Re: rules the same...

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down. 
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think? 
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when
holding 33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled.  If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people.  A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand. 
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table.  So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that confideny about their abilities,
why
wont
they put their money where their mouths are?

Maybe they don't have the money to play higher limits ... ?


A dig at those 'highly-skilled big winners' who only play play at mirco
limits.

If they are consistantly big time winners at mirco-limits, won't they
have
enough bankroll to move up?

I guess I'm one of those guys, although I never have made any claims to
being "highly skilled". I haven't really played much beyond 1/2 NL or
5/10 Limit, but that's because I am the sole provider for my family, so
the extra money I make playing goes to bills, holidays, birthdays, etc,
and not to expanding my bankroll much. If I could afford to not withdraw
money, I'm sure I could build up a nice roll and challenge 2/4 NL and
10/20 limit and beyond.

On a more serious note, to point out that poker is not only about the
right
play
with cards, ie., push with good hand, fold with crap hand, it is also
about
people. A lot of the times its also about the percentage of the time
when
you
think you can get the other person to fold a better, but marginal hand.
This
much harder to do on a mirco-limit table than it is on a medium limit
table. So
although rules might be the same, the game almost certainly isn't.

It's not harder to do at all. At every level I've played, I've found
people who call too much and people who fold too much. You might find it
weighted towards "calling too much" at the lower levels, but that doesn't
make bluffing more difficult, it just means you have to be more selective.

I personally think that every game is different, and is based on the
personalities of the people you are seated with. Maybe you find that at
lower limits you get many more calls than folds, so that makes
value-betting the main strategy. But value-betting is just as much a
skill as bluffing, it is just a different skill.

Being able to beat any game requires skill.

And it always irks me when some middle stakes bozo turns up his nose to
lower-stakes players claiming "it's not the same game". I always think
those people are delusional, and typically they tend to think they are
better than they actually are.


~ MysteriAce

"Get up offa that thing,
and dance 'till you feel better" - James Brown, 1933-2006

Coming from a 1-2pl player it makes it all the more ludicrous. The stakes are
always relative.

On Mar 1 2007 5:11 PM, jd00123 wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 1:29 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 12:01 PM, Nick Wool wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 6:50 PM, MysteriAce wrote:

On Mar 1 2007 11:38 AM, Nick Wool wrote:

...for mirco limit players?

At least that what some 'highly-skilled, big winners' would have us
believe.

Yes, the card-rankings are the same, and the best hand wins at
show-down.
But
if that is all there is to poker, it becomes rather simple, don't you
think?
How many hands actually get to show-down unless its passive when no
one
holds
anything much, or when two big hands clash?

Lets say you have an average income, is it really the same decision
when
you
are
asked to call for your stack of $2000 as it is for $1 when holding
33 on
a
flop
of 457 rainbow?

A lot of mirco limit players talk a very good game, and think
themselves
as
highly- skilled. If they are that c