I haven't been playing long enough to talk in technical poker terms yet, but I think you understand what I'm saying…I would have stayed in too, raised you when the Q showed up to force you to show me your strength, then it would have been really interesting on the river…

Cool blog…thanks!

The best way to get profit out of the microstakes is probably what you say, to search for donks and stack them a few times. But as you said, there isn't much to be learnt from that and not much thought that goes into it. And for me, I enjoy the game for the decision making more than the profit, so waiting to stack donks doesn't quite do it for me. Haha.

So for now (as I mentioned in the other reply), I'm experimenting with some $1 + 0.20 SNGs. I think there's a bit more thought that goes into that. Eventually I might go back to grinding at the microstakes, though. And I'll definitely be looking at your poker blog. =).

Looking at the AA vs j2 this is standard at this limit. Your value is coming mainly from pre flop and when you are min raising you kill your value.

These players don't think you bluff they just think they can get a J or 2 and win a big pot, obviously they disregard the odds but they will call and therefore you should raise more even 5x because they look at it as implied odds. (ex. If I flop a full house ill beat him)

I played about 10k hands at 0.02NL 6max running 14bb/100 (i 15 tabled) and i got a profit of 68$ net.

It's easy to bluff because they fold unless they get 2 pair or if they have a hand they raise at the 0.05nl people just slow play aces and such huge hand and never raise.

What I did is just search for the maniac donks and sit down stack them a few times and move up.

There is not much skill to be learnt at the level. at least for someone like me who has put in lots of hands and played way higher stakes online.

I am at 0.10NL now and I am crushing it so hard because I am finding the donks and making easy money. Ask any pro at the HU tables, thats all they do wait for the donks to dump off money. (what my friend tells me)

Good luck and I hope I see you on my poker blog.

As for your general comments, I think you're right. I'm playing mainly nits at 2NL. I think at these levels, the strategy really differs based on table selection. There are really nitty tables (the ones I try to look for), and there are the tables full of donks.

And yeah, I'm definitely going to have to adjust as I go higher, starting to realize that more now. Played a bit of 0.05NL, and the same strategy isn't working quite as well. I think I've gotten so used to 0.02NL that I wasn't thinking through my hands as much at 0.05NL.

I think by min-raising at 0.02NL vs tight nits, you can more or less let go a lot of hands with minimal losses, while seeing a lot of flops.

Still trying to figure out how I should be playing 0.05NL though. Seems slightly less nitty there. .

Thanks for all the advice and thoughts, though. I really do appreciate it. =). It's given me a lot to think about.

More importantly, I do not play brainless poker, I know when they have a hand and when they are trying to fish their 4-5 outers. Either a gut shot or trying to get two pair or trips with bottom pair or middle pair.

I almost folded flopped 2 pair but I just called it down. I had 78 vs 99 on a 978 board which i was certain he had 99 but I thought, I'm ahead of the range so much that I can't fold. Like when you have KK and you know the guy might have AA you get it in because your going to be ahead most of the time and it's a cooler if it's AA.

If I would ever play at a table with you I think I would destroy you just because you play so weak.

My line goes straight up with mild downswings where i got it in on a flip like ak vs 66 or ak vs qq. I don't think I have ever lost more then 1 buy in in a row.

I think variance can be reduced by smart tight play not by betting less. I think the reversed implied odds of you min raising in 0.02NL vs tight players isn't very good.

The stratagy is obviously working at 0.02NL because your playing nits and you can always find nitty tables.

The problem is that, the higher you go up the stakes the more people think. If you would ever re raise someone they need a hand or they will fold most of their range.

If you flop a set you only get action from anything higher then tptk or higher.

I think however you should stick with it for now and as you move up you will gradually change.

Though the strategy is great at higher limits because players don't just call any 2 cards that might hit a flop.

Keep up the good work, see you at the tables.

As for a check-raise on the turn. If they're on J-x would they actually bet out? I dunno, I figured someone who is just calling on the flop wouldn't bet out on the turn, especially with the overcard being dealt, and I wanted to get more value here.

On the turn, a check-raise would be pretty nice if you have them on J-x. Keep in mind that this is micro stakes, people stay in pots and flat call with top/mid pair or even high card aces… and I have no idea whether a larger pre-raise would've made MP1 give up his J2o trash hand. The majority of micro stakes players are not “thinking” players.

Believing you had the best hand on the river, value bet or check, don't overbet… assuming they know what showdown value is both players would check this, a bet would be really unusual for J-lower kicker. Really, if you pushed on the flop to try and get max value, you might be getting people with draws it would be worth the risk.

At micro stakes, it would be favourable – for me, to shove pre-flop (people call with anything suited, etc) or raise 5xBB, even if you get one caller you make more from it than min raising against two and push on the flop, pushing on the flop would be bad OOP but again, a flop like this doesn't really hurt you.

I read somewhere that “weak hands are easy to play because you know their value but aces are the hardest because you don't know their value”. Meanwhile, I'm poor on PS, lol. I hope my contribution was worth something.

Specifically, though, the three things you address. Firstly, you say you are getting very little value. Thing is, though, most of the time, I'm still able to get to a flop with 1-2 other players, and taking down the pot with cbets quite often. Maybe it's table selection, I don't know.

“you need to hit a big hand to ever bet big” Isn't that the point though? I'd think that you don't want to be betting big much with mediocre hands.

On a whole, though, yeah. I've read a lot about how you shouldn't be playing this way at the micros, but to my surprise, it's actually been working, so I don't know about whether I should change it up.

As for your example.
Here's how I would have played KK from the small blind. Raise to 6c preflop. Yes, I know it's larger than my standard min-raise, but when it comes down to just the blinds, I make it a bit larger. Essentially I'm trying to make it 2bb for the other players (especially those behind me) to call. Maybe that makes a difference? Essentially my thinking is, when I open for 2bb + 1bb per limper, the players who haven't bet preflop need to call at least 2bb. The limpers also have to call at least 2bb. Generally I don't worry much about the big blind, because I'm normally find with isolating the big blind, and playing with position on him.

I'd also have led out on the flop and the turn, and probably not gone all-in with such a huge overbet. Once it's been 4-bet I think I'd just call, and try and c-c it down for as little as possible. Essentially a small ball approach, because at the end of it, a pair of kings is still just one pair, and I try not to go all in preflop with just a pair.

I know that seems contradictory to how I played the hand in the post, but I think I would have seen the raise and re-raise as a show of strength. In the Aces hand, the opponent just called, so I didn't think he had that much.

Overall, I think playing this way would essentially require that I be willing to lay down overpair hands like this some times, or not get all-in. Maybe I won't be getting as much value as I can in the long run, but I'm also not going to get busted as much, and have lower variance.

That's my take on it, does that make sense?

And yeah, I know of the bloggers tournament. I'm playing, probably at least the ones on the 25th and 30th. Might not be able to make it on the other days. Registered using my other blog (http://derrickkwa.com) because the registration kept failing with this. Are you playing? Maybe I'll meet you there. =).

ps. You should drop me an email/im some time, I think it'd be great to have discussions with you. =).