Begginer's luck vs. beating fish at the micro stakes

Hello. I've been lurking around here for a while but never posted before.

My background: I played limit for a couple months or so before the US-legislation went through, getting $40 up a bit over $100, but then they wouldn't let me play and I cashed out (and didn't really even think about looking for other places.)

Recently, I remembered I never actually looked around for a new site and decided to deposit $40 at Stars. I picked up the ol' limit game pretty fast, but got kinda bored with it (mostly realizing how much more I could be getting out of the big hands) and started trying NL again. I got stacked a few times at first (this was my general experience with NL at this point) but hey, how else will you learn to fold? Well, I kept at it and have settled into playing 2nl 6max, made back the money I lost at first and have been holding a steading upward rate since I got going.

Now, here's my question (sorry it took so long to get to): I've been very skeptical about my skill level, always worrying it's just variance. However, I'm starting to think maybe it's just the micro stakes and people not knowing how to play poker. Is a few way weeks too short to judge my play (playing at least a couple hours a day 1-2tables)?

I've read a couple limit books, and I think I grasp odds and position pretty well, and I've learned a lot more about post-flop play switching to 6max. I know I'm just mucking around at the bottom of the bottom but, damn, can it really be this easy? I keep working on my game and keeping discipline, but in the back of my head I keep waiting for the floor to drop out underneath me and realize I had holes to plug.

Hmm, sorry if that wasn't terribly focused, I guess better posting than lurking

edit, sorry, yes, the microstakes are very beatable, but there is also much variance involved. judge your winrate at 10k hands or so.

welcome to ftr btw.

Poker is not easy, however I think anyone who takes the time to learn the game (and if you are in these forums apperantly you are) who is disciplined enough to have strict bankroll management can beat micro limits. Even in micro limits you can have variance hit you in the face, you need to log in a few thousand hands to start having an idea of where you stand.

If you are serious about the game spend some time reading the beginner circle and the NL forums, post some hands that you had trouble with (doesnt matter if you win or lose them), I have a feeling you will do fine

And welcome to FTR

I'm feeling a bit more grounded again after hitting some negative variance again I think I was just getting nervous waiting for a more believable winrate. I have been spending a lot of time in the beginner digest and trying to soak up as much as I can, but a lot of it takes multiple readings, and it's hard to focus on applying too many things at once, but I'm definitely seeing the good it's doing for my play.

Much thanks for your replies! I've played 3165 NL hands since I turned the hand history logging on, I don't remember when that was though. (edit: oh, the date is in the logs :P that was in 11 days) I guess I'll just keep at it then.

Recently I ran for about 3k hands at 6-max 10NL with a win rate of one full buyin ($10) every 100 hands on average. (50 ptbb/100 for those familiar with that notation).

I promptly hit variance and stupidity and lost a good chunk of it again, of course.

Anyone will tell you that that kind of win-rate is not sustainable (me included), but at the microstakes where people sometimes play completely headlessly insane win-rates are possible, especially in the short term. A lot of the time, people really are that stupid. Someone on here has a sig that reads to the effect that you cannot get owned at microstakes, you can only own yourself (through stupidity, inattention, lack of discipline etc).

The best thing you can do for your game is probably divorce your thinking from the idea that winning money is important. I'm still working on that. I still get warm fuzzies when my bankroll ends up rather than down. What is important is that you know what your opponent is holding without being shown and make correct positive EV decisions every time you are put to a decision. Your measure of success for a session should not be if your bankroll goes up or down, but whether you make the right decisions in the situations you are presented.

Thanks Erpel, your post pretty much covered all the things I've been thinking but wasn't sure about. Poker is pretty nerve-wracking trying to figure out by yourself. I put in another 2k hands this last week and I tightened up a bit on my opening hands and I now feel a lot more secure about my play. I think I was playing just a bit too loose for how aggressive I have been trying to play, and that's what I was nervous about.

Originally Posted by Erpel

The best thing you can do for your game is probably divorce your thinking from the idea that winning money is important.

I have been trying hard to think of playing poker as putting in time for experience rather than working for money. This has helped me a LOT getting back in after having losing sessions.

I think for now the biggest thing I need to worry about is watching myself better when trying to beat the super laggy players. It's too easy to hit big once and then loosen up and wind up screwing yourself out of your winnings and then the rest of your stack. But, on the positive side, I'm still up even after all my mistakes (alongside their suckouts) and they're still there throwing money away, so I guess I can't complain.

Wow, just thinking about all I learned in2k hands since this post makes me very excited about the coming weeks.