im a losing player

pod1

over the last 4mnths i have concentrated on cash and pretty much cash only, i was a losing player at nl10 a winning player at nl20 and at nl30 , def a losing player at nl 50 and so far a winning player at nl100, overall  i am up just over 1K, what i am really strugglin over is how much difference is there in these different levels compared to say table selection, variance and other outside influences like concentration levels, how many tables running, confidence etc. do these other factors play a bigger part in win/loses than the level you play at?? got a feeling higher stake players will answer different to lower stake. is variance the biggest factor in playing cash????

hamster880

Hi

Variance is something you have to deal with at any level of poker i think it is something you just have to factor in when you play the game. 

Also,  I think the game does vary alot dependent upon the level - one thing i noted as i moved (though still not a high roller lol) is becomes a lot more difficult to make conventional money via the abc poker route - though there are enough bad players that this can still be done. Rather it become about nerve and appriopriate value beting (i.e. when and were - this i think separates the breakevens/slightly profitable from the very profitable).

Also you have to remember your variance is also adjusted to your playing style - if you have a loose style you will be in more pots and get it more difficult situation (the same applies if you bluff more) and hence you may win more, but the swings might be very hard and wide. Whereas if you are a tight player only being patient and playing premiums your not going to get in as many difficult situation (just value bet when you hit your top pair and top kicker etc)

Just my thoughts

percival09

Well firstly, 4 months is no way a long enough period of time to decide whether youre a winning or losing player trying to play 5 different levels. You need to stick at one level until you think you are on top of it, their is no point in playing for 3 weeks making £400 and deciding youre a winning player. I play NL50 and one month i can be massively up and another I can be massively down, variance is one of the biggest factors yes! 

As previously mentioned, you have to be confident in your ability to beat the level youre playing at, if youre not, why play at that level? Tables running plays little affect, just play how many youre comfortable with, I play 6 and am very comfortable with that. Don't starting playing 12 tables because you see other people doing it, that's a mistake i often see people make. 

The thing is with SkyPoker, their isn't a large amount of tables running for any level, say for example their is 4 tables running for NL300, table selection plays no part as you have to sit on them tables. If you can, avoid the better players, avoid the players who know how you play, try to play with the people you know youre better than, that way you know over a long period of time you will consistently make money. 

ratedRKO

how can u be a losing playa at nl50 but a winning playa at nl100??? dont get too carried away if u have had a couple of winning sessions at nl100 its alot tougher than nl50!! if u have made 1k over the past few weeks then u are rolled for nl50 i wud suggest stay at that level until u can beat it, if u cant move down. dont get too carried away with winning a few big pots at the higher levels because it can/will overtime end in disaster.

dont get me wrong taking shots is cool, i myself do it, some times is good sometimes is disastrous (see my hand in clinic where i bluff off £400+ headz up) and even though i take shots at nl200/nl300 even if it turns out a profitable move i would never say im a 'winnin playa' at those levels because i dont have no-where near a big enough sample size, and not only that i know i aint ready for that on a reg basis yet. any1 can win big hands set v 2p, flush v fh etc even against the best players, just dont overestimate your ability. 

hope this helps, its not a dig, im genuinely tryin to offer a bit advice. gl

sikas

if ur bankroll is 1k, u are NOT rolled for NL50, 20 buyins is not enough for 6max, full ring? maybe, but not 6max u need at least 35-40...i made this mistake and went on a 12BI downswing, when we talk about variance yeah its normally a couple of Buyins up here and there but sometimes it can be UTTERLY BRUTAL, i have 50 BI for NL50 and wont start 'taking shots' at NL100 till i have 35-40 BI for it

....when u start getting 3bet pre, re raised on the flop, every1's floating ur Cbets u think that they cant be 'have it all the time' but seriously THEY DO, its just bad luck, good variance isnt neccesarily u getting AA 5 times in a row, n bad isnt how many times u get coolered AA vs KK n a K flops, sometimes u just miss and EVERY1 else hits

a few sessions at a level isnt enough, u need at least 100k Hands at NL50 or whatever to see if ur a winning player, which is prob like 4-5 months, when ppl say poker is about the long term is really is a bout the long term

N1CK

In Response to Re: im a losing player:

if ur bankroll is 1k, u are NOT rolled for NL50, 20 buyins is not enough for 6max, full ring? maybe, but not 6max u need at least 35-40...i made this mistake and went on a 12BI downswing, when we talk about variance yeah its normally a couple of Buyins up here and there but sometimes it can be UTTERLY BRUTAL, i have 50 BI for NL50 and wont start 'taking shots' at NL100 till i have 35-40 BI for it ....when u start getting 3bet pre, re raised on the flop, every1's floating ur Cbets u think that they cant be 'have it all the time' but seriously THEY DO, its just bad luck, good variance isnt neccesarily u getting AA 5 times in a row, n bad isnt how many times u get coolered AA vs KK n a K flops, sometimes u just miss and EVERY1 else hits a few sessions at a level isnt enough, u need at least 100k Hands at NL50 or whatever to see if ur a winning player, which is prob like 4-5 months, when ppl say poker is about the long term is really is a bout the long term
Posted by sikas

i think 25/30 is fine to play a level it also depends on your style of play, if you move up a level with 25 bis and go on a bad run you just have to know when to move down, if you 4/6 table you can hit 50k hands in a month  if you put the hours in and get a good idea of how you fair at that level and if you use software its a good sample size to look at leaks etc to improve your game but yeah 100k plus is realistic,

pod1

thanks for the feedback guys, i know my level is 20/30 at the mo and have no inclination of moving up, the dozen or so games i played at nl50 i did find tough and the nl100 (4games now) was just a "see what it was like" like i say table dynamics plays a big part and it just so happened that the games at nl100 suited my game and the nl 50s didnt. will keep plugging away at the lower levels with the odd game at the higher ones.   phil

68Trebor

 see you on the 30nl soon.

pod1

yes mate , just playing the 400gtd

5toneFace

The standard at 100nl is better than 50nl. Mainly cause the Regs at 100nl are better than the ones at 50nl. If you cant win at 50nl, you wont be able to win at 100nl. Your sample size is probably way to small. 4 sessions at 100nl is not enough. You could win all of those sessions. Then 1 day you could find yourself in a deep hole, wiping out your bankroll. And on the other hand, you might be able to win on 50nl. You might just be on a bad run, and think you cant win on there, but actually you can. 

You need to play at a certain level for a month+ to see whether you can beat that level. Not over a few sessions.

20 buyins is enough. As long as you are strict on yourself. Eg, moving down the levels when your bankroll tells you to. Most people have a problem with moving down the levels. Through pride or whatever. And that is what causes them to bust there account. If you use a 20 buyin rules, or even 10. It just means you find yourself moving up and down levels more, than say someone using a 50 or 100 buyin rule. It depends on what you want out of poker. If you want to withdraw money a lot, using a 50-100 buyin rule is better. If you just want to get to the biggest levels as quick as possible, and not withdraw any money until you have a decent roll at the highest levels. 10-20 buyins is probably better. But its more of a gamble and might actually take longer.