Joined: Jan '11
Location: United States
Age: 42 (M)
Posts: 852
One leak I use to have in my game, mainly online, that I thought could be of some use to others. When I first began playing online there were so many games, and so many players, that it was really overwhelming choosing games to play in. When I would finally choose a table or two, the first thing that I noticed was that the game's online were much more aggressive and loose. I soon found myself playing much weaker than I had ever played in my life, and couldn't figure out why. It took me a few bankrolls but I soon realized that I was automatically assuming that all of the other players at my tables were donkies, my poker skill was superior, and I would run over them all. You see being a mainly alive player for most of my life, with a table full of solid, tight players I found it rather easy to spot the fish. I now have tweaked my game, and stopped assuming I'm playing with freeroll players at every table. I have now realized I had been transdonkified! Beware players, once it happened I let my game spin out of control(luckily I was laying just freerolls at the time, just really,really badly) for a long long time! Just a heads-up, some of you Mobsters may not have known, that donkeyism is contagious!
Joined: Apr '09
Location: Australia
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 6483
LMAO ! yeah I make the mistake of assuming everyone at my table is a donk as well.. My reasoning is always "well - it's nl25/nl50/nl100" how good could they really be ? If they not a donk why they still playing for peanuts ??
This line of reasoning is flawed for many reasons..
Joined: Mar '11
Location: Germany
Age: 55 (M)
Posts: 1242
Thanks for your hint. I still try to tighten up my play, because I also used to play too much hands. But slowly it ios getting better. @jess: Lol, nl 100 is playing for peanuts to you At the moment Iam sticked to Nl10 , trying to build up my bankroll
Joined: Oct '10
Location: Romania
Age: 36 (M)
Posts: 178
I made the same mistake. Everyone is stating how bad micro/low stakes players are but that's very untrue because on all sites and at most limits sharks outnumber fishes. Dont give them too much credit but don't fall in the trap of assuming all are very bad. I started at NL10 thinking I'll face playmoney type players but NL10 got it's share of regulars and it costs you a lot if you treat them as fishes. When I think back it wouldn've been better if someone told me that NL10 is very, very hard to beat so I'm prepared for the worst instead of taking it too lightly.
Joined: Jan '11
Location: United States
Age: 60 (M)
Posts: 3361
I agree BadeaCR with the micro game analysis of yours. After playing in the $1+.10 SnG' I found there were a lot of civilized players at this level. This is especially true after playing freerolls for 4 months in attempt to build a small BR plus being an inexperienced player. I actually learned that playing in the freerolls to learn the basics to the game of poker wasn't the best way to go, but that's a whole other topic. Good Luck to All!
Joined: Apr '09
Location: Australia
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 6483
Posted by MIGO14: Thanks for your hint. I still try to tighten up my play, because I also used to play too much hands. But slowly it ios getting better. @jess: Lol, nl 100 is playing for peanuts to you At the moment Iam sticked to Nl10 , trying to build up my bankroll
When I say peanuts - I mean it's not the serious stakes.. like for example - if I play at my local casino the LOWEST stakes are $2/$3
before the advent of online poker - you weren't able to multitable "grind" IRL poker - and nl100 was considered micro.. Online poker has obviously changed things - but what I mean is - regs @ nl100 aren't anything special, believe me.
------------
Posted by BadeaCR: I made the same mistake. Everyone is stating how bad micro/low stakes players are but that's very untrue because on all sites and at most limits sharks outnumber fishes. Dont give them too much credit but don't fall in the trap of assuming all are very bad. I started at NL10 thinking I'll face playmoney type players but NL10 got it's share of regulars and it costs you a lot if you treat them as fishes. When I think back it wouldn've been better if someone told me that NL10 is very, very hard to beat so I'm prepared for the worst instead of taking it too lightly.
Joined: Jan '11
Location: United States
Age: 42 (M)
Posts: 852
Posted by jessthehuman:
Posted by MIGO14: Thanks for your hint. I still try to tighten up my play, because I also used to play too much hands. But slowly it ios getting better. @jess: Lol, nl 100 is playing for peanuts to you At the moment Iam sticked to Nl10 , trying to build up my bankroll
When I say peanuts - I mean it's not the serious stakes.. like for example - if I play at my local casino the LOWEST stakes are $2/$3
before the advent of online poker - you weren't able to multitable "grind" IRL poker - and nl100 was considered micro.. Online poker has obviously changed things - but what I mean is - regs @ nl100 aren't anything special, believe me.
------------
Posted by BadeaCR: I made the same mistake. Everyone is stating how bad micro/low stakes players are but that's very untrue because on all sites and at most limits sharks outnumber fishes. Dont give them too much credit but don't fall in the trap of assuming all are very bad. I started at NL10 thinking I'll face playmoney type players but NL10 got it's share of regulars and it costs you a lot if you treat them as fishes. When I think back it wouldn've been better if someone told me that NL10 is very, very hard to beat so I'm prepared for the worst instead of taking it too lightly.
well said
What a great bunch of feedback! We could also rename this thread, when sharks attack"felted addition" lmao
, trying to build up my bankroll
