[beekeeper]

I'm trying to expand my poker game to the local casino (Potawotami in WI). I play in a weekly home game, and I play on line at Bugsy school.

I've been practicing limit on Bugsy. I've played in a casino 5 times total (in 2 years). In that time, I've only had one losing session (lost $40). I usually play for 3 hours. The most I've won is $175 in 5 hours. Last night I played for 2 hours and won $3! (I was up $40 till the second to last hand--my nut flush lost to a river full-house).

I usually play the lowest limit possible because I figure I'm inexperienced and I should start at the bottom and work my way up. That means $2/$4 or $3/$6.

My questions (!):

I met a dealer who told me that there's no point playing in a casino if you're going to play the lowest limits because you're just going to be playing against callings stations and indiscriminate gamblers. He said that if I really want to improve my game and learn how to play, I need to play for higher limits.

Well, I figure to move up to $4/$8 I need at least a $300 buy-in. Is this enough for the buy-in?

Is moving to $4/$8 going to move me into a more skillful group of players, or am I still with the low limit crowd?

If I'm playing $4/$8 no limit, or $4/$8 omahi hi-lo, what should be my minimum buy-in?

My casino offers stud and stud hi lo ($4/$8, $5/$10, $10/$20), and omahi hi lo ($4/$8, $5/$10). I love playing Horse at Bugsy School, and I'm curious but afraid of playing a non-hold'em game at a casino. Which game and limit would be good one for someone to cut her teeth on?

Thanks a lot for any feedback.

[Poboy]

Originally Posted by beekeeper

I met a dealer who told me that there's no point playing in a casino if you're going to play the lowest limits because you're just going to be playing against callings stations and indiscriminate gamblers. He said that if I really want to improve my game and learn how to play, I need to play for higher limits.

Sounds like the dealer wants to help the casino. What's wrong with calling stations and indiscriminate gamblers? If you can't beat them how can you beat good players? The only reason not to play the low stakes is that the rake is hard to overcome.

Well, I figure to move up to $4/$8 I need at least a $300 buy-in. Is this enough for the buy-in?

Is moving to $4/$8 going to move me into a more skillful group of players, or am I still with the low limit crowd?

If I'm playing $4/$8 no limit, or $4/$8 omahi hi-lo, what should be my minimum buy-in?

My casino offers stud and stud hi lo ($4/$8, $5/$10, $10/$20), and omahi hi lo ($4/$8, $5/$10). I love playing Horse at Bugsy School, and I'm curious but afraid of playing a non-hold'em game at a casino. Which game and limit would be good one for someone to cut her teeth on?

Thanks a lot for any feedback.

I'll leave off answering specifics because I've played in a casino all of once, but I have heard that play doesn't really change until 5/10.

[hachkc]

For limit games, the standard buyin is usually around 20-30 Big Bets. In a 4/8 game, that would be $160 - $240. I'd agree in general that higher stakes can equate to better players but I'd be more concerned about playing profitable poker which is really the "best" form of poker. At lower limits, players will make more mistakes which is ultimately what you want. The downside, is they will often "suckout" and win a hand. Generally, they'll lose more than they win but we only remember the suckouts and not our wins. Of course, one would need to define what is a better player. Some folks define a better player as a predictable player because they don't chase without odds, can laydown hands before they suckout, etc.

In theory, a H/L split pot game is playable with a smaller buyin because of one's has 2 opportunities to win a hand. Remember, you play H/L games not to split the pot but to scoop or quarter your opponents. You also need to be aware of the fact the rake can alter the profitability of the hand in split pot games. If most of the money in the pot is bet by the 2 folks splitting the pot, the rake can eat a big chunk of the meager profits which are already being split.

[beekeeper]

Originally Posted by hachkc

For limit games, the standard buyin is usually around 20-30 Big Bets. In a 4/8 game, that would be $160 - $240. I'd agree in general that higher stakes can equate to better players but I'd be more concerned about playing profitable poker which is really the "best" form of poker. At lower limits, players will make more mistakes which is ultimately what you want. The downside, is they will often "suckout" and win a hand. Generally, they'll lose more than they win but we only remember the suckouts and not our wins. Of course, one would need to define what is a better player. Some folks define a better player as a predictable player because they don't chase without odds, can laydown hands before they suckout, etc.

I have difficulty with unpredictable players (i.e., players who make the mistake of calling when they shouldn't and end up "sucking out.")

I know that better players than myself are profitable against these players. I think that I may be profitable against them in the long run,too. However, I feel when playing against such players, that I am not really able to apply other techniques that I've read about profitably--skills that I guess I could categorize as thinking to the 3rd or 4th level (in Sklansky speak).

For instance, if the game was limit, I might be able to raise for a free card, but I wouldn't be able to check raise on the turn to get players to fold, or reraise preflop to thin the field. Any raise of a bet seems to lead to capping the pot. If the game was no limit, even if I "sized my bet" to give a player the wrong odds, because they don't think about the odds, that kind of strategy feels ineffective.

This raises another question for me. If I'm not "crushing" a lower limit game, though I may be profitable, should I move up or not?

Originally Posted by hachkc

In theory, a H/L split pot game is playable with a smaller buyin because of one's has 2 opportunities to win a hand. Remember, you play H/L games not to split the pot but to scoop or quarter your opponents. You also need to be aware of the fact the rake can alter the profitability of the hand in split pot games. If most of the money in the pot is bet by the 2 folks splitting the pot, the rake can eat a big chunk of the meager profits which are already being split.

Honestly, you just made more sense than Ray Zee ever did to me.

On line, at Bugsy school, I can split pots all day long--but those are tournaments. I haven't been learning to scoop or quarter my opponents. I really appreciate your feedback.

[jojobinks]

from your posts, i don't think you should move up.

reraising PF for value (or to thin the herd) is not a 3rd or 4th level concept. betting the correct amount works, whether they know enough to fold or not. until you get comfy with these (and other) important ideas, i recommend you play against the weakest competition you can find.

the calling stations and chip-spewers at the 3/6 game are the folk you want for now. i know they're frustrating, but they'll be at the 4/8 game, too. unfortunately for you, their'll be some players that are much better than you there too. the mix of players will not be a happy one for you.

keep playing where you are...keep records...make sure you're profitable over a few hundred hours before you decide to move up.

[beekeeper]

Originally Posted by jojobinks

the mix of players will not be a happy one for you.

keep playing where you are...keep records...make sure you're profitable over a few hundred hours before you decide to move up.

Good advice.

I have a question--if preflop I have a strong hand like JJ or QQ, and I want to limit the field, why wouldn't raising a bettor (before others call the initial bet) be a move to thin the field? Also, when I refer to 2nd and 3rd level thinking, I was thinking more of what I have read, and my home game tournament experience. I can see where I wasn't clear.

Maybe, since I'm just a casual player, I'll never really get there...

Thanks

[Poboy]

Originally Posted by beekeeper

Good advice.

I have a question--if preflop I have a strong hand like JJ or QQ, and I want to limit the field, why wouldn't raising a bettor (before others call the initial bet) be a move to thin the field? Also, when I refer to 2nd and 3rd level thinking, I was thinking more of what I have read, and my home game tournament experience. I can see where I wasn't clear.

I don't want to put words in jojo's mouth, but I think what he meant was raising for value and/or raising to thin the field are not high level thinking, but standard stuff. The things you can't pull are things like, 'I've got nothing, but there's no way he can call this bet w/o an A (or whatever)' because they routinely will. There will also be little, 'I know that he knows that I know' kinds of plays.
Try not to outthink yourself overadjusting to poor players. Most of the time, just do what makes sense because even if you go all-in on the river with a on card straight flush, two pair still calls. When you have JJ, you raise to thin the field and for value.

Maybe, since I'm just a casual player, I'll never really get there...

Nonsense. You'll learn to welcome stupid calls rather than fear them sucking out. Remember, even if you lose 4 hands to suckouts, if they keep calling and calling, the fifth time when your hand holds up, you cover all your losses plus make a profit.

[jojobinks]

Originally Posted by Poboy

I don't want to put words in jojo's mouth, but...

nah...you did it just fine, po.

bee: he got it right.

[TheMightyJim2k]

Even if you are casual, I HIGHLY recommend Sklansky and Miller's Small Stakes Hold'em. Not only does it give you the advice needed to play and win at the level you are at, but the underlying concepts you will learn will help you better understand poker in general. I think Theory of Poker is a great companion, but not necessary if you are planning on working your way up at low stakes first.

What you will find out over time is that low stakes is not about winning pots but making correct decisions that will maximize equity, and the profits will come in the long run.

For example to address your previous question...in low stakes raising with QQ or JJ preflop is almost always a good move. Even if you are three betting. It doesn't matter if players call or not. The point is that your hand has a lot of equity in the long run, ie its going to win more bets than you will spend playing it. That doesn't mean that with JJ three bet preflop that with suited AK10 flop that is getting raised and reraise that you should call to the end. But the cards are going to come down favorably enough in the long run that those raises are going to bring more chips your way.

Trust me pick up the book. Read it, and then reread it. And don't just focus on starting hands. Over time your perception of the game will change. You'll begin to realize that "sucking out" is a part of limit hold'em and is can be a profitable play if you do it with positive equity.

[SingleMaltFan]

can't agree more with whats written below...

things i try to remember in low limit, dont know if it s helpful..

1.there's always(ok usually) an A out there (or at worst a K)

2. watch for Overcards to your pair, esp and A)...esp w. middle and bottom pair (unless its checked around to you)

3. you can get a lot of mney in a pot when there are draws out there and you have the best hand up until the river..cause when they dont hit, that pot is yours...

4. (from sshe) when you have the best hand, or think you do.BET when checked to, and raise if there is a bet in front of you, thats when the calling stations PAY you.

recently at foxwoods, i was playing my usal t/a game...(mixed it up a bit with things like A8o, tg i hit it and showed) but no one payed attention that i folded a majority of my hands...PF: AJo...OTB, limped along with 5 or 6 callers..flop JJA!!!..bet to me, cal, call, i raise, eventually this round gets capped, two blanks show, the betting is still feirce...'course i got the nuts..i take down a huge pot...

now, if they were at a higher limit table, they probably would have noticed that i hadnt been in a pot in like 15 hands, and that a PF raise from the button on that flop shpoulda meant somethin..and i am sure i wouldnt have had as much of a profit..

right?

good luck out there...

1malt

Originally Posted by TheMightyJim2k

Even if you are casual, I HIGHLY recommend Sklansky and Miller's Small Stakes Hold'em. Not only does it give you the advice needed to play and win at the level you are at, but the underlying concepts you will learn will help you better understand poker in general. I think Theory of Poker is a great companion, but not necessary if you are planning on working your way up at low stakes first.

What you will find out over time is that low stakes is not about winning pots but making correct decisions that will maximize equity, and the profits will come in the long run.

For example to address your previous question...in low stakes raising with QQ or JJ preflop is almost always a good move. Even if you are three betting. It doesn't matter if players call or not. The point is that your hand has a lot of equity in the long run, ie its going to win more bets than you will spend playing it. That doesn't mean that with JJ three bet preflop that with suited AK10 flop that is getting raised and reraise that you should call to the end. But the cards are going to come down favorably enough in the long run that those raises are going to bring more chips your way.

Trust me pick up the book. Read it, and then reread it. And don't just focus on starting hands. Over time your perception of the game will change. You'll begin to realize that "sucking out" is a part of limit hold'em and is can be a profitable play if you do it with positive equity.