A question to the mid-stakers

Hi.

1) Talent
2) Hard Work
3) Self-Control

In order of which I think is more important. I think if you are just bad at games and math/logic in general, you definitely won't go very far so talent is no.1 for me.

Next is hardwork. You need to put in enough volume and also put in some hours out of the tables to fine-tune your betting strategies. Many players are just too lazy so they do not earn as much as they could have if they did put in more work playing.

Last is self-control: not cashing out too much, not playing too high, having proper bankroll management and quitting when you are tilted while playing longer when you are running good.

Originally posted by mbml
Hi.

1) Talent
2) Hard Work
3) Self-Control

In order of which I think is more important. I think if you are just bad at games and math/logic in general, you definitely won't go very far so talent is no.1 for me.

Next is hardwork. You need to put in enough volume and also put in some hours out of the tables to fine-tune your betting strategies. Many players are just too lazy so they do not earn as much as they could have if they did put in more work playing.

Last is self-control: not cashing out too much, not playing too high, having proper bankroll management and quitting when you are tilted while playing longer when you are running good.

hey thanks for the comment

While I do agree with most of what you said I think you answer "what it takes to be successful in general in poker" while I am more wondering what makes midstakes+ players more successful than the lower/micro stakes players

(yes they could work harder and put more volume and have more self-control etc but I have heard of players who have xxx thousands of hands at nl2 and still can't beat it for example so there have to be more specific skills,things the more succesful people are doing/having?)

ps i.e if i want to be more specific my question could be translated as a nl100,200,400? regular what deviates you from a nl25-50 regular

Correct me if i'm wrong OP, but do you mean what concepts do they learn and implement that lower stakes don't?

eg: 4bet/5bet bluffing, double floating etc?

The way i see poker is it a game of layers. Each layer will get you so far before you need to add the next layer to continue progressing on to increase a winrate at current stakes (almost like building a house if you like). So i'm guessing this is what you are getting at?...What moves they have in there arsenal that lower stakes players don't?

Originally posted by jonnyjm
do you mean what concepts do they learn and implement that lower stakes don't?

Overall yes but not only... I am also asking about things about mindset, work ethic , specific skills they have improved more etc

Personally I think one thing that sets mid-stakes+ pros apart from small-stakes pros is creativity. Lots of small-stakes guys make an effort to learn what is "standard," and follow a set of guidelines to make their decisions. A lot of mid-stakes pros think critically about every situation--they approach each hand with a fresh mind and think, "what is the most +ev line to take in this hand?" and execute it, whether it's double-floating and raising the river, or going for a double check-raise, or any other nonstandard (or standard) line.

Alternatively, some people (I'm thinking in particular of Sauce) probably just put a ton of work and time into diving into GTO play and trying to refine their game so that it approaches closer and closer to GTO.

Originally posted by oblioo
Personally I think one thing that sets mid-stakes+ pros apart from small-stakes pros is creativity. Lots of small-stakes guys make an effort to learn what is "standard," and follow a set of guidelines to make their decisions. A lot of mid-stakes pros think critically about every situation--they approach each hand with a fresh mind and think, "what is the most +ev line to take in this hand?" and execute it, whether it's double-floating and raising the river, or going for a double check-raise, or any other nonstandard (or standard) line.

Alternatively, some people (I'm thinking in particular of Sauce) probably just put a ton of work and time into diving into GTO play and trying to refine their game so that it approaches closer and closer to GTO.

Awesome post.

I'm a nl20 reg so I don't play midstakes but from my own learning experience I agree 100%. And it becomes super evident when watching the coachings/vids.

In Pleno's coaching this week there were a few times he'd x back flop with a strong hand because he can get more value on later streets. Whereas I'd be like tptk/nut flush - auto cb. Plus spots where he x/r turn with gs or something because villains range is capped. And most micro/small stakes guys would have just folded against villains aggression and missed some value.

Originally posted by oblioo
Personally I think one thing that sets mid-stakes+ pros apart from small-stakes pros is creativity. Lots of small-stakes guys make an effort to learn what is "standard," and follow a set of guidelines to make their decisions. A lot of mid-stakes pros think critically about every situation--they approach each hand with a fresh mind and think, "what is the most +ev line to take in this hand?" and execute it, whether it's double-floating and raising the river, or going for a double check-raise, or any other nonstandard (or standard) line.

Alternatively, some people (I'm thinking in particular of Sauce) probably just put a ton of work and time into diving into GTO play and trying to refine their game so that it approaches closer and closer to GTO.

10x for the comment - exactly what I was asking but yet another question arised
Just trying to implement creativity in someones game can often backfire especially in the beginning - how to find that balance between being too creative and too spewy/missing out value if there is such? Shall we just deviate from the standard game every single situation we feel like is ok to do so or should we pick our spots really carefully?

Originally posted by Lucker9200

Originally posted by oblioo
Personally I think one thing that sets mid-stakes+ pros apart from small-stakes pros is creativity. Lots of small-stakes guys make an effort to learn what is "standard," and follow a set of guidelines to make their decisions. A lot of mid-stakes pros think critically about every situation--they approach each hand with a fresh mind and think, "what is the most +ev line to take in this hand?" and execute it, whether it's double-floating and raising the river, or going for a double check-raise, or any other nonstandard (or standard) line.

Alternatively, some people (I'm thinking in particular of Sauce) probably just put a ton of work and time into diving into GTO play and trying to refine their game so that it approaches closer and closer to GTO.

10x for the comment - exactly what I was asking but yet another question arised
Just trying to implement creativity in someones game can often backfire especially in the beginning - how to find that balance between being too creative and too spewy/missing out value if there is such? Shall we just deviate from the standard game every single situation we feel like is ok to do so or should we pick our spots really carefully?

I agree with Dustin here a lot.

But we have to understand that to be creative one has to have a solid understanding of the game. It is not just to be creative for the sake of being creative (everyone can take weird lines) but as Dustin said being creative to find max value spots. For example being creative without good hand reading abilities isn't a good idea ♦ and mid-stakes players are good at this.

To answer to Lucker, I think it is very difficult for a micro player to be creative without being spewy bc the fundamentals aren't quite there yet.

Generally speaking I would advise you to focus first on understanding the standard lines/improving your hand reading. Once you got the basics nailed you can think about creative lines.

Originally posted by Lucker9200
10x for the comment - exactly what I was asking but yet another question arised
Just trying to implement creativity in someones game can often backfire especially in the beginning - how to find that balance between being too creative and too spewy/missing out value if there is such? Shall we just deviate from the standard game every single situation we feel like is ok to do so or should we pick our spots really carefully?

I think a lot of small/micro stakes players could benefit a lot from this simple advice: consider every option. A lot of my students, when holding a medium-strength hand and facing a turn bet (for example), used to have a problem where it literally seemed like their 'raise' button would disappear. They were stuck in this mindset that calling or folding were their two options, and that's what they had to work with. But in reality, the raise button was sitting there an inch to the right of the call button!

I'm not saying you should usually be raising in that specific spot, but when you start to consider all your options, your game really opens up and allows you to be more creative without necessarily being spewy or getting out of line. This applies to bet-sizing (this is no-limit guys) as well as remembering that you can always fold, call/check, or bet/raise, so consider them all

dunno if that helps answer your question?

Originally posted by oblioo
dunno if that helps answer your question?

yeah it does and if you have other amazing advices like this one id like to hear them aswell ;p

ps big thanks to all the people sharing their thoughts and knowledge, and if you or others have anything to add don't be shy