So...on Tuesday, with 2 days to go in the Sushi portion of the challenge, I sat in the low $170s. Decided I'd try my luck at $.05/$.10 NLHE to see if I could make up some ground on our fair leader. A little out of line probably, but semi-reasonable. Bought in for $8 at a few tables (still under the 5% rule) and proceeded to get crushed. Down about $14 in just 134 hands. Ugh.
With rakeback, the Eeyore 'roll ended at $158.76 (subject to review -- my spreadsheet tells me it should've been $3 higher, but Cake says what it says).
The breakdown (just under 21k hands in total) is as follows:
$.02/$.04 NLHE -- $60.17
$.05/$.10 NLHE -- ($42.25) - ouch
$.02/$.04 PLO -- $2.02
SNGs -- ($32.30) - ouch
MTTs -- $11.21
Rakeback -- $60.01
These results are a little unsettling, especially as I hope to get to the $200 plateau and move out of the micro micro stakes. Ditching the SNGs is easy. Done. But the $.05/$.10 result (which occurred in just 900+ hands) is problematic. I'm somewhat at a loss to explain the results; the following is all I've noticed.
* My (limited) experience is that people aren't simply handing away their money, as they often are at $.02/$.04. That dead money sure does help. Duh.
* I feel like I'm approaching the game a bit differently, which is adding volatility to the results. I'm trying to be a bit craftier (rather than simply playing ABC, TAG poker). By anecdotal memory (as opposed to HEM analysis), I'm 3-betting more from the blinds when the initial raise comes from the button. This approach has me putting more chips at risk than I my typical ABC baseline mode.
* My buy in is a little light, as I tend to buy in for $8 rather than $10. Maybe somebody has some insight here, but I feel REALLY short stacked in this game when I buy in for $8 (as I would if I were buying in for $10) because I'm seeing some really huge stacks. I sat at a table the other day where there were several people above $20 and one over $40. (Perhaps that should've been a sign that these guys had been there a while and were picking off the other players)
Not sure. Any words of wisdom re an approach for $.05/$.10? Eeyore inertia would prefer to go back to being the TAGgiest of TAGs. At least my volatility would lower.
$100 swing...the wrong way
14 years ago
3 comments:
So, congrats on earning turning $100 into $150 over three months. I know you didn’t win in the Sushi Books, but the Jason book is still out there, and you’ve got some time.
And seriously, getting a 1.5x return on your money isn’t bad at all for something that you would be doing regardless of the return, right? Well, maybe not grinding, per se. But I don’t know about you, but I’m enjoying playing at these micro stakes, not wagering anything at all but learning a ton.
Thanks, Royal, and agreed. Certainly an interesting experience. Congrats to you too for not going haywire. Your fortitude is impressive, as I would've probably gone full blown (woody) monkey tilt at some point and snapped.
Don't know what to say about your .05/.10 game. I'm sure HEM has a bunch to tell you since the data is there. I'm in the same place with my .02/.05 game where I need to cull answers out of the copious data sitting around untapped. Part of the results is that the game in general is going to get tougher moving up stakes though there will always still be some donk factor at every stage. Keep in mid the online factor as well since the 1/2 online crowd is way way way tougher than 1/2 live.
Post a Comment