|
|
 |
NL5 blog #1 - Preface |
 |
1
 |
Uptown . Nov 26 2008 19:59. Posts 3557 | | |
Before I set off on conquering NL5, I thought it would be best to lay out the set of rules, guidelines, and limits I would be following. This would make things concrete for me, and I would be able to reject all temptations of moving on to NL10 prematurely, or making other adverse actions.
The stipulations I set for myself are the following:
- Play the same hands the same way I did as NL2
- Choose tables with at least 4 players fully stacked at 100bbs
- Play on NL5 until I am rolled with 30bi's for NL10 ($300)
- Play on 6-8 tables, not 4.
- Drop back to NL2 if I go below 15bi's ($75)
- Insta-leave a table if it drops to 4 handed or below.
- Insta-leave a table if there is a habitual shortstacker
- Insta-leave a table if there are two or more very short stacks for any reason (because this is the same as being 4-handed)
The first one is pretty obvious. I was a winning player at NL2 with the way I played. I should continue exactly the same way until I have a large enough sample set that proves to me that I need to change things. I quote Pokey from the 2p2 forums:
"I think I've discovered the biggest mistake a player can make when moving up:
You play differently.
I'm talking about playing a different game from your usual game. Usually, people decide they have to "play more tightly," or they have to "play more aggressively," or they have to "bluff more often," or they have to "call down looser against all the floaters," ...
Here's a MUCH better strategy: when you move up, play your standard game. Change NOTHING. ...
You're a winning player -- that's why you want to move up. So when you move up, don't throw away your winning game! "
The second is pretty straightforward as well, but with a slight caveat. The reason I chose 30bi's instead of 20 or 25, is that I didn't want to fluke through NL5 and reach NL10 prematurely. My curret BR is $186, because Tenbagger shipped me more than he actually owed me in the beginning for reasons unknown to me (probably being generous / encouraging me to stick at it etc) and because I did a stars/paypal trade with Zulu. At the NL2 stage I didn't want to take advantage of my inflated BR, and instead acted as if I actually had $50 to start with. But as I move up in stakes, it's silly to not use money I already have! Thus, by setting a goal of $300, I need to make $114, amounting to roughly 23bi's at NL5. Considering I had to make 25bi's at NL2 in order to move up, it sets an equal bar for me to overcome in order to move onto the next stakes.
The rationale for playing 6-8 tables instead of 4 for me is a purely mental one. The reason I can play a ridiculously nitty game and not get tilted at the bad beats, suck outs and cheap profits with big big hands, is because I am able to play so many hands that I KNOW I'll get great hands really soon again. It allows me to play an optimal game and stick to the rules, and that's as important as anything here.
The drop down rule is there for pretty obvious reasons as well, but with a $100+ buffer, hopefully I won't have to worry about it ever!
The insta-leaving clauses are there for mental reasons as well. I'm not comfortable playing below 5-handed right now, and don't want to have to feel like I need to loosen up because of the number of players and the increased blind frequencies. I want to stick to my game, and there are plenty of other tables to do it on. The shortstacker thing again is to keep myself within my guidelines. It's annoying when you can't stack the guy properly when you flop a set or whatnot, and again I don't want to feel compelled to change my game because of such avoidable external factors.
---------
I'm sure there will be a period of nervousness as I move up, coming from the increase in numerical value I see on the screen, as well as the unfamiliar faces at NL5. But once I get past the jitters, it's still the same game and from what I understand, NL5 isn't a whole lot different from NL2 anyways. If anything, it's a great opportunity for me to make more $ faster, and to learn about what holes I have to patch up in my own game.
It's exciting to be moving up for the first time, and hopefully the excitement won't get the best of me 
Cheers~ sorry for the lack of pics, I haven't played a single hand yet!
|
|
| Half Pot! | Last edit: 26/11/2008 20:02 |
|
| 1
 |
roflcopter United States. Nov 26 2008 20:12. Posts 620 | | |
stick to four tabling imo. a lot of people play up to eight, but you will really learn the game and study your opponents with fewer tables.
just my thoughts |
|
| KwarK_uK: and if that was a bluff you deserved the pot for ballerness | |
|
| 1
 |
mknybtlr United Kingdom. Nov 26 2008 21:35. Posts 109 | | |
Good luck, I like your mentality
Agree with roflcopter - you're right about the more tables = more hands = less impatience, but at the same time it can be really beneficial to slow down and play more observantly. It's amazing what you can miss playing more tables. |
|
| 1
| |
|
|
 Poker Streams | |
|
Contact Users: 689 Active, 1 Logged in - Time: 03:52
,
,
,
,