Visit on the Upper West Side Reminds Me that NL Is Still Booming

[shipitfish]

Almost in the shadow of the office building I'll soon occupy (once my new job actually gets moved into its office space), I went to play some poker at the Upper West Side Club this evening. Shabbir was in town on some business, so I broke my rule of playing above my long term bankroll and decided to risk $200 to buy into the $1/$2 NL game and hang out.

Shabbir prefers limit, as I do at the moment (Shabbir because he's still just learning NL, and me for the lower variance on my short bankroll), but the few clubs in NYC that offer regular limit HE games are impossible to get into because you need a member to take you there. All the members I've met are playing that the NL clubs because they don't like limit, so they are unlikely to go back to the clubs. An unfortunate catch-22 for the "bring a buddy" system.

The Upper West Side Club is usually loose-passive, and this evening was no exception. Shabbir and I watched as people dutifully called huge bets all the way to the river, presumably just to see if "he really had it this time". I played "best hand poker" (what I call the kind of poker where you have to assume you'll be called and must focus on value betting over all else), and was surprised with the results.

High variance they were, of course. Most of my $162 winnings were due to one hand, where I held QQ and was called down on a TT6-7-4 board by a hand that was mucked in disgust when I showed my hand. I bet defensively on the river, a tactic that I've found most players don't actually pick up on, and was surprised when I got a call, expecting that I might be beat by a pair of Kings (the fellow did call my $12 raise from UTG, after all).

That's the thing about loose-passive NL games: play super-tight, manipulate the size of the pot to your advantage, so you can get a big bet paid off on the turn or river. It seems to work as a general strategy quite well against these clueless players.

One of the most interesting things that I find at the Upper West Side Club is that so many people are totally new to the game. Three people, in the short two hours we were there, sat down to ask about posting blinds, paying time, and how much a legal minimum raise is. These people had barely played before. This included an older gentleman, having a grand old time, but consistently bet $3 no matter what. He even tried to preflop raise $3 every time, despite the dealer's explanation that with a $2 big blind, he must raise at least $4.

The upshot is that, at least in NYC, $1/$2 NL is the new $2/$4 limit poker. For tight-aggressive players, this is amazing news, because the positive EV you get from players that bad in a seemingly "baby NL" game is just huge. And, since the turn-over and "quick cash-out of a big win to head to the blackjack pit" downside of Foxwoods $1/$2 isn't possible, the money stays in the game when the bad beats come.

This boom can't last, and I am certain that I have to find a way to play regularly in these juicy games. More on that, BTW, in posts next week.

But, poker aside, it was great to see Shabbir, an old refugee from the early days of Greg's game, who had to leave town before the exciting twists and turns really started there. I have a message to him, and the other talented limit players I know: learn some NL, quick, while the iron is hot. These games are juicy, and for the moment it's captured the imagination of people who are willing to pay you off for the excitement and entertainment it brings them.

Anyway, back to "real life work" for me. I hope to have more poker time this coming weekend, which should include finishing some of those entries I've been promising.