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. Posted by DrSharp
Ive actually changed my raising range to AQ+ pre now. Trying to keep calling range to this too. The issue is with this is the seriousness and bordom.
In Response to Re: why i cant beat nl4. Sigh. some BBY but want advice. sick of losing at this level. : this wasn't even aimed at you Posted by SHANXTA
In that case I apologise, just couldnt see who else they were aimed at?
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. Posted by DrSharp
This is a question, not an argument or debate starter.
I think mostly played @ NL 20 & 50 on sky & havent read dohs well received doc on NL4 strategy. Its not an ego or snob thing, just that I need the amounts to be reasonable or I will just not play my game & will b a pure payoff wizard (even more so)
But from what you say about the 45 hand:
Are we just not going to play any hand of equity because its micro stakes? I have replied in many threads talking about losing min vb max and creating windows of opportunity. But is the range of hands we advocate playing at NL4 really that tight? esp when we feel oppos will pay us off on favourable boards?
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. Posted by AMYBR
No, its not coming across as insulting one bit. I like to think you and I can be fairly blunt with each other.
As for multiway pots, we need a really big hand to continue multiway, i'm talking flopping 2 pair +. As you see from the AK hand i posted, if you raise big enough, you will isolate. If you keep getting called multiway, bet even bigger. On certain tables i will just open shove 100xbb at NL4 with big pairs knowing the table is that loose i will get a call. Can i do it at NL8, no, it doesnt work, but at NL4 you will often find a call from any hand like pocket 2's upwards along with hands like J,10+ alot of the time.
Is it correct poker? No, not really, but its profitable against some of the opponents you are up against and then we are back to adapting to your surroundings.
Its been a very good learnng tool for me and to be fair i learnt alot from Dons original thread 'taking on NL4'. Loads of hand histories in there to disect, not necessarily Dons plays and the analysis given on them but also the ranges of a typical recreational player at NL4.
Honestly, the way it is sometimes described as unbeatable is laughable, i dont understand it. Don beat it once and maybe, just maybe moved up too soon but he may tell you different. Me and DOHHHHHHH disagreed on the amount of BI's needed to move up. He knows how to beat it, he just doesnt seem to handle the swings and beats so well.
(Sorry for talking about you as a third person on your thread Don)
In Response to Re: why i cant beat nl4. Sigh. some BBY but want advice. sick of losing at this level. : In that case I apologise, just couldnt see who else they were aimed at? Again my apologies. Seemed oddly out of character for you. Posted by AMYBR
i believe it was aimed at me,
Also shanxta i wa styping the very following post was getting typed as you posted so i hadnt seen it. was aimed in general.
Currently playing nl4 again, and winning, after withdrawing in March and having a break from cash.
I was a better than break even player at mtt's and stt's before playing cash.
When I first started nl4 I was break even rather than profitable but took the view that it meant I had leaks in my game, worked at it and improved. I know that to move up will require more skills, but making moves on players atnl4 who aren't good enough to fold is setting fire to money
It is beatable, and once you can beat it you should always have something to fall back on.
The uber nitty play hasn't done my mtt results any good but the cash profit is more than covering that..
Hopefully will have a pop at moving up a bit come the Autumn, but not interested in putting any volume in at the moment. Don't currently have the BR to play higher and won't be depositing to attempt to move up.
In Response to Re: why i cant beat nl4. Sigh. some BBY but want advice. sick of losing at this level. : Ive actually changed my raising range to AQ+ pre now. Trying to keep calling range to this too. The issue is with this is the seriousness and bordom. Posted by The_Don90
In Response to Re: why i cant beat nl4. Sigh. some BBY but want advice. sick of losing at this level. : 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. Any more to comment on this? Posted by The_Don90
I love people like you. I was trying to be constructive and let you know where i found i was losing money and yet you just attack me (okay you're not all out insulting me, but you're clearly having a dig).
You obviously don't need my thoughts or anyone elses on the matter as you just analysed your own play. Carry on losing and then whining that the players are bad.
Flopped top pair (the almighty 8) and also had a nowhere-near-the-nuts flush draw. You were in so good the only mistake you made is not re-mortgaging so you could get even more money in.
In Response to Re: why i cant beat nl4. Sigh. some BBY but want advice. sick of losing at this level. : No, its not coming across as insulting one bit. I like to think you and I can be fairly blunt with each other. As for multiway pots, we need a really big hand to continue multiway, i'm talking flopping 2 pair +. As you see from the AK hand i posted, if you raise big enough, you will isolate. If you keep getting called multiway, bet even bigger. On certain tables i will just open shove 100xbb at NL4 with big pairs knowing the table is that loose i will get a call. Can i do it at NL8, no, it doesnt work, but at NL4 you will often find a call from any hand like pocket 2's upwards along with hands like J,10+ alot of the time. Is it correct poker? No, not really, but its profitable against some of the opponents you are up against and then we are back to adapting to your surroundings. Its been a very good learnng tool for me and to be fair i learnt alot from Dons original thread 'taking on NL4'. Loads of hand histories in there to disect, not necessarily Dons plays and the analysis given on them but also the ranges of a typical recreational player at NL4. Honestly, the way it is sometimes described as unbeatable is laughable, i dont understand it. Don beat it once and maybe, just maybe moved up too soon but he may tell you different. Me and DOHHHHHHH disagreed on the amount of BI's needed to move up. He knows how to beat it, he just doesnt seem to handle the swings and beats so well. (Sorry for talking about you as a third person on your thread Don) Posted by DrSharp
No worries.
Ive actually moved up on two occassions. Once getting as high as NL20. took a shot on a show table done brilliant and moved back to my normal NL20 the next night and ran bad, played bad, lost. Simply everything went bad.
The second time, i got to NL10 and i suspect this is the one youll be talking about. I managed to get to £230 ran bad and didnt move back down after a bad session. This was an obvious mistake.
The issue i have at NL4 is imo you have to be rolled. Thats something that i aint, and lets face it im not the tightest player in history. As i once stated nl4 makes me feel like a brain dead ape. I know it sounds strange but im a far better player when opponents are making me make a desision. Weather it be "am i good here/" or "how much should i be value betting".
In Response to Re: why i cant beat nl4. Sigh. some BBY but want advice. sick of losing at this level. : I love people like you. I was trying to be constructive and let you know where i found i was losing money and yet you just attack me (okay you're not all out insulting me, but you're clearly having a dig). You obviously don't need my thoughts or anyone elses on the matter as you just analysed your own play. Carry on losing and then whining that the players are bad. Flopped top pair (the almighty 8) and also had a nowhere-near-the-nuts flush draw. You were in so good the only mistake you made is not re-mortgaging so you could get even more money in. Posted by Pipunch
Right firstly im not having a dig. I believe you told me to tighten up my checking range, Im not sure on how im meant to do that so i asked for clarification. I then broguht the 3 hands up that i checked, and put my point asking if you wanted to add anything more to this. Youve taken it as an insult then so be it, but i believe thats because you dont know me or how i intend things to be taken.
Also i said 50% equity against most hands. I said i spewed on the turn. but i believe i got 2 callers with 2 worse hands no draw on the flop. One of which had one out.
In Response to Re: why i cant beat nl4. Sigh. some BBY but want advice. sick of losing at this level. : This is a question, not an argument or debate starter. I think mostly played @ NL 20 & 50 on sky & havent read dohs well received doc on NL4 strategy. Its not an ego or snob thing, just that I need the amounts to be reasonable or I will just not play my game. But from what you say about the 45 hand: Are we just not going to play any hand of equity because its micro stakes? I have replied in many threads talking about losing min vb max and creating windows of opportunity. But is the range of hands we advocate playing at NL4 really that tight? Posted by AMYBR
Yes it really is that tight.
At NL8 an NL10 i may play 4,5 in position but at NL4 i'd just fold. If i am playing 4,5 suited at a higher level i am not just hoping to hit 2 pair+ to continue but looking for the boards which will let me take the hand down at a later street in position. Thats fine if we are playing people who can read the dangers on the board. At NL4, the thinking is literally, 'i have pocket 8's, i have a monster, i will put all my chips in the middle' even if there is an Ah,Qh,10h flop. They dont even need the 8h mate. The other issue is that mostly players will not be 100xbb deep so the implied odds can be very poor for hands like 4,5suited. You cant turn your hand in to a bluff so there is just not enough value in speculative hands like this, even in position.
In all honesty AMYBR, just give DOHHHHHHH's thing a read, it doesnt matter if you dont play at these levels its just really well written and explains probably better than i ever will the way to beat NL4. It will take you 10 minutes at most. Pass it on to your mate.
In Response to Re: why i cant beat nl4. Sigh. some BBY but want advice. sick of losing at this level. : No worries. Ive actually moved up on two occassions. Once getting as high as NL20. took a shot on a show table done brilliant and moved back to my normal NL20 the next night and ran bad, played bad, lost. Simply everything went bad. The second time, i got to NL10 and i suspect this is the one youll be talking about. I managed to get to £230 ran bad and didnt move back down after a bad session. This was an obvious mistake. The issue i have at NL4 is imo you have to be rolled. Thats something that i aint, and lets face it im not the tightest player in history. As i once stated nl4 makes me feel like a brain dead ape. I know it sounds strange but im a far better player when opponents are making me make a desision. Weather it be "am i good here/" or "how much should i be value betting". Posted by The_Don90
Yeah, this is what we have spoken about before. Interesting how you bring up being properly rolled. As you say, your not the tightest player (should be at NL4 lol) so the 20xBI level is, in my opinion, too small for your game. Your last effort at beating cash as you say ended when poor discipline let you down by not moving back down stakes fast enough when on a downswing. This brings up another point i would like to put to you, you seem to be in a rush to move up. I did the same and have learnt to just hang on a bit longer prior to moving up. This will make you laugh, i now sit with well over £500 in my skypoker account but i am still hanging around at NL8 and NL10 alot purely because when i had onl 20xBI for a level i felt under pressure not to lose a BI whereas now at NL8 i have approx 70xBI for NL8 and 54xBI for NL10 and i dont care if i lose a few BI's on a night. Also lets me multi table with ease at these levels. Might be excessive, but i feel my game is alot more relaxed and less forced now than when i had £50 at NL4.
Ty again for feed back sharpy, but I've laid out my game to you (for my benefit aswell as yours) so you should know that that isnt the kind of NLHE I'm able to play.
Most of my game is disguising range with constant aggression. I just dont think i could play a format where all my value comes from my oppos making constant mistakes and my strong hands holding vs draws.
I will read dohs thing as I hear its good.
The don, dont see a point where you've been out of line in this thread tbh, but I;ll look closer
Ty again for feed back sharpy, but I've laid out my game to you (for my benefit aswell as yours) so you should know that that isnt the kind of NLHE I'm able to play. Most of my game is disguising range with constant aggression. I just dont think i could play a format where all my value comes from my oppos making constant mistakes and my strong hands holding vs draws. I will read dohs thing as I hear its good. The don, dont see a point where you've been out of line in this thread tbh, but I;ll look closer Posted by AMYBR
Yeah, understand your stance on this. I think your view mirrors that of Dons and thats why he sometimes struggles with it. It really is a patience thing and multi tabling is a must. A mate at work plays one table at NL4, i dont know how he does it. I need at least 4 going just to keep the hands coming.
As usual, its good talking these things through.
At Don, are you giving NL4 a go again then or you finished for good?
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. Sighhhhhhhhhhh Rant over. Posted by The_Don90
15k hands, 12bb/100 win rate here - fairly small sample size but shows that yes, 4NL is beatable.
I seem to remember a while ago, you were posting 4NL hands in A51 and BBV all the time too? Withdraw a couple of 4NL buy-ins, download the free PC Kindle app, and buy "The Mental Game of Poker". Or buy the book itself for a couple of quid more and keep it in the toilet or something )
Seems like some "Hellmuth Tilt" going on here to me - when you get your money in ahead, you feel as if you're entitled to the pot, and you tilt when you don't win, or you see someone win a pot with 84o and think "That idiot shouldn't be in the pot and he's taken my money". Simple fact of the matter is that if you keep getting your money in as a favourite, you'll make money. It's the same at 4NL and 1000NL.
Imagine you and a villain both put £4 in the middle pre-flop, KK vs A6 for example, and you have 70% chance of winning the hand. Which also means your opponent wins the pot 30% of the time.
Do that 100 times and you'll win the £8 pot 70 times. You've bet a total of £400 and won £560, so £1.60 for every time this happens. Therefore, instead of thinking "I've just lost £4 to this idiot calling all in with A6 and getting lucky", imagine you've actually won £1.60 every single time you get into that spot, and forget about the result altogether.
Embrace the bad beats, too. Bad players getting lucky is what keeps bad players playing. If you were playing a game with much less variance, where the bad player hardly ever wins, they'd lose their money and give up as they never win anything. The variance is what makes Poker attractive to fish as it allows them to win in the short term.
You also seem to have a massive lack of confidence with 4NL. I remember before you were asking to be staked for UKIPT Nottingham on the Facebook DTD page IIRC, you seemed a lot more confident than you do about 4NL - Look where that confidence got you. Weren't you chip leader at one stage? You can be chip leader in a £770 tournament but can't beat 4NL? You're good enough at Poker to beat 4NL, and much higher levels too, but the Mental side of your game needs some serious work IMO.
In Response to Re: why i cant beat nl4. Sigh. some BBY but want advice. sick of losing at this level. : 15k hands, 12bb/100 win rate here - fairly small sample size but shows that yes, 4NL is beatable. I seem to remember a while ago, you were posting 4NL hands in A51 and BBV all the time too? Withdraw a couple of 4NL buy-ins, download the free PC Kindle app, and buy "The Mental Game of Poker". Or buy the book itself for a couple of quid more and keep it in the toilet or something ) Seems like some "Hellmuth Tilt" going on here to me - when you get your money in ahead, you feel as if you're entitled to the pot, and you tilt when you don't win, or you see someone win a pot with 84o and think "That idiot shouldn't be in the pot and he's taken my money". Simple fact of the matter is that if you keep getting your money in as a favourite, you'll make money. It's the same at 4NL and 1000NL. Imagine you and a villain both put £4 in the middle pre-flop, KK vs A6 for example, and you have 70% chance of winning the hand. Which also means your opponent wins the pot 30% of the time. Do that 100 times and you'll win the £8 pot 70 times. You've bet a total of £400 and won £560, so £1.60 for every time this happens. Therefore, instead of thinking "I've just lost £4 to this idiot calling all in with A6 and getting lucky", imagine you've actually won £1.60 every single time you get into that spot, and forget about the result altogether. Embrace the bad beats, too. Bad players getting lucky is what keeps bad players playing. If you were playing a game with much less variance, where the bad player hardly ever wins, they'd lose their money and give up as they never win anything. The variance is what makes Poker attractive to fish as it allows them to win in the short term. You also seem to have a massive lack of confidence with 4NL. I remember before you were asking to be staked for UKIPT Nottingham on the Facebook DTD page IIRC, you seemed a lot more confident than you do about 4NL - Look where that confidence got you. Weren't you chip leader at one stage? You can be chip leader in a £770 tournament but can't beat 4NL? You're good enough at Poker to beat 4NL, and much higher levels too, but the Mental side of your game needs some serious work IMO. Posted by EvilPingu
On the whole a superb post young man! The highlighted parts are especially relevant!
Don just play like a brain dead ape and bash the raise btn with value hands and bash the call btn with your draws
it's that simple
If you play NL30 and you come across the same kinda laggy/station oppo, how you going to play against them ? The same as versus NL4 laggy/station oppo's Don, get your ahead around beating NL4 -
Comments
Again my apologies.
Seemed oddly out of character for you.
I think mostly played @ NL 20 & 50 on sky & havent read dohs well received doc on NL4 strategy. Its not an ego or snob thing, just that I need the amounts to be reasonable or I will just not play my game & will b a pure payoff wizard (even more so)
But from what you say about the 45 hand:
Are we just not going to play any hand of equity because its micro stakes? I have replied in many threads talking about losing min vb max and creating windows of opportunity. But is the range of hands we advocate playing at NL4 really that tight? esp when we feel oppos will pay us off on favourable boards?
As for multiway pots, we need a really big hand to continue multiway, i'm talking flopping 2 pair +. As you see from the AK hand i posted, if you raise big enough, you will isolate. If you keep getting called multiway, bet even bigger. On certain tables i will just open shove 100xbb at NL4 with big pairs knowing the table is that loose i will get a call. Can i do it at NL8, no, it doesnt work, but at NL4 you will often find a call from any hand like pocket 2's upwards along with hands like J,10+ alot of the time.
Is it correct poker? No, not really, but its profitable against some of the opponents you are up against and then we are back to adapting to your surroundings.
Its been a very good learnng tool for me and to be fair i learnt alot from Dons original thread 'taking on NL4'. Loads of hand histories in there to disect, not necessarily Dons plays and the analysis given on them but also the ranges of a typical recreational player at NL4.
Honestly, the way it is sometimes described as unbeatable is laughable, i dont understand it. Don beat it once and maybe, just maybe moved up too soon but he may tell you different. Me and DOHHHHHHH disagreed on the amount of BI's needed to move up. He knows how to beat it, he just doesnt seem to handle the swings and beats so well.
(Sorry for talking about you as a third person on your thread Don)
Also shanxta i wa styping the very following post was getting typed as you posted so i hadnt seen it. was aimed in general.
May i ask when ive ignored people?
I was a better than break even player at mtt's and stt's before playing cash.
When I first started nl4 I was break even rather than profitable but took the view that it meant I had leaks in my game, worked at it and improved. I know that to move up will require more skills, but making moves on players atnl4 who aren't good enough to fold is setting fire to money
It is beatable, and once you can beat it you should always have something to fall back on.
The uber nitty play hasn't done my mtt results any good but the cash profit is more than covering that..
Hopefully will have a pop at moving up a bit come the Autumn, but not interested in putting any volume in at the moment. Don't currently have the BR to play higher and won't be depositing to attempt to move up.
You obviously don't need my thoughts or anyone elses on the matter as you just analysed your own play. Carry on losing and then whining that the players are bad.
Flopped top pair (the almighty 8) and also had a nowhere-near-the-nuts flush draw. You were in so good the only mistake you made is not re-mortgaging so you could get even more money in.
Ive actually moved up on two occassions. Once getting as high as NL20. took a shot on a show table done brilliant and moved back to my normal NL20 the next night and ran bad, played bad, lost. Simply everything went bad.
The second time, i got to NL10 and i suspect this is the one youll be talking about. I managed to get to £230 ran bad and didnt move back down after a bad session. This was an obvious mistake.
The issue i have at NL4 is imo you have to be rolled. Thats something that i aint, and lets face it im not the tightest player in history. As i once stated nl4 makes me feel like a brain dead ape. I know it sounds strange but im a far better player when opponents are making me make a desision. Weather it be "am i good here/" or "how much should i be value betting".
Also i said 50% equity against most hands. I said i spewed on the turn. but i believe i got 2 callers with 2 worse hands no draw on the flop. One of which had one out.
At NL8 an NL10 i may play 4,5 in position but at NL4 i'd just fold. If i am playing 4,5 suited at a higher level i am not just hoping to hit 2 pair+ to continue but looking for the boards which will let me take the hand down at a later street in position. Thats fine if we are playing people who can read the dangers on the board. At NL4, the thinking is literally, 'i have pocket 8's, i have a monster, i will put all my chips in the middle' even if there is an Ah,Qh,10h flop. They dont even need the 8h mate. The other issue is that mostly players will not be 100xbb deep so the implied odds can be very poor for hands like 4,5suited. You cant turn your hand in to a bluff so there is just not enough value in speculative hands like this, even in position.
In all honesty AMYBR, just give DOHHHHHHH's thing a read, it doesnt matter if you dont play at these levels its just really well written and explains probably better than i ever will the way to beat NL4. It will take you 10 minutes at most. Pass it on to your mate.
https://www.skypoker.com/secure/poker/sky_lobby/poker-school/beat-small-stakes-cash-games-1?tracking=pokersleftnav
Obviously not forcing you to read it but it may explain better than i can.
Anyway, i'm far from an expert but how i would get away from these hands:
84h - bin them once raised on turn.
QQ - depending on the opponent i fold in fear of the king but at this level probably call the all in.
JJ - insta fold to such a strong raise.
Q9 - insta fold, wouldn't even make up the small blind.
Most of my game is disguising range with constant aggression. I just dont think i could play a format where all my value comes from my oppos making constant mistakes and my strong hands holding vs draws.
I will read dohs thing as I hear its good.
The don, dont see a point where you've been out of line in this thread tbh, but I;ll look closer
As usual, its good talking these things through.
At Don, are you giving NL4 a go again then or you finished for good?
You are a gent and a credit to the forum as always sharpy
Am currently stood over iluvs lappy watching him 3table nl4 & 8 to see watch action HiCupP
Don just play like a brain dead ape and bash the raise btn with value hands and bash the call btn with your draws
it's that simple
If you play NL30 and you come across the same kinda laggy/station oppo, how you going to play against them ?
The same as versus NL4 laggy/station oppo's
Don, get your ahead around beating NL4 -
Havent played a hand in 30 mins : this table then this: