Jump to content

the 10/20 limit guy who started with $1000


Recommended Posts

Well, although he worded it as vaguely as humanly possible, I think it is a generally true statement that the better players migrate to NL in the online world. You will find a lotttttt more suckers bleeding a couple bets at a time in the limit games. The good players realize this, but then also realize they can bleed 10 or 30 or 100 big bets off the same morons in NL. They ARE harder to find in the NL world though. No limit is where most of the moneys at...unless you are a highly specialized limit player, or a very good heads up player.
This is just so not true.Most of the grinders that I know of that are making in the mid to high 6 figures online play mostly limit. It's a more robust game.The idiocy of these guys on this forum astounds me. You have this yoda guy that has probably never played higher than $50 NL and isn't a winning player making broad generalizations of where the money's at. Huh?
Link to post
Share on other sites
I talked to this guy on AIM, he wasn't joking. Here's some excerpts from the conversation (he's konidias)
Okay, I thought I made it clear already that I wasn't joking. You don't have to go and post chat logs like a little b*tch.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I talked to this guy on AIM, he wasn't joking. Here's some excerpts from the conversation (he's konidias)
Okay, I thought I made it clear already that I wasn't joking. You don't have to go and post chat logs like a little b*tch.
but everything you said was just so hilariously dumb i had to
Link to post
Share on other sites
I talked to this guy on AIM, he wasn't joking. Here's some excerpts from the conversation (he's konidias)
Okay, I thought I made it clear already that I wasn't joking. You don't have to go and post chat logs like a little b*tch.
I agree with you there. Private conversations should remain private. I wouldn't want what I said to Ron_Mexico in a private chatroom being repeated on here.
Link to post
Share on other sites
This doesn't really prove anything, but arguably the two best players in the strat section of this forum play limit simply because they prefer it. Aseem has said NL is too volatile and to the best of my knowledge Screech does not play NL very often.Both these players have the ability to play NL, they simply PREFER limit.Sorry screech if this isn't true for you but i'm 99% sure it's true for Akishore.
Don't forget about Smash, arguably the best player on this site. He crushes limit games up to at least 10/20 online. Personally, I disagree with the statement that the best players migrate to NL. I think that the best NL players migrate to NL because it's what they're good at, and the best limit players migrate to limit because it's what they're good at.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, the OP wasn't joking. And the debate about quality of players in Limit vs. NL is just kind of silly.It would seem to most seasoned players that the OP is fooling himself about his BR management ability.I think his point, though, was that he just does better at higher limits. I'm guessing that his style is better suited to a higher limit game. This style, I presume, is a conservative, TAG-like approach. Of course there are less suckouts when players have to pay some real $ to see cards. Yes, he will get paid off less, but he's decided he can live with that. Anyways, there are enough games going and enough donkish players online to feed him bets or respect his bluffs even if he is generally playing straightforward - even transparent - poker.He could definitely run bad. At that limit, especially in shorthanded games, it can get costly if you don't have some game. Or he could just get into some tougher games that he's not really ready for. He's out on a limb, BR-wise. If he's not willing to adjust, he's in for heartbreak. Then again, he is playing and beating shorthanded games, so he must be doing something right. I suspect that he's improving along the way. And he's building his BR to absorb the inevitable shocks. Yes, it's a tough place to learn - but if that's what he's doing, more power to him. Sure, most players develop their skills at microlimits and move up gradually as their skills and BR allow. I think it's the way to go. But I wouldn't be so quick to fault someone just because he's willing to play out on a limb, especially if he's really adjusting to the game and improving. That's not to say that his mentality doesn't generally pay lots of people's bills.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i just made big post on my blog about bankroll management stuff.although i doubt the guy playing 10/20 right now will care or read it....i'd recommend it.but whateer, if he does'nt care about 1k, then he doesn't care about 1k.- Jordan

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, although he worded it as vaguely as humanly possible, I think it is a generally true statement that the better players migrate to NL in the online world. You will find a lotttttt more suckers bleeding a couple bets at a time in the limit games. The good players realize this, but then also realize they can bleed 10 or 30 or 100 big bets off the same morons in NL. They ARE harder to find in the NL world though. No limit is where most of the moneys at...unless you are a highly specialized limit player, or a very good heads up player.
Do you realize how completely retarded that rationale is?If good players were to all 'migrate' to NL, the money certainly wouldnt be there.Do you see why?
Link to post
Share on other sites
SSHE will not work for 10/20 just so you know.
would you please explain ~ i would love to read this answer
well it really depends on how tough the games are. In SSHE they assume you are going to be the most aggresive at the table. in 10/20 (a lot of times) you are not the most aggresive. This can reek havoc on your post flop play. Also playing certain hands that you can not play profitably if there are only 3 people to a flop versus 5-8 like in a small stakes game.
Link to post
Share on other sites
SSHE will not work for 10/20 just so you know.
Yes it canThere are many medium stake games (10/20 - 30/60) that I have seen play like 2/4. Its not about the stakes, its about the players.
Indeed, 10-20 and 20-40 on doylesroom.com plays like a bad live 3-6 game, 6 to 7 players to the flop, 3 or 4 to the turn...Its nutzo. Theres also a live 30-60 game at the local casino in which retired millionaries donk off a few K a day. Conversely, Ive noticed full handed 2-4 games on fcp/pokerroom playing like 100-200. Its odd.Short handed limit on 50bb is retarded. U need 2 conditions to survive that.Horrible players and the cards holding up for you.Doesnt sound like much, but a combination of the two is extremely hard to come by.I cant really critisize though because I took my shot long ago playing 4-8 short handed on 1K, tore it up and never looked back. The difference between 120bb and 50bb is enormous though, I would never play a game, especially short handed without at least 100 bets.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I talked to this guy on AIM, he wasn't joking. Here's some excerpts from the conversation (he's konidias)
Okay, I thought I made it clear already that I wasn't joking. You don't have to go and post chat logs like a little b*tch.
I agree with you there. Private conversations should remain private. I wouldn't want what I said to Ron_Mexico in a private chatroom being repeated on here.
We might get on an FBI watch list.Even better is the guys name.NAMBLA GamblaEveryone know what NAMBLA is?NorthAmericanMan BoyLoveAssociationThis is true.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I played with Namble Gambla some where along the way, and didn't like it.He either supports/belongs to a very sick group of individuals, or, he is willing to associate himself with the name, which is prolly even dumber.And, he posts private communications?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, its nowhere near impossible that Konidias would win the way he's playing. If he's been winning, as he says he has, he's not playing with 1k any more. He's probably got 3K which is 150 BB which could easily survive a swing here and there.Now if he keeps going up limits, and decides to move to 30/60, as soon as he gets 3K, then sure he'll go borke eventually, but there's no reason he couldn't survive and prosper at 10/20 with the BR he's playing with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You know, its nowhere near impossible that Konidias would win the way he's playing. If he's been winning, as he says he has, he's not playing with 1k any more. He's probably got 3K which is 150 BB which could easily survive a swing here and there.
It's never impossible for a winning player to play indefinitely at a given limit. Even with as little as a 5BB buy in. The probability is incredibly low, but it's possible.The issue is that based on what he's said, he seems like he's almost definitely a losing player. He could be playing with a 1000BB bankroll and he'd still go bust eventually.
Link to post
Share on other sites
You know, its nowhere near impossible that Konidias would win the way he's playing. If he's been winning, as he says he has, he's not playing with 1k any more. He's probably got 3K which is 150 BB which could easily survive a swing here and there.
It's never impossible for a winning player to play indefinitely at a given limit. Even with as little as a 5BB buy in. The probability is incredibly low, but it's possible.The issue is that based on what he's said, he seems like he's almost definitely a losing player. He could be playing with a 1000BB bankroll and he'd still go bust eventually.
This may well be true, but I haven't heard one thing to critique his play the whole thread. It's all, bankroll management this, bankroll management that. I was just pointing out that if he's up to 150 BB, and he's staying at 10/20, it's probably not going to be BR management that makes or breaks him.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  I was just pointing out that if he's up to 150 BB, and he's staying at 10/20, it's probably not going to be BR management that makes or breaks him.
Agreed. That's kind of what I was getting at myself awhile back. If he's up to that 150 BB, then he's already insulated his BR from a typical shock. The real problem is whether he was over his head in the first place and has overestimated his ability based on the results from a few sessions. That would spell disaster. Stepping down levels after a downsizing - which is what a lot of reasonable players do all the time- doesn't seem to be an option, either.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I started my 10/20 play with a $2000 bankroll and was fortunate to win over $4000 in the first month of play. If I had to do it over again, I would try to start with at least $4000. 200 BB seems about decent to start with if you aren't figuring that you'll have to immediately take money out of it to pay for living expenses. It also depends on your playing style. When I first started, I played a little bit more conservative style than I do now only so that my fluctuation/variance was low enough to handle any unfortunate swings I might have taken. I have been playing for a living (have had no outside income aside from poker) for almost a year and a half. I've stuck to 10/20, 20/40, and 30/60 games and can relate to the experience of feeling like it's impossible to lose a few thousand dollars playing in a 10/20 game, but really it is not. No matter how good you think you are, you will suffer horrendous losing streaks that can potentially damage your poker psyche. Understanding this up front helps you endure them later. Never think you're invincible ... humility will get you a long way in this profession.Regarding the limit/no-limit discussion, I prefer to play limit because I enjoy the comfort of being able to make mistakes that don't cost me a lot of chips. I play no-limit every now and then, and am a winning player at no-limit, but I prefer limit because you're not forced to make decisions for all your money. I think it's just easier for my personality type to handle as well. I also believe that the difference between limit and no-limit is like the difference between 7 card stud and Omaha H/L ... they are two completely different games with completely different strategies. Trying to compare play at both of them can be hard if you don't realize how different they are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...