August 18, 2012
Reasons
My first post in this blog actually got some comments which was nice. I had a blog a long time ago and only friends in real life ever read the damn thing.
I may have to clarify a couple of things in my "great plan". Becoming a Pro is a dream. Not an impossible one considering the time at my disposal and my financial situation but still, at this point calling it anything else would be silly. Playing really small, PLO 10 Zoom, isn't ideal from a financial point of view and neither is PLO 25 or 50 Zoom considering the rake and minimal profit (if any). My reasons for playing so small and putting in a lot of volume at those stakes are as follows.
Tilt control - I tilt a lot! This is something I'm well aware of and without a doubt my biggest leak. The thing I've noticed is that, the amount lost in a pot doesn't matter. It's loosing a pot I "should" have won that tilts me. My plan is to plug this leak in the months to come and playing small until I've managed to do so should be the best long term decision. I'm not saying I'll be able to become a robot that never tilts but hopefully playing with fish that do things that tilt me all the time will at least take me on a path towards less tilting.
Challenge - There is people all over the place claiming that Small stakes PLO can't be beat, because of the rake. Well I like a challenge! The way I see it is that if you can't beat PLO 25 due to the rake you'll probably be a fish at PLO 200. I may be wrong but I'd like to be able to beat every level before moving up to the next one. If I can't well then I'll change my plan somehow. I've got time...
Volume - The more you play the more you'll learn. It's easier to get in a ton of volume at lower stakes and it can be done without risking too much money. This is also why I play Zoom even if it isn't the same thing, no reads etc. The play isn't the same at higher stakes but the situations are.
Is my time schedule realistic? I think it is but I may have to revise it. Like any project (I'm a project manager) you have to have goals and a timeline. In the beginning of any project you have to decide the relative importance of time, money and quality. In this PLO project quality comes first then time and the least important is money. May seem stupid since it's money we are trying to make while playing poker but that comes later hopefully as an effect of this project that ends when I've reached PLO 100. What I mean with quality is simply the improvement of my decision making and tendency to tilt. I want to do this journey as quickly as possible and therefore the timeline and the reason as to why time is of more importance than money.
A lot of rambling in this post. If none of it makes any sense to whom ever might read it I apologize for wasting your time. I guess I wrote this more to convince myself of the greatness of my plan than anything else :)
BR is now $449.65 (10267 hands at PLO 10 Zoom), +129.33$ (All-in Adj: $125.67)
6 Comments:
SchFerreira posted on August 19, 2012 at 03:44 AM
I don't play PLO but I'm going to chime in and say that a coach of mine with alot of experience working databases and I agree that players with proper fundamentals (ie, not nits, lagtards or other type of fish-regs) will probably tend to have a higher winrate at NL100 than NL50. Rake makes that much of a difference, especially nowadays.
The thing is that back a couple of years ago the skill jumps between stakes where alot bigger than now, so even though NL100 was raked at 6 bb/100 and NL50 was raked at 10 bb/100, people were so much worse at the lower stake that you could still squeeze a bigger winrate. Now it's different since overall the edges have shrinked.
slycebu posted on August 19, 2012 at 05:08 AM
Don't take any warnings about the rake as being unsupportive - I doubt anyone who has chimed in wants to discourage you, I think we're more wanting to make sure you're well informed.
One last thing to think about - I forget which coach said it, maybe n0whereman?, but some players get an unrealistic assessment of their skill level because of the rake - i.e., "I must suck because I'm losing 2bb's/100" when realistically, independent of rake, they'd be an 18bb/100 winner, their game is not as bad as they thought.
fwiw, I'm currently playing micro PLO for the hell of it, seriously good luck on your endeavor!
P.S. I've played some zoom up to 10plo recently and switched to standard tables for the milestone hand promotion. I ran pretty well playing zoom, partly simple run good, partly recognizing how widely I could steal from co and btn (i.e., super wide except against a small percentage of players) and how widely I could 3bet from btn against co. Serious adjustments are required to play standard tables after zoom at these stakes - the games are so much looser outside of zoom. Just a thought about your plan, at some point you may want to see whether standard or zoom tables are better for you personally.
shuttle posted on August 19, 2012 at 08:20 AM
I'd highly recommend not playing microstakes zoom plo, it's a completely disgusting rake trap. If you do decide to play micro plo I'd recommend playing the regular tables where it's undoubtedly softer + has better table selection options.
I totally agree with SchFerreira's comment above, the rake really is that bad that you can win more at higher stakes in some circumstances provided your game is fairly solid.
Stengalen posted on August 19, 2012 at 13:17 PM
I appriciate the comments and advice. In no way do I feel like you are trying to discourage me. This challange just became even more interesting due to the fact that it seems difficult. We'll see how it goes!
cocacola2012 posted on August 21, 2012 at 07:17 AM
Good luck in your challenge. I just want to support you with an other constructive critique. If your total bankroll is $449.65, you are under-rolled with about 100 buyins, so unfortunately, no matter how good you play, and how hard you try, your results are going to be decided almost entirely by luck and not skill. The positive thing about it is that it's a relatively cheap learning experience in plo.
Stengalen posted on August 21, 2012 at 08:14 AM
I'm actually not that underrolled as it might seem since I'll be adding more money to the bankroll frequently. I started the challange with what I had at pokerstars since it's easier to see the total sum but that sum does not equal the total money at my disposal. But I do appriciate the comment and critique.
Log in or sign up to leave a comment!