is it the place to learn

pod1

some of you know i play a lot of mtts and hu, now thinking about cash, playing on 2/4p, but is it really the place to learn cash?. have a bank roll to play quite a bit higher. 2000+ games under my belt it other formats, but been on those cash tables and to say the standard is poor is  well "poor". as you cash people know, u cant bluff and it just seems to be call, call, and call again. do i stay there and pick up bad habits or go higher and try and find a decent level (not too decent mind!!!)

debdobs_67

Hi babe,i play 2p/4p,4p/8p and dabble in 5p/10p and 10p/20p so you CAN mix it up a bit.There are though alot better players on the latter 2 levels but you can still make decent money,xxx

YOUNG_GUN

if you are rolled nl20 and 30 imo

debdobs_67

In Response to Re: is it the place to learn:

if you are rolled nl20 and 30 imo
Posted by YOUNG_GUN

Lol whenever ive tried 15/30 it has never gone well for me,xxx

pod1

i did try it once , very very drunk and got creamed. couldnt see the screen unless i closed 1 eye. ozzie was playin and he told me to go to bed even though he was taken money off me x

YOUNG_GUN

lol wat a gent ozzie is, if proper rolled i think nl 30 fine then if losing drop down. not a fan of starting nl4 or 8 i'd rather stick to sit n gos

Tikay10

In Response to is it the place to learn:

some of you know i play a lot of mtts and hu, now thinking about cash, playing on 2/4p, but is it really the place to learn cash?. have a bank roll to play quite a bit higher. 2000+ games under my belt it other formats, but been on those cash tables and to say the standard is poor is  well "poor". as you cash people know, u cant bluff and it just seems to be call, call, and call again. do i stay there and pick up bad habits or go higher and try and find a decent level (not too decent mind!!!)
Posted by pod1

Hi-Pod,

With respect, you have fallen for something called "Group Think" there, & believed something that is repeated again & again, & is nonsense.

If the standard at 2p-4p is as bad as some say - & perhaps it is or is not - why would you NOT want to play it?

A BI at 2p-4p is £4. Win, say, 3xBI per night, that's £60 per week if you play 5 nights, equal to £3,000 per year.

What's not to like about that?

In truth, it's NOT as bad as most say, & if it were, we'd all spend all day & night there, making a small fortune.

I do think it's rather demeaning & elitist when everyone knocks the 2p-4p guys.

stien

In Response to Re: is it the place to learn:

In Response to is it the place to learn : Hi-Pod, With respect, you have fallen for something called "Group Think" there, & believed something that is repeated again & again, & is nonsense. If the standard at 2p-4p is as bad as some say - & perhaps it is or is not - why would you NOT want to play it? A BI at 2p-4p is £4. Win, say, 3xBI per night, that's £60 per week if you play 5 nights, equal to £3,000 per year. What's not to like about that? In truth, it's NOT as bad as most say, & if it were, we'd all spend all day & night there, making a small fortune. I do think it's rather demeaning & elitist when everyone knocks the 2p-4p guys.
Posted by Tikay10

Tikay,

Sorry but I have to disagree, I hear the matra of the play is getting better on here, but in all honesty its shocking at times, the beats are what keep the bad players here and there are so many of these its scary. Sure there are plenty of good and indeed some great players at the upper levels but there are many, many bad players at all levels, thats why so many play here.

2p/4p is poor, these guys call with any two pf, beating the game is simple, raise pf 6x, 8x 10x until you find the upper limit that they will call, value bet when you hit the flop and go from there.

In response to what level should you start at, try 15/30 as a minimum if you have the roll, 2/4 is little better than play money.

pod1

i hope the word " everyone" WAS  aimed at past posts, because at no point  was this "demeaning or elitist". i can only talk about the tables i have been on tikay and the standard was awful, everything you say about bad play being played by 4 or 5 players ,limp ,limp, and limp some more. if you can isolate 1 or 2 players on the table then yes you can make half decent progress, but you know that aint going to happen with 4 or 5. if there are 10 people here who are making 3k a yr from 2/4 i would be impressed. 1 would rather go up against 1 person with a machine gun than 5 with a rifle. as and when i  put the time effort and money into cash, i will take said advice and play 10/20 and see where it takes me. phil

tikay1

Sorry guys, lets agree to differ.

If we can't beat "bad" or "poor" players, what does that say about us, & our game? It tells me they are better than those who cannot beat them. I'm not sure how that logic can be contested. The flawed logic exists almost universally in poker, in no other game could it possibly be said that good players cannot beat bad players. I mean, think about it!
 
They play different, they play "awkward" (ALL calling stations are awkward), but if we cannot find a way to beat them, then they are better than us, or we are not as good as we think we are.

Good Luck against the better players. If you can beat the 2p-4p game, you might be ok at 15-30. But if you cannot beat 2p-4p, you are going to seriously struggle at higher Levels. 

The logic is watertight - good beats bad.

Mr_Miyagi

I agree with Teeks

tikay1

TY Mr M, but it's not even open to debate imho.

Since when was "poor" or" bad" able to beat "good" or "competent"? Those descriptions are self-evidently incorrect.

If we can't beat them, they are better than us.  

Mr_Miyagi

exactly

pod1

even mike tyson would struggle against 5 drunken yobs. never about skill tikay its about numbers. my point is you wouldnt want to play 5 people like me x

DOHHHHHHH

At the higher levels the individual players are better, but as a collective, when you put them together with 4 others and chose your seat, the table can often play easier.

You are able to isolate, if not 1 player, that a couple of players, and outplay them without hitting a hand.

Obviously if you take a nl4 player and put him heads up against a nl30 player, there's only 1 winner over a decent sample size.

I know Pod plays his poker hard, and to win, but it's by no means his living nor is it likely to be in the foreseeable future....

Therefore I'd weigh up the factors that should in influence his game selection....

Is it beatable?/Can I compete on a regular basis with the regular players?

Is it gonna be enjoyable?

Can I afford it?

Will I be rewarded with a significant profit on good nights, as well as be able to afford the losses on bad nights?

If you go through tikays legendary "tick the boxes method", I would say nl4 ticks 2 of the 4 boxes, as does nl8.

Nl 10, 20 and 30 are where things start to get a tad challenging. I know that pod is already a competent player. There's no need to prove this by spending 4 weeks beating nl4.

The key is to be honest with yourself. I would pick the level I felt I could compete at, and start at the one below.

I'd say Pod could be a competent nl30 player within a month or so, therefore I'd advise he starts at 20nl. (Or maybe even 10nl as the buy in is 200xbb there, so it's the same, but deeper)

I reckon this shud challenge him, without isolating him to players of too high a level. He can also afford it (or shud be able to judging by the sng buy ins he normally plays)

You can easily have 5 buy in nights on cash, so £100 a night would be rewarding. It's decent money in anyones bankroll. 

I also think he wud enjoy it alot more than nl4, which is afterall - why he plays right?

I'll finish my uni essay now, maybe shud have pm'd u this mate and addressed it directly to you, but didnt expect to go on.

Good luck whatever u do, always happy to discuss hands/notes via pm or on the clinic, got alot of experience playing these players.

Let uz no how u do.

JJ

ps. U are planning on playing on sky right?

Mr_Miyagi

Pod.

Poker is all about situations.

It's true moves that work on higher levels won't work on the low levels, but you should be able to change your game to do what does work on the lower levels and win consistantly if your a good player.

If you lose all your money bluffing on the micro tables it doesn't make you a good player playing against idiots - it makes you the idiot for thniking you can do that. (not saying your an idiot or that you have lost any money bluffing)

tikay1

In Response to Re: is it the place to learn:

even mike tyson would struggle against 5 drunken yobs. never about skill tikay its about numbers. my point is you wouldnt want to play 5 people like me x
Posted by pod1

You'd rather play 5 good players, than 5 bad players? For money?

MP33

I started on NL30 and did ok for a while, but after my BR took a hammering on Vegas (before i excluded myself)  i started playing on the NL4 and NL8 and found i had to adjust my game when playing at these levels.

I still play a litle on NL10 , 20 and 30 but adjust my game accordingly to the players i am playing

I would advise playing at all levels (up to  a point) even if its just to make notes on the players there  and when you get enough notes togethor pick the tables where you think you,ve got the best chance of winning 

Paul 

debdobs_67

Tikay i do see exactly what you mean BUT when you play too many BAD players they seem to hit faaaaaar too often and IF you get your money in good each and every time then HOW can that make you a worst player than them? i mean OMG you are starting to sound like shanxta now,xxx

stien

Tikay,

"The flawed logic exists almost universally in poker, in no other game could it possibly be said that good players cannot beat bad players. I mean, think about it!"

Tiger Woods won't miss 5 putts from 3 inches, Messi won't miss 5 goals from 3 yards and horses don't trip up 5 feet from the finishing line 5 races in a row, I'm no Durrr, far from it but yesterday I lost over £1,000 in pots on the river when I was so far in front on the turn it was ridiculous, try grinding that back. Thursday evening I hit 3 sets in 7 hands on one table and lost all 3 pots!! That's poker, you get outdrawn, but maybe if you played cash on the site more you'd know how hard it is to beat the game when the game keeps kicking the hell out of you, its not as simple as bad players can't beat good ones because they do all day long, skill only goes so far, luck is the very reason the fish play.

You're the analyst, you're holding JJ on an AJx flop and the fish bets half his stack at you, what you doing folding? No you're shoving he's got QQ and calls because he's a fish and can't fold......... turn a Q, this afternoon on here. Bad players can't beat good ones, you're having a laugh, want any more?

Back to the OP point, if you see the flop with AA and 4 others do, you're no favourite against the field, yes you have to thin the field, as I said raise and raise big at 2/4p, get the field to fold and see the flop with one or two opponents. Yes I am well aware that you have to play the low stakes differently, I can beat it. But IMO play at least 10/20 as dohhhhhh suggests or 15/30.

pod1

thanks for the advice and time you put into your response dohhh, much appreciated .  tikay what im trying to say is the likes of sparce, red ,lolufold and were on tv( please dont think i am putting myself anywhere near there level) are playing 1 on 1. i watched red and lolufold go at it for hrs on sunday. their mentality of  " i would rather play 1 really good player than 5 good players" must hold true. with your thinking they would be more profitable playing £2.50/5 on a 6 seater than £5/10 hu. night after night they play heads up, not against each other all the time i admit, but they do play each other and others of a high standard. very very rarely do you see them sat on a table of 6/10. of coarse you wouldnt want to sit down at a table with 5 better players than yourself and i feel insulted  that you think i implied that. what i am saying is that the amount of bad players you sit down with will make a difference. phil

GREGHOGG

In Response to Re: is it the place to learn:

Sorry guys, lets agree to differ. If we can't beat "bad" or "poor" players, what does that say about us, & our game? It tells me they are better than those who cannot beat them. I'm not sure how that logic can be contested. The flawed logic exists almost universally in poker, in no other game could it possibly be said that good players cannot beat bad players. I mean, think about it!   They play different, they play "awkward" (ALL calling stations are awkward), but if we cannot find a way to beat them, then they are better than us, or we are not as good as we think we are. Good Luck against the better players. If you can beat the 2p-4p game, you might be ok at 15-30. But if you cannot beat 2p-4p, you are going to seriously struggle at higher Levels.  The logic is watertight - good beats bad.
Posted by tikay1

this

stien

In Response to Re: is it the place to learn:

In Response to Re: is it the place to learn : this
Posted by GREGHOGG

Greghogg,

When you work your way up to 25/50, 50/1 I'll see how well you play but for now shhhhhhhhh.

debdobs_67

In Response to Re: is it the place to learn:

In Response to Re: is it the place to learn : Greghogg, When you work your way up to 25/50, 50/1 I'll see how well you play but for now shhhhhhhhh.
Posted by stien

I could NOT have put it any better,not ever,xxx

GREGHOGG

In Response to Re: is it the place to learn:

In Response to Re: is it the place to learn : Greghogg, When you work your way up to 25/50, 50/1 I'll see how well you play but for now shhhhhhhhh.
Posted by stien

lol, come play some mtts and sngs with me
 
and fwiw i can play 4nl and win i just choose not to.

now you shhhhhhhhh innit

p.s we are allowed different views around here, i agree with tikay on this one, i dont always agree with him, but on this i do.

stien

In Response to Re: is it the place to learn:

In Response to Re: is it the place to learn : lol, come play some mtts and sngs with me and fwiw i can play 4nl and win
Posted by GREGHOGG

i'll pass on the donkuments but i'll look you up on the 2/4 tables when i'm drinking, i'll give you a chance.

Ozzie08

1 thing 2 say here NL4 is fun, wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

And greg u cant beat nl4 u have to play hands and not auto fold, hehe

GREGHOGG

In Response to Re: is it the place to learn:

1 thing 2 say here NL4 is fun, wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii And greg u cant beat nl4 u have to play hands and not auto fold, hehe
Posted by Ozzie08

yes nl 4 is fun, we should have a fun forum game soon, and stien should be the guest of honour

me you doh and dyl would eat him alive imo:)

yb

Stien obv in one hand its very easy for a fish to get lucky (or even over a few hundred hands for that matter). But when you're talking about the long term, over a very large sample size, the better players will always win against the worse players. That's undeniable. In one of your posts you said that the bad players are kept going by the suck outs they get, that is wrong. You might see them get lucky winning a few hands, but over a long period of time the only reason you'll see a continuously bad player still playing is that they are able to reload.

Pod, if you can't beat 4NL (where the standard on here is obviously terrible) then you'll have no chance of winning at a higher level. If, however, its that you decide you have the bankroll and ability to start playing cash a bit higher, then just try it and see how you get on imo.

tikay1

In Response to Re: is it the place to learn:

thanks for the advice and time you put into your response dohhh, much appreciated .  tikay what im trying to say is the likes of sparce, red ,lolufold and were on tv( please dont think i am putting myself anywhere near there level) are playing 1 on 1. i watched red and lolufold go at it for hrs on sunday. their mentality of  " i would rather play 1 really good player than 5 good players" must hold true. with your thinking they would be more profitable playing £2.50/5 on a 6 seater than £5/10 hu. night after night they play heads up, not against each other all the time i admit, but they do play each other and others of a high standard. very very rarely do you see them sat on a table of 6/10. of coarse you wouldnt want to sit down at a table with 5 better players than yourself and i feel insulted  that you think i implied that. what i am saying is that the amount of bad players you sit down with will make a difference. phil
Posted by pod1

So it's not the quality of the opposition, it's the number of them?

So why do you think that exact logic would not hold good against a regular 2p-4p player?

Do you think you could not beat a 2p-4p regular Heads Up more than 6 times in 10? because if you could not.........it's "next case".

But using your logic, beating them Heads-Up should be easy.

I'm not having a pop, pod, (scans nice that, eh?), but Sky Poker, & myself, are accused again & again & again by the usual suspects of not caring for the players at the lower levels.

And yet players are repeatedly happy to say they are hopeless, & at the same time admit they cannot beat them.

Go square that equation!

Sorry poddy, but I'm not being party to saying these guys are hopeless, but we cannot beat them, it just sits badly with me I'm afraid.
 
Really, at whatever level you choose to play, I hope you get the lot.

But "I can't beat 2p-4p but I can beat 10p-20p" makes no rational or logical sense.

pod1

morning tikay, at no point did i say i couldnt or havnt been beating them.( made a profit on both tables i played yesterday) . The original question was "is it the place to learn" not poker, as you know i have been playing quite awhile, but the art of cash. having 3people calling you with 4 hearts on the table and 2 of them not having 1 is great, but i am not learning anything. i play golf with 2 friends, 1 plays of off of 3  and the other plays off scratch. do i get beat 90% of the time, yep i sure do but my handicap has come down from 21 to 11. dohhh put it nicely when he said why people play poker. i am not playing to make a living although a slight profit is always nice, i play to improve and to enhance my game, pit my wits as they say. the   standard at 2/4 i said was awful (only tables  i had played) was not a dig at them or sky, people need to learn how to play somewhere, i was saying it wasnt offering me what i want out of playing poker. phil