http://www.liquidpoker.net/


LP international Poland latinoamerica Iceland    Contact            Users: 145 Active, 19 Logged in - Time: 23:43
Poker News










LP Pokerstars Avatars:



unpronounceable name

New to LiquidPoker? Register here for free!
rss
Ship bankroll +15% yo
  rgfdxm, Nov 06 2007

PokerStars Tournament #65238053 'Sunday Hundred
Grand [$11 NLHE, 10m levels]'
Buy-In: $10.00/$1.00
18572 players
Total Prize Pool: $185,720.00

Tournament started - 2007/11/04 - 15:30:00 (ET)

Dear Beelzenef,

You finished the tournament in 386th place.
A $74.29 award has been credited to your Real Money account.

Congratulations!
Thank you for participating.

Needless to say, my first Sunday Hundred Grand went well. I also had a nice session yesterday that consisted of a ridiculous heater. I think I hit sets on a third of my pocket pairs, which was quite fun. I made $50 in 1200 hands (NL10), and then since the tables seemed fishy and I was running good I decided to play some more Sunday Hundred Grand sats. I spent $6.60 and won two seats to this week's tournament .

My bankroll is now a hair over $600, with maybe $150 of that coming from MTT and SNG play. I'm rolled for NL25 now, but I still haven't decided whether I'd rather move up or switch to a site with rakeback. Everyone says rakeback is very important at small stakes, but I can't really decide where to go. I also just read some stuff lately about FTP's rakeback being dealt rather than contributed, which makes it sound a lot better in comparison to Prima than I thought. Rednines is contributed rakeback, isn't it?

Maybe I'll just stay on Stars, since it's been working out for me so far and I'm a creature of habit. Is rake more painful on NL25 than NL10?

Edit: My HM stats, in case anyone cares:




0 votes

Comments (14)


Experimenting
  rgfdxm, Nov 02 2007

Well, I've been playing NL10 for about a week and a half now and it's going well, if slow. I had a stretch of ~7000 hands where I was breakeven, which was frustrating since I can't play a whole lot (I work full time). I really thought my edge at NL10 was near 0, but I've started running better again so I'm getting some confidence back. Once I get in another 10k hands or so we'll see how things stand.

I've been trying out some other stuff for fun like SNGs and MTTs. Last weekend I played a couple of $1.10 and $2.20 MTTs and busted out, then played a couple of $2.20 sats to the Sunday Hundred Grand and won a seat, but I couldn't play because my brother needed a ride somewhere right about when the tourney was supposed to start. I unregistered and got the T$ though.

I played a couple of 9-man SNGs and a 45-man I think, busted out of the 45 and won one of the 9-man games but they were $1.10s so it wasn't terribly satisfying. Then I got into the $5 HU SNGs and played a bunch of those this week. HU is fun but frustrating when you run bad. I've had a streak where I run way better than I need to and crush someone, then lose the next by missing every flop of the match. I feel like I have enough of an edge that if I could just run average I'd be fine, but this overkill alternating with inexorable death is annoying. I suppose I shouldn't complain, at least I run well in some of them.

I really don't know what I'm doing too well at the MTT/SNG/HU play, but I think I'm learning. I have a positive ROI at all of them, though, so it's been going well so far.

Ahhh, while I was writing this I was in three $2.20 sats to this week's Sunday Hundred Grand and I just won seats in two of them (busted 16/36 (six seats) in the first one). I like satellites. Seems to be lower variance.

Now that I'm at NL10 I think I can make Silver Star this month, but I'm thinking of moving some of my roll over to RedNines once I hit $500 or so (hopefully this week). Rakeback would be very nice, especially since my bb/100 on NL10 is much lower than NL5 or NL2.



0 votes

Comments (9)


No more NL2
  rgfdxm, Oct 20 2007

Well, I hope so at least. I've reached enough money to move up in stakes (by the 20 buyin rule, at least).



I was planning on moving to NL5 a lot earlier, but I didn't realize at the time that NL5 was deep too. It has the same size buyin as NL10. Now that I have $200 is there any reason I should play NL5 at all? I have 20 buyins for either 5 or 10 and it just doesn't seem worth it to play 5. NL10 isn't significantly harder, is it?

Also, updated database containing all the hands I played since I got Holdem Manager last weekend. I didn't play as much this week, but I was running pretty good.





0 votes

Comments (12)




Next Page



Copyright © 2014. LiquidPoker.net All Rights Reserved
Contact Advertise Sitemap DonkeyTest