I think 4 betting to more like $4.20 to $4.30 would be better pre. Not keen on the min raise.
What made hands do we have here? AA/KK/AK/KQs and that is about it unless we are min 4 betting 66 or 44. What draw do we have? Do we 4b much beyond AQs? Maybe A5s?
What made hands does he have here? Slow played AA/Good Kx/poorly played 66 and 44 and then stuff like QQ/JJ/TT?
Which draws does he have? He's going to have some flush draws.
Our flop sizing offers too good of a price to his draw range. We don't care what he does with his set range (calls or raises are perfectly fine since we are outdrawn so rarely). What about his TP range? I don't think they call Kx pre to fold it post flop on a pretty safe board.
As played, I am going bigger on the flop (somewhere between $4 and $5) and then jamming non diamond turns and jamming on the 6d turn. This sizing attack will leave you with close to a pot sized jam behind.
To be honest, I don't even mind jamming turn with the sizing you used above. He will have a little over $17 behind with a pot of just over $13.
Aug. 24, 2022 | 8:35 p.m.
This is a spot I have experimented with quite a bit.
Create filters for the below statements:
1) C bet Flop success in Aggregate (2 handed, Single Raised Pot) = ??????
1a) WWSF when C bet Flop in Aggregate (2 handed, Single Raised Pot) = ??????
2) C bet flop success AND WWSF IP = ?????
3) C bet flop success AND WWSF OOP = ????
These numbers are easy to establish.
Next, to get a sample to compare, you need to experiment and start playing a polar strategy and adjusting as you go.
I personally added the sizing of 80% and 110% to Jurojin and started the sample. I pretty much eliminated small betting from my strategy during the sample.
When I filtered my database for when I c bet flop between 75% up to 200%, these answers I got the to above questions (so I could compare the big sizing to aggregate.
1) C bet flop success in Aggregate (2 handed, single raised pot, 75% to 200% sizing) = 62.45%.
1a) WWSF when c bet flop in aggregate (2 handed, single raised pot, 75% to 200% sizing) = 82.95%.
2) C bet flop success and WWSF IP = 64.30% and 82%.
3) C bet flop success and WWSF OOP = 55.56% and 86.34%.
I recommend giving it a try. Move down a stake or two to get used to it for a session or two.
Once you determine how often things are working, setting up the range construction becomes much easier.
In short, they are massively overfolding to it.
Give it a try. Hope this helps.
Aug. 12, 2022 | 12:17 a.m.
One of the biggest thing to consider here is the consequences of catching our "nutted" turn.
On your board, the 742r, I would mostly avoid raising 54, 43, 87, 76, 88, etc. Vs. the continue range, we make two pair when draws fill (ex. if we raise 54 and spike a 5, he fills 86 or A3).
As Shaun Pauwels mentioned, stuff like A4/A2/A7/K4/K7/K2 etc make better "merged" raises in these spots due to how much cleaner our "nutted" outs are.
Aug. 11, 2022 | 2:48 p.m.
I am assuming an in position C bet? What is the dynamic? BB vs BTN SRP?
So, something unique to the KJ2r vs the AJ2r is the presence of open ended straight draws where there can be no open enders on a AJ2 board. Also, most BB's are going to have substantially more Ax than Kx in their calling range which could be why the solver is going polar on the AJ2 board and smaller on the KJ2 board.
Aug. 5, 2022 | 5:59 p.m.
Not in love with preflop. Calling CO vs UTG 3x seems ambitious here. BTN would be fine IMO. I play 3b/fold in this high rake environment.
MW on flop, I experimented with bombing pot+ no matter if I had the initiative or not and it worked out quite well. Here it makes a ton of sense. BB has a ton of draws/weaker made hands on this board. UTG has less draws but the draws he does have pay the price. Plus, do you really think someone random player in the 10NL pool is going to fold overpairs to a large bet here? Also, vs aggression from either/both players when you bet big it makes it simple to get AI on flop.
As a side note, I think you can take the free card on one of the worst cards in the deck (the 6s closed both straights and flushes for both players). It is very very easy to be behind here.
July 30, 2022 | 8:59 p.m.
Honestly, if you plugged this into a solver, I think it will just bet flop and jam turn with this combo. We run into it sometimes but we also deny equity to stuff like JJ or AdXx.
I mean, look at the SPR. I honestly don't think there will be much EV difference between most any lines with KdKx here.
July 24, 2022 | 4:38 p.m.
He should have folded AQ on the flop. He is continuing AQdd here 100% and AQs at some frequency. Rest of the AQ should be gone from range but we all know its in there at a low frequency.
That turn is particularly bad due to QQ being in there more often than not. Suit sucks but we still have to continue vs 1/2 pot when we check. The turn also eliminates the best draw (can't have AQdd so there is very little Qx in his range).
So the Q hits some of his best draws KQ and QJ and he does have stuff like Axdd and this region of his range makes me want to bet this turn. I think he will want to check back stuff that has SD value and you still have QQ/KK/AA in your range.
This makes me think that his betting range is likely to be pretty strong.
I just can't see folding T or R here vs 1/2 pot and getting sick price on river.
July 24, 2022 | 2:42 a.m.
Most likely going about 3-5 bb larger on flop. He is not folding Jx. We split with sets. He has all KQ and at least 98s (which have pretty high equity and will certainly continue). He also has all of the overpair combos that never fold.
Following this theme, both as played and also in the scenario where we raised bigger on the flop, bigger turn.
As played, I would have just jammed. He can't have JTs so he only has JTo which may or may not be in his PF range. And if it is in his PF range, then that means he has all of the better Jx combos than JT which certainly don't fold.
I will say, I think if there is some other line than jamming river, this one would be the 2nd best (referring to the river size). Not in love with flop/turn sizing as played.
July 24, 2022 | 2:28 a.m.
In the abstract, I would default to the tighter strategy and start to increase combos gradually as you improve in redline spots. If you are able to start winning more "redline" pots, you are going to counter the rake somewhat and you are going to soften the blow of run bad.
Most microstakes games are raked between 7 to 11bb per 100 hands. That means every time you play a 200bb pot and win it, you net 189bb to 193bb. That sucks. You get hammered in the big postflop pots and you also get hammered in the small postflop pots.
So 3 betting becomes a much better option preflop (the higher the rake) because you are going to win quite often when you 3b and not get raked when you win preflop. Every time you 3b a 3x open and get a fold, you will net 4.5bb in non blind positions. This is huge when you add up pot after pot that you win preflop. Then, they call horribly in 3b pots, you are going to win a ton when you 3b pre/c bet flop (non showdown redline winnings).
Play extremely disciplined from UTG. Play disciplined MP. As you are improving, you can probably go like 13 to 15% UTG. No one is really going to catch on. I would pick a suit and raise decent connectors 25% of the time. If spades is your suit, you raise them only. If you use RNG, you can only raise when you roll between 0 to 25 AND have a connector. Drop the gappers. Drop some of the worst pairs or only raise them 33% of the time. Once you get things going in the right direction, you don't have to do much to increase your RFI. Add the small PP's back in first (my opinion, my approach only). And raise connectors 1/2 the time and you add randomness to your EP range (to those paying attention). Play tight in MP too, though not as tight as UTG obviously. Hammer the BTN, Hammer the SB and work on the BB 3b strategy vs SB and BTN and get the calls down well in the BB.
Work on XR flop from BB in SRP's. You will start picking up so many unraked and small pots and it will drastically help counter the rake.
Go into Poker Tracker and filter for Showdown and then highlight it and then click the 'Not' button. This will change it to Showdown=False. See what your bb/100 is in non showdown pots. Take whatever number you find, and make it a goal to improve that winrate by 1bb. If you are losing at -8b/100 in Non Showdown, look to get that number to -7bb/100. Keep in mind, improving just 1bb is a Massive Win.
July 22, 2022 | 1 a.m.
emsterdad I play on Ignition (Anonymous). Basically every spot is based on vacuum/pool trend analysis. I would say Ignition plays slightly worse than most sites, but most sites have the same overall pool leaks, just a smaller % of players that have substantial leaks. On trackable sites, the pool trend is still vitally important while the deviations would be made based on a comparison of your opponents stats to what the pool trends are. By this I mean, in a situation where the pool folds a spot 45% of the time but your opponent (who we have a bigggg sample on) folds the same spot 35% of the time. That is an important number to know, at least in my opinion.
I pulled some numbers from my most recent 1,000,000 hands or so. I keep a full database of all my hands on my PC but I only keep 1,000,000 or so on my laptop PokerTracker (Need Bigger Hard Drive on Laptop). In the grand scheme of things, 1,000,000 is not that much but I have studies this stuff enough to know the number I am going to give you below are very accurate.
So, there are many factors to consider when coming up with a sizing strategy. My strategy, on a site that is not trackable is simple, I raise 3x with the best hands (99+, AKs, AKo, AQs, AJs, ATs, KQs in general) from all positions. The rest of the time, lighter opens, weak steals, etc. I use a smaller sizing. Pretty simple, once I leave a table, no one knows who I am.
A friend of mine and I have spent some time on this (was some time ago, as we have decided that other spots are much more important than preflop size/range selection). You open 15% UTG or open 17% UTG, isn't going to make much of a difference.
Here are the numbers (1.28 million hands to be exact):
In steal situations, when I RFI from the BTN (no sizing filter applied) I have a steal success of 38%. I face 3 bet 17% of the time which equates to a range of 8 to 10% of hands. My WWSF is above 50% in this spot.
When I open min or 2bb, I have a steal success of 31%. I face 3b 18% and my WWSF is 52% when I min open.
When I open 3x, I have a steal success of 44%. I face 3b 14.89% and my WWSF is 51% when I 3x. I honestly expected this number to be higher, but it makes sense since the 3b range is tighter and the calling range from BB is going to be tighter.
My sample is the smallest for 2.51x to 2.99x opens (1109 hands) but my WWSF is astronomical but I am not going to read too much into that since it is tiny sample.
Here is where it gets interesting:
When I apply the filter for Position=BTN, RFI=True, RFI Sizing=2x and 99+, AKs, AKo, AQs, AJs, ATs and KQs, my winrate is 211bb/100 with WWSF 62%. With the same parameters and only changing the sizing to 3x, my winrate is 315bb/100 with WWSF of 65%.
I am using only the BTN RFI here. We did the same type of analysis for each position RFI and I encourage you to do the same.
The most interesting spot, when considering preflop 2b sizing is when we open UTG, MP or BTN and get called by IP player. Now we are seeing flops OOP and in a tough spot. In my pool, I just continue the same trend. I 3x the strong hands and usually 2x the rest. I understand that it is 100% exploitable in trackable environments but there is zero they can do in my pool. There are tons of 3x opens and also tons of 2x opens. I blend right in.
So, in short, a few things to look at:
How often do I RFI and get 3b? This is extremely important. Check your winrate. Remember, when you 2x UTG and fold to a 3b, your winrate is -200bb/100 compared to when you 3x (-300bb/100). Of course, this is when you fold. So, if you are winning -170bb/100, you are doing better than folding.
How often do I RFI and get called by IP player? How often do I WWSF in this spot? Again, this spot takes some work OOP. You need to establish how often your c bets are working. You need to examine your c betting strategy.
How often do I RFI and get called by OOP player? How often do I WWSF in this spot? These spots are typically easier to get right.
How am I doing when I call 3b or 4b with the 2x open vs the 3x open?
This is why PF charts can be deceiving. Say, some GTO chart has BTN's opening at 43% and SB 3 betting at 16%. Now, you look at your concrete data/evidence in a big sample. You see the BTN is opening 38% in aggregate. You now filter for SB 3b and it is 10% (my pool is 10%). This honestly makes sense, we should 3b tighter against a tighter range but is that really what the vast majority of the players are thinking? Probably not.
So, my advice would be that you establish the data by playing a huge sample and just pick a size and run with it for a while to build a sample. Check the data. Play another sample with a different size and compare/contrast them. In general, you are going to get 3b by a 7.5% to 10% overall range or 15% to 20% of the time.
Filter for pot size and look at your redline.
If you RFI 2x, get called by IP player and see flop 2 handed, the potsize is always going to be under 6bb, if you RFI 3x, get called by IP player and see flop 2 handed, the potsize is always going to be under 8bb. Filter for pots up to 6bb, look at your redline. Filter for pots between 6.01bb and 8bb, look at your redline. These spots suck. Keep in mind I am not including pots where there was a limper or poster.
Hope this helps.
July 22, 2022 | 12:37 a.m.
HodorIsKing I think the concept of Wizard is great. Having so many solutions at your fingertips that pop up in seconds is great. IMO the drawback to it is that the ranges are static and there is no node locking available. PIO can get expensive. I have never used GTO+ but I assume it will do the same things as PIO. I prefer PIO's interface to GTO+.
I usually have one instance of PIO going with a sim that I don't adjust or play with (It would be comparable to a Wizard Solution). Then I open another instance of PIO, adjust the ranges (adding in some combos or subtracting combos from the ranges) and then making node locks or subtree configurations (adding in more bet sizes on the turn/river) and compare the two side by side.
It can be very eye opening how things change from slight changes to how realistic opponents typically approach a spot.
July 19, 2022 | 8:18 p.m.
FWIW I like your line. I can see betting bigger on flop. Hard to see a scenario where we are not pushing 45% or more equity vs his made hand range. Where we benefit from the jam is what happens to the draw portion of his range. BB cold callers are typically not regs and I don't think it is unreasonable to see all KQ, QJs and QTs here (especially the pair+draw). He will have KJss almost always. KTss often, etc. What about T9ss, 98ss, 87ss, 76ss???
We put ourselves in a position where if he calls the draws, we are happy and we are also happy if we slash his equity to zero when he folds the draws.
July 19, 2022 | 4:14 a.m.
Do you have a solver like GTO+ or PIO to go along with Wizard? A good way to learn is to run the solve in your own solver with similar parameters and then compare the two (perfect play vs reality play).
Wizard is going to play perfectly where in reality, the opposite is true. You need to be able to lock the node and determine what is happening in reality.
There are interesting things you can find and I certainly am not downing Wizard. A simple way thing to do is:
1) Run an aggregation report to establish how often BB is "allowed" to check/fold vs a BTN c bet.
2) Jot this number down.
3) Compare the aggregate GTO fold to c bet % to your own c bet success in this node (BTN vs BB SRP).
4) Say your Wizard report is folding 38% in aggregate across all of the flops. You then go to your database and see that your c bets are having a success (in aggregate again in this dynamic) of 50%. That is a big big difference. They are overfolding. What part of their range is the overfold coming from??
5) You would then go into PIO and run a sim similar to Wizard. You don't need 8 bet sizes per street, use a few or choose one size based on the typical sizing being used by the pool of players.
6) Your sim should have very similar numbers to what you get in Wizard.
7) You would then lock the node and have them folding more often (what is going on in reality). Now you have something.
8) Next, I would play a sample and experiment. Say you are using 50% sizing. Size down to 40% and see what happens to their fold percentage. Do they realize they are getting exploited and adjust? Or, my preference is to experiment with bigger sizing than what people are used to. Check the bigger size in Wizard, run a sim with a bigger c bet size and start the process over again.
July 19, 2022 | 3:50 a.m.
Bigger pre. He 3b to 10bb, I would 4b to 21 to 23bb in general.
Not folding in this line post flop. if you went X/B/B and faced a raise on river, you could fold I assume. You don't look particularly strong here and he will VB worse and have bluffs here.
Imagine how easy it is to bluff you if you are folding in this line.
July 19, 2022 | 3:31 a.m.
Based on the line, one part of me wants to bet to get value from Jx, QQ/TT and some worse Ax (lets face it, this type will have A5/A2/worse Ax at some frequency. I don't think Jx, QQ/TT go for thin value if you check but will call if you bet. I think you get called by worse Ax sometimes too. The other thinking would be that he has club draws or worse hands that have to bluff.
In practice, I think either option is probably going to be fine with the proper judgement if he makes a big move.
As for preflop, I would stick to ATs+, AQo+ and like A5s/A4s with the latter combos being able to flop better. This guy doesn't fold much (could be sample size thing). If he is truly continuing over 1/3 of the time, I would take a different approach vs him preflop where I can confidently fold "bluffs" vs 4b and my top end is designed to never fold when I get 4b.
July 19, 2022 | 3:22 a.m.
I think you can bet turns a lot............just not on the non-club K or Q turns. I would bet J turns, Maybe check T turns.....and I would understand that almost all suited Ax is in his range and be prepared to get rid of this if he gets crazy on 9-2 turns or rivers vs. out value bets.
As for the hand in a vacuum, I think he will have all 2 pair on this turn. I think he has J9s here. Obviously we block it. I think you will see AK once in a while based on the pool not always 4 betting it.
If would call most non K/Q rivers facing a bet this size. Here, I would imagine this call is break even at best (might be worth a note if your sample is big) and probably worse than we think in reality.
July 19, 2022 | 3:03 a.m.
This of it this way. Vs QQ+, AK (pretty confident these are all going to play as a 5 bet All In in BvB situations) you have 36% equity. In general you have a break even call based on the math.
That range is unblocked and has 34 combos. That is @ 2.8% of all combos. I am making an assumption here, but he is 3 betting at least 10% of the time. The entire range is 115 to 130 combos (depending on how it is constructed). That means he is folding a TON vs 4b or he is making plays with dominated pairs or unapired holdings that only increase your equity.
So, when you take a break even play and couple it with the stacks of chips you scoop when he folds, you are doing just fine. I think you will find that you will encounter more AQs or TT than you think, so when you factor in some domination and more of a range that is unpaired (AQs) you will do even better.
I think I would draw the line at JJ with my paired hands. Maybe TT vs a guy who is 4 betting this often. I would incorporate stuff that blocks his 5 betting range and blocks him having AK......KQo, AQs and AQo are a good place to start.
July 19, 2022 | 2:51 a.m.
Before you get too far into your analysis, how often are your C Bets in 3b pots successful in this dynamic? In general, its going to be somewhere between 35 to 40% depending on site/pool/stake. Won't fluctuate too much more up or down from that range.
So, if you are going to approach this from a high frequency approach, you are likely to fine mostly betting here. I would mostly bet this. We benefit from getting folds from something like 76s or some other combo drawing super live against your pair. I would be selective with my checks and consider checking Tx since it is less vulnerable against middling cards and could extract from their turn bluffs/thin value bets better than A4s which we likely end up folding on a ton of turns.
If you choose the more polar route, we can certainly bet big with TPTK+ but that is still a ton of combos. A4s probably still makes it in there to try to protect/get value when he has 65s and 76s.
July 19, 2022 | 2:25 a.m.
Checking river is probably best.
I am curious yehudi how big of a sample this guy is playing 12/7/0 over. Is it 100 hands? 1000 hands???
July 10, 2022 | 5:37 p.m.
Here are some numbers for thought (from Ignition, which is historically passive). This is from a 10+ million hand pool filter in PT4.
They probe turn 36.61% of the time (low end being MP which was 35.64% and high end being BB which is 37.18%). Very consistent between all positions.
The pools fold to T probe is 52.11% and the pools raise T probe is 10.2%.
There is massive incentive to probe turns based on these numbers.
If I add a filter where I make the probe bet 0 to 50% of pot, they are still folding 51.25% of the time. If I change the probe sizing to 50.01% to 100% pot, they are folding a whopping 71.19% of the time.
One way to investigate the is to run two instances of PIO; #1 being a standard GTO sim and the other we would lock in the pools turn probe % and see how the strongest hands in our range react compared side by side.
Even though the pool is passive, it is worth investigating because there are subtle "facts" that you can establish based on big samples of data.
Welcome into the forums!!!!!
July 10, 2022 | 5:34 p.m.
I would suggest setting up a filter in HM or PT and analyze your c bet success based off of sizing ranges (make sure you isolate single raised pots). In your case, I would filter for 0 to 34.99% pot sizing and jot down my c bet success, I would then filter for 35% to around 69.99% and jot down my c bet success and then I would do 70%+ and see how successful my c bets are. I would also take it one further and try to establish how often I win the hands based on the various sizing ranges.
Remember, when you bet 1/3 pot, you need to win on that node 25% of the time to print. When you bet full pot, you need to win on that node 50% of the time to print. In general, you are typically going to fall somewhere in between that range most of the time as far as sizing goes.
June 17, 2022 | 7:34 p.m.
It depends on several things (the pool, the specific players if you have stats, how often your steals work, how often you face 3/4/5 bets, etc.)
If I had substantial stats on you, I would adjust to your preflop play in a very simplistic way:
You VPIP very tightly, so I would fold more when in non-blind positions, I would 3b you super polar, I would be super tight vs. any 3bet+ from you. When in the blinds, I am going to call you more (you have a condensed range that will stack off more often when I flop big against you, think set vs AA on Qxx board). When it comes to 3 betting from the SB, I am going to study my 3b success vs you very closely. When you are in the BB, I am going to go after you A TON when I raise first in from SB when you are BB, from BTN when you are in the blinds and from CO when you are in BB.
That said, if you are not facing too many regs or playing anonymous, you are going to be less predictable.
I think anything between 19 to 25% VPIP and 15 to 19 PFR and 6 to 9% 3b is a good range to look to achieve. What you will learn and realize along the way is that there will be stretches where you just can't do much due to bad card distribution and you will run super tight and then when you are on the good side of distribution, you will have much higher VPIP stats.
Tightening up somewhat is incentivized in most pools. A typical GTO raise first in range from the BTN is around 43% or so (that is 1326 available combos X 43% which is @ 570 combos). My pool opens 37% from the BTN (that is 1326 available combos X 37% which is @ 490 combos). Still a lot of combos, but that is 80 less combos they are opening in the "real world". How should we adjust to that fact (at least it is a fact in my pool). What would your adjustment be?
June 10, 2022 | 8:43 p.m.
What is your winrate when you raise first in and face 3 bet?
What is your typical RFI sizing?
How often are you facing 3 bets from the different positions?
June 5, 2022 | 2:42 a.m.
So, aside from a weak Ah, we don't have much with A2-A5 suited here. Any of the combos with BDDF hate to bet/fold (pretty good backdoor equity/potential), while A2-A5 of spades is a higher frequency bet here IMO as it is an easy combo to bet/fold (I am confident a small bet will work often enough here. We are going to get called by draws that go x/x and we show down a winner sometimes and they are simply going to fold too often that it will work out better to bet the vast majority of the time here.
June 1, 2022 | 11:16 p.m.
Raidion We can help you pinpoint potential troubling areas but we will need some data to help us help you.
How big is your overall sample?
There are some filters you will need to run in PT4/HM/DriveHUD/ETC Apply the following filters and we will need the following stats to start to narrow it down (WWSF and BB/100).
Saw Flop and Number of players seeing flop=3
Saw Flop and Number of players seeing flop=4
Saw Flop and Number of players seeing flop=5 to 6
In general, you want a WWSF of 50%+ in heads up pots, WWSF of 33%+ in 3 way pots, WWSF of 25%+ in 4 way pots and so on.
I have not played very much this year, but in 3 way pots this year my WWSF is 32.71% (close to the goal) but my BB/100 is 154.4 and my adjusted is 141.72.
Lifetime (26,000+ 3 way hands), I am 99.98bb/100 (adjusted is basically the same) and my WWSF is 31.21%.
May 29, 2022 | 6:32 p.m.
Since those videos have been made, most people realize that good baseline preflop ranges can be found all over the internet (Zenith, Upswing, etc.).
Preflop mistakes are less costly.......made a polar 3b in a spot where the button folds 55% of the time and faced a 4b? Who cares, fold and move on.
Just get some free ones (Snowie's are kind of tight and weird but still solid). You won't be very far off. You will start to say "I can be a bit more polar here since I know he folds a lot" or you will say "hand is too good to 3b BTN vs CO because I have to fold to a cold 4b BUT, both of these guys squeeze 3% of the time" I will call and take my chances.
This stuff comes with experience. Small preflop mistakes can be mitigated by not paying off postflop and also playing a solid aggressive strategy when you 3b light and get lucky.
May 27, 2022 | 11:20 p.m.
Before you look to improve that line, what are you blue and green lines doing?
One thing you have to realize is that many of the calls you get down in the smaller stakes turn into folds as you move up. So, when you bet top set and they pay off with 2nd pair, which line do you want that bet to hit? In this case, we don't want them to fold. Now, look at it from the other side, we know they call too much so should we bluff more often or less often when we are getting called more often?
The redline is a measure of how many folds you get. In a pool that pays off to much, the focus should be on finding the value betting threshold (perhaps you should be value betting thinner). By value betting thinner, you are going to accomplish two things: they are going to fold more and you are likely to still get paid off often enough with worse to offset the times you take blue line hits by value cutting yourself.
May 27, 2022 | 11:13 p.m.
In short, yes those games are wreckable. Expect to pay roughly 10bb/100 rake at 5 and 10NL and about 8bb/100 on 25 and 50NL on Ignition/Bovada. Once you get to 100NL, rake will play less of a factor and will continue to be less of a factor as you rise in stakes.
I would suggest 4 tabling 10NL regular speed tables. Less volume but you will find some of the worst players on earth in these games so they are highly lucrative. I will add that you have to have a solid mental game state because they games will be volatile and you will suffer bad beats, bad nights, bad weeks but if you stick with it and keep improving, you will jump quickly.
Plus, you can run a HUD and tag guys in real time as you go.