I put $50 on absolute and have been working the micros for a while, up and down, and quite frankly, I find the play there so bad, that if feels impossible to win. So I decided to take 50 and play way out of what I should and sat down at a .50/$1 table. The play there is more what I experience in person at my local games, and before the end of the session I was sitting at $169. A good chunk of it thanks to a guy pushing all in with AK when I had AA in the bb. Now the question is what should I play. Ring games I hate the micros, it's rediculous, and quite frankly I am a better tourney player. What should I be playing?

The reason the lower levels are bad are because all the donks *cough* KRE8R *cough* got a free 100$ sign up bonus.

I profited from my time at Absolute thank you very much!

__________________
Lots of good rakeback options at http://www.raketherake.com/?refer=RTR25126

KRE8R probably has about seventy college funds in his NL5 roll.

I used to think this same way my friend. I hope this doesnt offend you, but this is the worst possible way of looking at this. When I first started playing I had a hard time beating lower levels for all the same reasons that I am sure you are having. If you cannot beat the lower levels then you seriously need to reevaluate your play. I will admit that some people are better at higher levels than lower, but IMO you should not consider moving up until you are able to beat the lower games. The reason I say this is because your inability to beat the micros shows that you have problems adapting to those styles of games. This is going to manifest itself negatively over time when you DO try to move to higher levels. I believe your inability to beat the micros is as a result of inexperience. My advice is to play the micros on Absolute until you can beat them. Do not play underrolled! If you do this my guess is that within the next month you will be posting a "damnit, I played underrolled on Absolute and now I am busted" post in the River rats section. Not because you are bad, but because normal variance will catch up with you and you will be stuck. I could end up being wrong about this and I really hope you are able to just run up that money. Either way you have my suggestions.

Or if you could care less about cash games after all just go play tourneys (what you say your better at) and kick some ass.

__________________
Lots of good rakeback options at http://www.raketherake.com/?refer=RTR25126

KRE8R probably has about seventy college funds in his NL5 roll.

Thanks for the advice. I guess my question is, I play a cash 100nl game every wed. night and do fine there now. This isn't a bunch of donks, well some are, but it isn't your tourists that don't know how to play. It just confuses me. I am now sitting at the 2/4 limit Omaha game, way way softer than where I play. I am up almost double over my buy in. This is very perplexing, and I will have to think about this. I won't be going back to the $1NL game, but is .25/.5 ok?

Are you asking if .25..50 NL is ok?

__________________
Lots of good rakeback options at http://www.raketherake.com/?refer=RTR25126

KRE8R probably has about seventy college funds in his NL5 roll.

Yes, considering what I play during the week.

Sure if your comfortable with it. My point is simply that if you play underrolled and go busto you cant be to surprised. If you wanna gamble a little you should go for it.

__________________
Lots of good rakeback options at http://www.raketherake.com/?refer=RTR25126

KRE8R probably has about seventy college funds in his NL5 roll.

Thanks man! Online poker just seems to be so different than in person games. I need to get down to Greektown Casino and play down there.

Grats dude... happy for you...

But believe me micro are beatable... maybe not with the same strategy, but definitely you can extract heck of a BB/100 ratio...

KJ

__________________
Originally Posted by Girevik
Heck, I've seen people go nuts with middle pair!