suwasup

also, I have a deeper understanding of win rate. My average win rate is 8bb/100. that means when I have a good run and doing 50bb/100 for 1000 hands, im guaranteed to lose some later. vise versa, If I have a bad run and losing 50bb/100 for 1000 hands, im gonna win some.

I had a downswing about 2 month ago, and it was when I thought I was good at it and I was ready to beat NL50. I lost 10 buyins in 3 days. it starts with bad luck and I was not sure if I tilted and made some bad decisions. I posted my hand history on 2+2, and some people told me that I actually made a lot of wrong decisions, so I realized that im not quite there yet. I had been wining, and I think I could still win if I wasn't unlucky, but mainly because the game is soft on the site.

I stoped playing for about a month, and focus on studying GTO. and then I learned that I have to do certain things at certain points, but the result is not something I can control. for example, I understood that when villain do this kind of thing, he can have air or nuts, All I have to do is call sometimes and fold sometimes, if he has nut, I lose, but It doesn't mean I played bad. set of set? it happens, but I should go all in, it is the correct play.

Also, I realized I could not handled the loses at NL50, I will be tiled by losing 10 buyins, even 5. so I decided to move down to NL30, and build my bankroll until I feel comfortable losing another 10 buyins at NL50

polarbearandpenguin it should be more than enough as long as you fully understand every concepts it covers

plus its only $50 and you can get one month membership for free as well

Mudkip I highly recommend you to read Play Optimal Poker if you love math, those books are more math/theory toward than Modern Poker Theory. the first book is ok, its not too difficult to understand. Im currently studying the second one, and i have to say it is pretty hard for me, its not something you can understand once you read it, you have to really study it（maybe one of the reason is that English is not my first language, and its challenging for me to solve difficult problems in English ）

Anyway, I think you would enjoy POP more if you are a math nerd

The most basic class I ever took was "Crush Micro Stakes Online Poker: The Complete Mastery Guide" on Udemy. They also have a website that offer discount, feel free to check it out. This series of videos are all about basic knowledge, and I think it could help you to understand "From The Ground Up" better.

IMO, "From The Ground Up" is not for completely beginners, you need to have certain knowledge at first.

If you just want to be a regular who beat NL50, Nl30, maybe NL100, I think those two classes should be more than enough.

However, If you want to be a professional player, I think you should study GTO, and it is the only way to fully understand the game of poker from the core, but it is so boring and its like studying math. It will take you a lot of time and effort, its not worth it at all if you just want to have fun.

Here is my recommendation of learning GTO( you still need basic knowledge in order to understand these books) :

Play Optimal Poker 1&2 by Andrew Brokos: very hardcore poker theory book, it teach poker theory by using toy games, it like learning math more than learning poker.

Modern Poker Theory by Michael Acevedo: this one is more like a text book from school, it tells you the ranges, the cbet frequency, etc. more of a poker book than Play Optimal Poker.

I would recommend you to read Andrew first and then Michael.

Yes, From the Ground up is a great course! and its only $50. I ve seen it and it improved my game a lot. and im now reading his book The Grinder's Manual.

I have a thought that GTO is a required poker course. or let say the foundation of modern poker, because any imbalance, or dominated strategies, which can be exploited, are based on the deviation from nash equilibrium, which is GTO strategy.

people say you should not play GTO strategy at micro stack because your villains make too many mistakes, you should try to exploit them as much as you can. but isnt it still based on the understanding of GTO? it just their mistakes are too obvious in micro stack that you dont realize you apply GTO strategy. or GTO thought.

I just had another thought on GTO.

any imbalance, or dominated strategies, are based on the deviation from nash equilibrium, which is GTO strategy.

In another word, when you try to exploit villain, what you do is find his leak, which is where his strategies deviate from GTO strategy. and change your strategy to exploit him. but everything is based on the understanding of GTO

is this correct? if so, does it make GTO the only strategy that work? (if everyone is smart enough like super computer)

update:

I talked to someone in a group chat and found out that, unlike rock paper scissor, there are dominated strategies in NLH.(it basically means the strategies worse than the others). for example: all in with 27o all the time and fold any other hands. you will lose against GTO strategy.

dominted strategy don't exist in the game of rock paper scissor. no matter what strategies villain use, both of you will have 0EV as long as you play GTO strategy.

my guess is that NLH and RPS have different type of nash equilibrium

yea, i paid 100 dollars for it so i cant just not using it.

I mainly use Scenarios to analyst my hand when there's no one i can discuss my hand with

I still sometime use snowie to analys my whole session, simple because I have like 5000 analyst per month, why not?

I asked the same question on 2+2 before. here is the link:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/69/micro-small-stakes-pl-nl/should-i-learn-pokersnowie-1768118/?highlight=

also, what is your thought on open raise range when there is a limper who limps more than half of the time?

I can see some hands prefers checking but you might not have them in your range.

thank you for you relpy

i dont quite understand this, can you please explain it. what do you mean i dont have them in my range? is it because my 3bet frequency is not very high?

thank you for your common.

the reason for me to bet half pot size is
1) Im OOP, villain can call 1/3 PSB more often since he is IP(i find out most people would easily call 1/3 PSB with a lot of hand, thats why i dont like 1/3 PSB) . and this is all i thought at that movement. i know betting 1/3 pot size is what GTO suggest but i just dont get it especially when im oop.
2) I think this board is very good for me, I can have more Qx in my range, and villain just dont hit this board very often, so i basically cbet with everything in my range on this board. what do you think?

Not only that but we don't even need our call to be winning. It needs to make it so that we lose less than 1BB overal. Because if we just fold that's what would happen, lose a big blind.

This makes a lot of sense. Thank you very much