[Closed] Worth playing microstakes ring games?

LOL looking at holdem manager I have just noticed my VPIP is 40 PFR 30 at NL10 after 5k hands lol...Maybe it wasn't just my bad luck that I lost a lot of cash...I've been playing speculative hands like suited aces and suited connectors agressive from any possition [Short handed game] and i've been raising with pretty much any hands from buttom and cut off which also explains why it's so high...

On NL 5 I have noticed I have been playing too loose and my vpip is 28.5 and PFR 18which is still pretty high, but an improvement from NL10 I guess..I'm not sure how else to tighted up my game, a lot of people are nits to my surpize on NL5 and 10, i've been playing pocket pairs agressivly from any pos, I have been more picky on the button and cut off.

What is the ideal VPIP and PFR for these limits to crush them?

Originally posted by ZeMammuth
LOL looking at holdem manager I have just noticed my VPIP is 40 PFR 30 at NL10 after 5k hands lol...Maybe it wasn't just my bad luck that I lost a lot of cash...I've been playing speculative hands like suited aces and suited connectors agressive from any possition [Short handed game] and i've been raising with pretty much any hands from buttom and cut off which also explains why it's so high...

On NL 5 I have noticed I have been playing too loose and my vpip is 28.5 and PFR 18which is still pretty high, but an improvement from NL10 I guess..I'm not sure how else to tighted up my game, a lot of people are nits to my surpize on NL5 and 10, i've been playing pocket pairs agressivly from any pos, I have been more picky on the button and cut off.

What is the ideal VPIP and PFR for these limits to crush them?

Mine are 15\12 - ish for NL5 SH and I have been told to loosen up just a little. I wouldn't be playing small pp's (22-66) aggro in early position and I wouldn't touch suited aces until on CO\BU unless to call an open limper or isolate I guess. When stealing, don't just steal with any two - although you can against certain opponents - It shouldn't be your default play. Although when you steal you're not necessarily looking for confrontation you should be using hands that have the potential to hit the board nicely on the occasions you are called. This also stops the players to your left thinking you are a complete lag tard and calling you down three streets just to make a point.

Originally posted by Dendra
NL10>24x10=$240
Even with 25BI BRM you've still got enough money to perfectly play 24 tables and still have 1buy-in to spare, which is kind of stretching it, as you'll have to close down 1-2 tables if you lose a stack in some all-in or whatever

How on earth are you playing perfectly if you need to close the table because you have no money left in the cashier? If I take a horrible bad beat against a complete fish I dont want to be closing that table. I also dont want to find myself in a situation where I can no longer top up my stack when the blinds pass or when I lose a few chips.

Originally posted by Dendra
You can have 30BI rule and play with all 30BI at the tables - since BRM doesnt tell you with how much money to sit at the tables but with how much money to play a certain limit

I cant believe anyone would offer this as sound advice without an agenda ♠_biggrin: I dont need a safety-manual telling me not to jump out of a plane mid-flight without a parachute. Having all your $ on the cash tables is terribad, it's that simple.

The point of BRM is to spread your bankroll so that you can't lose it all in one go. You're increasing your sample size to combat variance, so to speak. When you're multi-tabling you're doing the same thing, only multiple times at once.

You could say that, as long as you can handle the tables, playing 1 table for 4% of your roll for 24 hours is the same as playing 24 tables for a combined 96% of your roll for 1 hour

Originally posted by ZeMammuth
LOL looking at holdem manager I have just noticed my VPIP is 40 PFR 30 at NL10 after 5k hands lol...Maybe it wasn't just my bad luck that I lost a lot of cash...I've been playing speculative hands like suited aces and suited connectors agressive from any possition [Short handed game] and i've been raising with pretty much any hands from buttom and cut off which also explains why it's so high...

On NL 5 I have noticed I have been playing too loose and my vpip is 28.5 and PFR 18which is still pretty high, but an improvement from NL10 I guess..I'm not sure how else to tighted up my game, a lot of people are nits to my surpize on NL5 and 10, i've been playing pocket pairs agressivly from any pos, I have been more picky on the button and cut off.

What is the ideal VPIP and PFR for these limits to crush them?

You're WAY too loose, especially at these limits...tighten up.

Originally posted by dylboi011
You could say that, as long as you can handle the tables, playing 1 table for 4% of your roll for 24 hours is the same as playing 24 tables for a combined 96% of your roll for 1 hour

So risking 4% of my roll at a time for 24 hours is the same as risking 96% of my roll at the same time for 1 hour????? This makes no sense at all.

If I have 4% of my roll at risk on 1 table I would have to rebuy 24 times to have put 96% of my roll at risk, and if I am using sensible BRM then I would have moved down limits long before the 20th rebuy!

With 96% of my roll at risk on 24 tables at the same time I only need to lose 1 BI, (my AA vs villans J3os AI preflop, flop JJ3, we've all been there!), and rebuy once to have 100% of my roll on the tables at once. This I am sure would be considered very bad BRM!

I would think that no matter how many, or how few, tables you are playing, to have more than 50% of your roll on the tables at once would be poor BRM.

I may be wrong here as this is just my opinion but seems to make sense to me.

Originally posted by Hahaownedlolz

Originally posted by ZeMammuth
Why do you need to have more than one screen to multi table?...I play one screen and cascade 16 tables on I-poker no problem.

Well cascade you pick up pretty much 0 reads..

ah ohwell.. i just give up.. i won't bother with this thread anymore.. just 50 table with a 20 BI BRM i don't care.. I'm sure you will improve a ton playing on so much tables.

i never said i played 16 tables, playing 9 tables or so is easy enough to improve and can take ur time, write player notes, etc. also, why do you seem to correlate playing micros with having shit screens? it doesnt really make sense...

fact is, u CAN multitable with a significant portion of your bankroll on x tables, if the extra tables arent causing u to play much worse, then ur risk of going broke is exactly the same as playing 1 table for x hours, it really is that simple

is that escobar as in pete/skribz(and chenny i suppose) mate from the firm/GOOKZ?

What is the ideal VPIP and PFR for these limits to crush them?

The ideal VPIP and PFR can vary alot from table to table on miro sh tables.
The dynamic of the table will change if a maniac or a loose fish sits down and you need to adjust to this instantly to get the most out of the situation.
When you are playing 24 tables you wont spot theese players as quckly even with HUD. In addition to that you can't pick up on your opponents betting tendencies, and thereby missing out on some really profitable situations.
I agree with the people in this thread, who says that the objective with playing micro stakes has got to be to improve your game. You are not improving your game significally when playing 24 tables. You will just make the same mistakes again and again. When playing 4-6 tables you have more time to analyse your hands and to spot your opponents weaknesses.

Check the video series by TwicwT "move it, move it up to the sky" part 1 and 2. Theese videos really helped me to get a better understanding of the micro stakes and how to put people on ranges based on their VPIP, PFR and betting patterns.

Originally posted by Semesa
is that escobar as in pete/skribz(and chenny i suppose) mate from the firm/GOOKZ?

yes, more recently mcity but ur right. skribz put me on to this site when i asked him to teach me poker, shortstack strategy he recommended cos he knew id be completely USELESS to start with. haha

Originally posted by Escobario

Originally posted by Hahaownedlolz

Originally posted by ZeMammuth
Why do you need to have more than one screen to multi table?...I play one screen and cascade 16 tables on I-poker no problem.

Well cascade you pick up pretty much 0 reads..

ah ohwell.. i just give up.. i won't bother with this thread anymore.. just 50 table with a 20 BI BRM i don't care.. I'm sure you will improve a ton playing on so much tables.

i never said i played 16 tables, playing 9 tables or so is easy enough to improve and can take ur time, write player notes, etc. also, why do you seem to correlate playing micros with having shit screens? it doesnt really make sense...

fact is, u CAN multitable with a significant portion of your bankroll on x tables, if the extra tables arent causing u to play much worse, then ur risk of going broke is exactly the same as playing 1 table for x hours, it really is that simple

Way to miss the point yet again.

Common sense really about the screen.

How many people have 24"+ or multiple screens?

There are really only a few type of people that need or are willing to spend so much on a screen or multiple ones. People like hardcore gamers, or if you work with your computer. The average person won't have huge/multiple screens that you need to multitable properly. Yes i can tile 12 tables on my 17" laptop but you pick up barely any reads and you simply don't play even closely as well as on 4-6 tables. Plus for me atleast, with so many tables they become so small a HUD isn't an option either.

So a person who plays microstakes poker is unlikely to have a really big screen. Simply because he wouldn't have needed it in the past.A person who plays higher stakes, has a bigger bankroll from which he can withdraw to buy bigger or multiple screens. Very likely has a good foundation of poker knowledge to build on, has less leaks, is usualy a better play and probably multitables more. So not only is it better for him to multitable alot it's also alot more likely.

Am i thinking too advanced here or something? If you even think a little before you post you can make some logical conclusions from what i'm saying.

welcome to 2010 bro alot of people will have 22inch screens or similar which is perfectly fine for 9tables (or more) without cascading or tiling or watever

but yes, OBVIOUSLY if you have a really small screen and cant see the numbers with smaller tables then dont play too many tables............................

......................also u seem to have this idea that playing higher stakes = more wealth and therefore bigger screens?

i would hesitate to claim that people playing micros or even playmoney are less wealthy/likely to have good screens.

do u live in cambodia or something (not hating if u do, cambodia's awesome, just sayin i dont know many people with a computer and also a terrible screen)

actually to play here you must be a sound poker player But if you are not a solid player and a new one then you can not make more wins. It is mostly for the experienced players. but if you can play well then no problem even if you are new. Best of luck or you

wow what a graph and winnings. i too wanted to play like that..