comparing 25nl and 50nl

is it much harder at 50nl? more skilled players?

The rake difference is a complete bitch.

50NL is really hard i would recommend playing 25NL forever

i remember it was the biggest jump ive had to make so far. So id say it is quite different from 10NL - 25NL imo.

Its a lot tighter imo. Dont really remember what the challenges i had exactly but i know i was getting out-nutpedaled by people +_+

On November 20 2006 20:35 Pokerintheface wrote: 50NL is really hard i would recommend playing 25NL forever

good advice

good question, i'm going to be getting ready to move to 50NL soon if i can stop fucking cashing out.

It's tighter obviously - i even noticed without intentionally playing tighter my vpip from 25 to 50 is like 23-25% down to 18%...

Even though i have 40++ buyins for 50NL it's still scary to get have confidence to re raise light pf when you think someone is just being a loose goose and it's obviously harder to make the big decisions because the money involved is bigger - but let's face it - that's what it's like moving up.

And as for rake - i'm going through the 600 bonus on FTP pretty quickly playing 2x25NL and 2x50NL at a time. Also i'm getting some good rakeback on top of the bonus.

I find 50nl to 100nl jump being harder. 25 to 50 was insignificant imo.

yes i felt the jump from 50 to 100 more noticable.

nl50 is soooooooo easy.

nl25 is definately the worst limit ever, nl2 doesnt even compare. players are the worst there so of course players are better at NL 50 but you just have to know whos tight and whos not and it's fairly easy to beat them

On November 20 2006 20:56 CrownRoyal wrote: nl50 is soooooooo easy.

Is this a joke? I can see some hands of yours at 25NL but most are at 10NL.. so i assume it's a joke!

its funny, now that i play 200NL it reminds me a lot of 10NL

i found 100nl got easier than 50nl

On November 20 2006 21:09 Verbloten wrote: Show nested quote + On November 20 2006 20:56 CrownRoyal wrote: nl50 is soooooooo easy. Is this a joke? I can see some hands of yours at 25NL but most are at 10NL.. so i assume it's a joke!

i went broke once, and i had to cashout nearly my entire bankroll two or three times...
I havent really reworked up the will to play poker seriously enough to make it back to nl50, but when I was there everyone was insanely predictable and exploitable.

NL50 was great stuff

On November 20 2006 21:22 Ket wrote: i found 100nl got easier than 50nl

you realize that doesnt make much sense :3 right?

50 NL is the worst level imaginable if you want to play poker. At 25 nl you can pretty much be assured that everyone sucks and you basically only play a good hand. At 50 nl there is such a mixed bag it makes reads hard and you don't know who to give credit. Players kind of know what is going on, but half the players do crazy/stupid shit every once in a while that messes with you. You're left thinking, man this is a great spot to bluff, but i dont know if this guy is a retard. Also, a scare Ace comes on the turn and you have air, still but you represent it, only to find the guy was floating the flop with AJ high basically trying to hit something. IMO, get out of 50 nl as quick as possible 100 nl players at least make sense and are easier to outplay.

I am currently (and have been for a while) playing at 25NL and 50NL, depending on what my BR allows. I find 25NL super light, very beatable, and you will find some of the worst players at these stakes. 50NL, is light, beatable, and you will find some bad players at these stakes, but you will also find some good players, who play like you do (which I will assume is correct play). The move from 25NL to 50NL is a little daunting though if your BR is <$1k. A bad session can cut your BR in half, which sucks. Part of the problem is in thinking that 50NL players are better, and trying to outplay them based on this (called "creative play syndrome" or something like that). Your rationale is that while you can't bluff the 25NL fish, the 50NL players are much better, so they will lay down to your extremely aggressive triple barrel bets. I started 50NL with this problem, and i usually cbet 100% on the flop, and a lot on the turn too, only to be reraised, or beaten at the showdown with a marginal hand. While aggressive betting is key to 50NL, you really have to choose your spots, and know when to lay down when the situation warrants it. The players at 50NL are slightly better on average, but nothing that a successful 25NL player could not handle. gl with 50NL .

On November 20 2006 21:22 Ket wrote: i found 100nl got easier than 50nl

maybe u just got better u nit ^_^

anyways, NL50 is much harder than NL25 b/c people are not stupid.

errr...

not AS stupid.

don't listen to the hype
there is no huge difference, only that you can find far more regulars the more you move up. since this is only 50nl, you can easily table select around them with the wide selection of tables most sites offer at this limit.

just make sure you are properly rolled, and comfortable.

and imo the hardest jump is 200nl to 400nl, because i cant get over it.

It depends a little bit on which site you play too, don't underestimate that.

On PS for example, there is a slight but significant tightening from NL25 to NL50, which fits with the change of category in the lobby (micro -> low IIRC). Don't worry though, they still suck :D

ROFL goodkarma, this is awesome!

on PartyPoker the difference used to be quite significant when NL25 was the lowest no-beginner stakes, cuz players there often didnt even know the hand rankings.

LMFAO!!

HAHA

lol

On November 20 2006 22:25 Big_Rob_48 wrote: 50 NL is the worst level imaginable if you want to play poker. At 25 nl you can pretty much be assured that everyone sucks and you basically only play a good hand. At 50 nl there is such a mixed bag it makes reads hard and you don't know who to give credit. Players kind of know what is going on, but half the players do crazy/stupid shit every once in a while that messes with you. You're left thinking, man this is a great spot to bluff, but i dont know if this guy is a retard. Also, a scare Ace comes on the turn and you have air, still but you represent it, only to find the guy was floating the flop with AJ high basically trying to hit something. IMO, get out of 50 nl as quick as possible 100 nl players at least make sense and are easier to outplay.

why do people talk about bluffing at these low stakes?
play tight and very aggressive
raise, fire flop and if in trouble, get out

no emotion

be a machine

agree with veg except there is some easy bluffing spots tho....

On November 20 2006 21:22 Ket wrote: i found 100nl got easier than 50nl

ditto

blah

every level is easy if you know what your opponents are thinking. seriously. just consider it for a minute...if you sit at fucking 300/600 on FT with benyamine, durrr, and sbrugby and you can read them like books, then that game is a piece of cake for you. obviously this is unrealistic in reality, but i'm being hypothetical here -- it's a simple precept of poker.

25nl and 50nl are just as easy to crush if you get inside your opponents' heads the same. in fact, the same goes for 100-600nl too. i don't need to have played all of these games to assure you that being one step ahead of your opponents will ALWAYS give you a HUGE edge. there's a huge huge huge huge huge huge huge difference between having an algorithmic, systematic, ABC style that (luckily) exploits some game theoretical weaknesses that your opponents have, and having the ability to understand your opponents well and manipulate them to make huge mistakes against you.

if you are having trouble making the transition between 25nl and 50nl, you are not reading your opponents' thoughts well. honestly, the competition is just as dumb and transparent, even through the mid limits. there is a very slight increase of better players once you reach 1/2, but they usually aren't that good, they're few and far between, and they are playing really ABC poker anyway.

you gotta start working on your ability to understand your opponents' thought processes, and stop being so concerned with your VPIP/PFR and stuff like that.

On November 21 2006 04:08 GoodKarma wrote:

rofl

im sorry, but there is absolutely no need to understand the thought process of players in 25nl, 50nl, or even 100nl. just do what veg said, abc poker. play tight, raise pf, cbet, if you run into problems fold. the only spots worth bluffing are the cbets on flops, thats it, if you have trouble in 25nl or 50nl you are probably playing a bad TAG game.

On November 21 2006 12:30 Bigbobm wrote: im sorry, but there is absolutely no need to understand the thought process of players in 25nl, 50nl, or even 100nl. just do what veg said, abc poker. play tight, raise pf, cbet, if you run into problems fold. the only spots worth bluffing are the cbets on flops, thats it, if you have trouble in 25nl or 50nl you are probably playing a bad TAG game.

wholeheartedly agree... i only started to think at 200nl

On November 21 2006 11:30 [vital]Myth wrote: blah every level is easy if you know what your opponents are thinking. seriously. just consider it for a minute...if you sit at fucking 300/600 on FT with benyamine, durrr, and sbrugby and you can read them like books, then that game is a piece of cake for you. obviously this is unrealistic in reality, but i'm being hypothetical here -- it's a simple precept of poker.

???

i think i'll just grind... i'll think in tourney's... plus i think getting your opponent's thought processes comes with experience.. something which i definitely lack at the moment...

i appreciate the post myth... actually i tried playing like that, but i lost some money... i lack the experience

i think the biggest difference between nl25 and nl50 is how much fpps you are raking. The difference is insane

On November 21 2006 19:55 tokeweed wrote: i think i'll just grind... i'll think in tourney's... plus i think getting your opponent's thought processes comes with experience.. something which i definitely lack at the moment... i appreciate the post myth... actually i tried playing like that, but i lost some money... i lack the experience

dont expect to not lose money with experience
you have to be able to fight through the downswings

my reasons for staying at 50NL after experimenting at 100NL and 200NL are:

1) cant fully beat 50NL(although my sample is prob less than 50K hands)

2) losing a buy in on 50NL doesnt hurt me (psychologically), losing a buyin on 100NL or 200NL hurts me and will effect my game because im a very emotional person by nature

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeee

err...

fundamental theorem of poker implies that if you could see your opponents' cards, you could play perfect poker, 100% of the time. in fact, that is the ONLY way to play perfect poker 100% of the time. this is really easy to understand and i hope everyone gets it.

what i'm saying about getting into your opponents' heads is that you have to develop hand-reading abilities and the capacity to understand how your opponents read hands too. sure, like i said, a bot could beat most very low stakes w/ plain abc poker because people are that bad. but just because you CAN beat low stakes with a small winrate doesn't mean you should settle for that. if you want to play good poker you have to develop more than a plain abc, systematic, bot-like game. and if you want to move past 50nl you have to do it too.

my major point is that people at 50nl are just as retarded as those at 25nl, although they may be retarded in different ways. just figure out how they're retarded and own them.

furthermore, great hand reading / opponent manipulation is FAR FAR FAR more valuable than great mechanics/game-theoretical solidity.

if you have somewhat shaky fundamentals, like maybe you play too many hands out of position and you limp a lot and stuff, but you read hands very well and you can get inside your opponents' heads and figure out what they're thinking, and how to manipulate them, then you can still be an extremely dominant player. you may not have your maximum potential winrate, but your winrate can still be very high even at very large stakes.

if you have poor hand-reading abilities and you don't understand the thinking of your opponents very well, and you try to play very systematically by a set of rules for particular situations, then i don't care how beautiful and perfect your preflop raise curve, aggression factors, bet sizing, pot control, etc. are...you will never be a great player. you can win, especially at 25nl and 50nl, but you can't excel.

work on both aspects of the game. be technical with your analyses, work on really mechanical things, and consider game theoretical implications of this and that. also take a lot of time to consider what your opponents are thinking. find out what makes them tick and you'll know what their cards are, and you'll know what they're going to do with their cards too. just think about how easy a poker hand is whenever you have a dead-certain read, then try to make every hand that easy.

On November 21 2006 20:09 Loco wrote: i think the biggest difference between nl25 and nl50 is how much fpps you are raking. The difference is insane

The difference in skill between any limit is hard to quantify, but don't be afraid of tougher players. Since you're only playing NL50 you shouldn't be worried about your profitability, but your own skill level. You'll improve faster playing against better players, so you should welcome the challenge.

On November 21 2006 12:30 Bigbobm wrote: im sorry, but there is absolutely no need to understand the thought process of players in 25nl, 50nl, or even 100nl. just do what veg said, abc poker. play tight, raise pf, cbet, if you run into problems fold. the only spots worth bluffing are the cbets on flops, thats it, if you have trouble in 25nl or 50nl you are probably playing a bad TAG game.

and this mentality will get you nowhere, even if you do win at nl50.

biggest jump (for me) was from 100NL to 200NL