Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is it worth learning at super low stakes?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is it worth learning at super low stakes?

    Does it make sense to learn at super low stakes like 1c/2c and 2c/5c. Or, are these games really random and end up creating bad habits and poor play?

  • #2
    You'll encounter a huge amount of crazy plays. As long as you don't start trying to imitate what they are doing you'll be fine.

    Stick to putting into practice what you're learning and you'll be fine.

    They're the softest games so they're a great place to start.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by LondonImp View Post
      You'll encounter a huge amount of crazy plays. As long as you don't start trying to imitate what they are doing you'll be fine.

      Stick to putting into practice what you're learning and you'll be fine.

      They're the softest games so they're a great place to start.
      I guess it's a case of not over reacting if these crazy plays come off and essentially playing my game. Suppose putting them on ranges and seeing if I was correct isn't an option. It's more don't worry about their actual hand and worry about playing the situation correctly, even if wrong in that moment. Seems like it could be more profitable (as a %) playing at higher stakes

      Comment


      • #4
        Playing a strong, exploitative (not exploitable - very different) strategy is the most profitable strategy in poker. It's at the lowest stakes where opponents make the biggest mistakes, so you can exploit to the max and have the biggest bb/100 return.

        It's definitely less profitable playing at higher stakes. We make money in poker when our opponents make mistakes, this simply happens less and less as you move up.

        Comment


        • Jeremy M
          Jeremy M commented
          Editing a comment
          Is it safe to say though that if you dont have the fundamentals to identify and implement exploits appropriately that youre just lighting your money on fire? And that we should be able to be, perhaps, more profitable at the micro stakes by first learning and understanding something that resembles GTO? And maybe incorporating some obvious general player pool exploits , IE - RFI wayyy more often on a table that plays 5% of hands? Ive sat at one or two tables where it seemed appropriate to open literally 100% of hands and just sat and raked blinds.

        • LondonImp
          LondonImp commented
          Editing a comment
          Yeah, you're 100% right. An active-exploit is an adjustment from a fundamental strategy. By it's very definition, without at least a basic understanding of the fundamentals then how can you possibly hope to intentionally deviate? When we don't know what we're doing when we're making our decisions then we are generally losing money.

          Even at the microstakes without a fundamental understanding of poker you will not be a winning player.

          We can still passively exploit our opponents simply by making less mistakes then them. If we know an opponent is doing something incorrectly but we don't know how to adjust our strategy to take advantage of this, then by just playing a sound strategy we will still profit against them. Just not by as much as if we can make an active-exploit.

          There's no substitute for hard work in poker. We need to get our heads down and work work work.
      Working...
      X