this level. : I suggest you look at these hands where i am "limping" again. ALL OF THE LIMPS ARE CHECKS. This is obviously different. The Q9 is a fold, suspect i was on tilt by that stage and the 84 i played badly post flop. Posted by The_Don90
Ok by limping in i meant being allowed in for free on the blind. Sorry for the incorrect terminology. There's no need for that tone. Whatever else is said, you've been playing marginal hands as if you had the nuts, despite evidence from your opponent that you're well beat, and then complain when you lose.
I actually played some NL4 today after seeing this post because i started to miss it. Its good fun, absolutely crazy, never knowing what they are going to turn over.
Just gonna post some hands, not for people to analyse really, just to show what people play like. These are the winning pots over 50p during my session. Hope you dont mind don! Sorry if its a bit hijacky, just thought i would post some ranges to be found at NL4.
I hear what your saying bud. For me it is the multiple seats that wont fold that is the issue.
As already said, its not an insult to micro players. Its just that I think they can play the same game higher, still be profitable, likely experience less variance (& self lvling) and pay less rake.
If someone is making a profit at micros, despite the elements counting against it, then more credit to them. As I said I know nl50 games that play farrrrrrrrrrrr worse.
I guess despite my efforts its obv coming off as insulting but didnt mean it that way.
In Response to Re: why i cant beat nl4. Sigh. some BBY but want advice. sick of losing at this level. : This a pop at me? I dont think my posts on the matter could have been more balanced and fair and I'm pretty sure I dont deserve the tone your using. But thats your choice. I suggest you read a bit more before making a rude remark Posted by AMYBR
Another point i would like to make. It may come across as a bit braggish and maybe a bit of a dig at the don some of the things i have said/posted but me and don have spoken about this before. Don has a good game and he has a very good understanding of the game and he has said to me before that he may overthink things at NL4 and i do think thats his problem.
He once won a decent sized pot against me at NL4 (big regarding no of BB's) with something like 4,5 suited vs my A,Q. I dont think the don realises that playing 4,5 suited is spewy at this level. As DOHHHHHHH's strategy says, its all about getting value for your big hands. 4,5 suited, unless really priced in, should not be anywhere near our range when attempting to beat NL4.
In Response to Re: why i cant beat nl4. Sigh. some BBY but want advice. sick of losing at this level. : Ok by limping in i meant being allowed in for free on the blind. Sorry for the incorrect terminology. There's no need for that tone. Whatever else is said, you've been playing marginal hands as if you had the nuts, despite evidence from your opponent that you're well beat, and then complain when you lose. Posted by Pipunch
OK lets look at the hands i checked
84hh flopped second pair + flush draw, 50% equity against most hands, Played turn terrible admitted.
TJo - flopped the nuts
67 - Flopped 2 pair potted, bet folded turn when i suspected i was behind.
Comments
Not saying its unbeatable. Am saying we have alot working against us. Where the same winning patient game will provide higher reward at marginally higher lvl with lower variance & rake.
But as luvvy has pointed out my online cash record is woeful.
But do you not think the same game a winning player has at NL4/8 would play favourably @ nl20/50? Doubt they become a losing player if rolled.
Am not trying to insult any profitable nl4/8 players. You have a buhzillion% more patience than I do.
See your still winning popularity contests
but if I find the same kind of player at NL4 and NL20 then I adjust
NL4 overall is so easy, NL20 by comparison is difficult
Jump on any NL4 table and you will print money, maybe you will run bad and every station will hit the gutshot but long term if you play a solid ABC TAG approach and raise 4x as standard you can't go wrong
It's very basic stuff if you have a table of laggy/stations - then charge em more
Ive beaten much harder opponents consistantly yet i cant beat NL4, Im not saying im perfect, im just better than the players calling massive raises OOP with ATC and getting lucky. Im not saying that i should just find £200 out of nowhere and start playing NL20. But im telling you at least ill be allowed to 3bet fold my AK v a tight player. Ill be allowed to fold my aces on a board that reads T29K3 because im allowed to put them on a set or two pair as it now makes up a "massive" part of their range.
IMO micro stake poker isnt poker. Yes its the same game but no matter what hand you hold 3 - 6 way your odds are reduced massivley. As a result you get a player like me. Stuck unable to beat a level because hands that should be HU hand between me and one other person suddenly gets every guy in the world thinking "ohhhh ive hit bottom pair in a 9bet pre flop action i must go all in here" turn gives them to pair. Now im the fish.
Sighhhhhhhhhhh
Rant over.
But thats your choice. I suggest you read a bit more before making a rude remark
You're making so many mistakes pre and post flop IMO.
The key to breaking even at this level is to play strongly with your strong hands and fold anything where you're less than 100%. For instance, going all in with the JJ. With the re-raise coming you're only ever going to be behind, so shoving is horrendously bad i think (people may disagree). I've found with hands like this to see a flop, check for no scare cards and then gauge your opponents reaction - doing this in position is key also. If nothing comes then it's no shame to just bin them if you're getting bad odds to call given the pre-flop action. People at this level usually only bet when they've got it.
Another thing i've noticed about my own game - i've lost an awful lot on bad pre-flop cards when i've been allowed to limp in with them on the big blind and have caught a piece of the flop. "GREAT!" you think, when you've hit top pair. Only to find out you're outkicked. The thing about betting with anything less than massive premium pairs and face cards when you've been allowed to limp in is you have absolutely zero idea of what your opponent is holding. Now i will often fold top pair, mid-kicker when facing a large bet if i've been allowed to limp in. People might say this is crazy but it seems to be saving me money.
Some of the hands you posted are coolers and some are just plain unlucky but a fair few of them are down to bad play on your part.
I think you need to tighten up your range at this level also
The Q9 is a fold, suspect i was on tilt by that stage and the 84 i played badly post flop.
I think adapting your game is vital in poker whether you are playing NL100 or NL4. If, for some unknown reason, i found myself on a table with the regs at NL4 when i was there (dudeskin, thedon, rancid, junglegeek,zedsdeadba, tintin, harding10 etc) i would know they would be good enough to lay down top pair on certain boards whereas if i am on a table of your 'kamikaze's' i would know i couldnt get them off and just wait for a better spot. I suppose when you play at a live event you will quickly realise the players who are unbluffable and adjust your game when heads up with them. Its the same at NL4/NL8/NL10. Some players are better than others and you have to know if they are capable of a big laydown or not. Thats your edge.
I know you were'nt implying micros are worthless but it does rankle slightly when some people say its unbeatable when it is probably the easiest level you can ever play. Whats not to like about people refusing to fold hands? Give me that every day of the week. One hand i remember from months ago was i had AA in the big blind and pretty much everybody limped (it was a 10 handed table), i shoved 100xbb in the middle and got called by 2,3 hearts. He obviously hit his flush but how good is that? Who doesnt want him on the table. He got there that time but let me tell you that he must have passed a fair amount to me over the few times i played him both before and after. I was actually quite happy about losing as it meant he carried on playing for a few more months. If they dont get lucky then they will never play again.
Just gonna post some hands, not for people to analyse really, just to show what people play like. These are the winning pots over 50p during my session. Hope you dont mind don! Sorry if its a bit hijacky, just thought i would post some ranges to be found at NL4.
As already said, its not an insult to micro players. Its just that I think they can play the same game higher, still be profitable, likely experience less variance (& self lvling) and pay less rake.
If someone is making a profit at micros, despite the elements counting against it, then more credit to them. As I said I know nl50 games that play farrrrrrrrrrrr worse.
I guess despite my efforts its obv coming off as insulting but didnt mean it that way.
Another point i would like to make. It may come across as a bit braggish and maybe a bit of a dig at the don some of the things i have said/posted but me and don have spoken about this before. Don has a good game and he has a very good understanding of the game and he has said to me before that he may overthink things at NL4 and i do think thats his problem.
He once won a decent sized pot against me at NL4 (big regarding no of BB's) with something like 4,5 suited vs my A,Q. I dont think the don realises that playing 4,5 suited is spewy at this level. As DOHHHHHHH's strategy says, its all about getting value for your big hands. 4,5 suited, unless really priced in, should not be anywhere near our range when attempting to beat NL4.
84hh flopped second pair + flush draw, 50% equity against most hands, Played turn terrible admitted.
TJo - flopped the nuts
67 - Flopped 2 pair potted, bet folded turn when i suspected i was behind.
Any more to comment on this?