Ladbrokes: 241 dollars
Pacific: 240 dollars
Total: 481 dollars
MOVING ON UP.
I decided to take the plunge and move up a level on Pacific and I've been playing .50/1.00 for the last week. The general standard and style seems much the same as on the .25/.50 tables. Lots of tables and lots of folks seeing the flop - generally around 50% - which is way too high of course. Strangely enought the variance hasn't been that much different to what I found on the lower tables. I've been over 240 and back down to the 220's, then recovered again. The same steady game that I have been using on the lower limit seems to be working ok. The same habit of chasing down any straight or flush opportunity, however remote, also still seems to apply.
My hand of the week was two jacks under the gun, which tripped up on flop (Jc 8c 2h). I still had three folk calling me when the turn produced Qc (not thrilling). I bet and was raised (2 left now). The river was 7d. I bet again and was raised and called that with another limper and took the hand for 19 dollars, which is the most I have made on one hand I think. They both had two pair.
I've recently been following the Poker (and life, the universe and everything) blog of Pete Birks - a chap I know from the Diplomacy scene. While he has been active in Diplomacy circles since the 70's, Pete, has been equally well known in the Poker world since that time. You can find lots of stuff by him if you put "Pete Birks poker" into Google. His day job is financial journalism, but he also writes for various Poker sites. (You can find his blog at http://www.livejournal.com/users/_pjb_/). The reason I'm mentioning him, apart from the fact that he writes interesting stuff related to Poker, is that his "game of choice" for making money is Limit Hold 'em at the 3/6 dollar and 5/10 dollar level. Now this is interesting, as I have at various times flirted with the idea of developing a No Limit game like "J" and "The Edge" and others. However I am now thinking that if Limit works nicely for someone as experienced as Pete, then why should I be looking at anything else?
red mist
8 years ago
2 comments:
Perhaps the key is not the game you play but how way you play it.
There is nothing wrong with limit so far as im concerned.
Alot of people slag it off but thats only because they cant play it very well.
Having said that I do quite enjoy the money in NL.
Yes there do seem to be bigger profits in No Limit if you can get a game together that works (as you have done). I think Limit just suits my style - I don't like the idea of being totally committed to just one hand as seems to happen at NL. Temprementally I like Limit, because I can shrug off the "bad beats" in the knowledge that if I keep my game solid I will win over time.
Post a Comment