How to Beat NL200: Avr0ra Expert Cash Game Training

Avr0ra (Alexey Borovkov) : Today our guest is Kirill “Marusya,” who has analyzed my tournaments twice.

The first time was back in the dinosaur era, when I played knockouts using signals from outer space.

The second time was when I won a million. Hi!

Kirill : Hi! About a year ago, I decided to try cash games — starting at NL10–20 with just a $100 bankroll. After a couple of sessions, I ran it up to $1,000 and realized it wasn’t as hard as I’d thought! So I began playing more seriously, but with a specific purpose in mind.
In short: I’d been grinding MTTs for seven straight years and wanted to test how tournament strategies would perform in cash games.

I started studying and watching training videos. These days, I play NL200–500, and if I go on a downswing, I drop back to NL100. Over the past year, I’ve been slightly profitable mainly thanks to rakeback — but my actual win rate is close to zero, sometimes even negative.

Rake Load and How to Reduce It

Avr0ra : This analysis won’t be quite what you expected. Professional cash games are actually a pretty dull grind. The main factor is the rake. Do you know how much commission you’re paying at NL200?

Kirill : I asked a friend during a session review, and he said it’s around 5% or more. I can’t say exactly how much that comes out to in big blinds.

Avr0ra : If you want to play cash games professionally, you must always know the rake in bb/100. If you don’t know this figure, you’re not a real regular. Any player at a reasonably high level has a very clear understanding of these numbers.

The issue with the GG Network is that it charges rake both preflop and postflop, so the overall load is extremely high. Professional play must be built around strategies that minimize rake paid.

Its size is determined by two key factors:

Your VPIP (percentage of hands played).
This is a very tricky metric — 30% versus 20% VPIP makes a huge difference in rake.
Your standard deviation in bb/100.
This depends on your average pot size over 100 hands. For winning players, this is typically between 80 and 130. If you play tight and carefully, it’s around 80. If you try to play every pot big, like Stefan, it’s closer to 130. For top winners, it’s roughly 110.

If your goal is to make money, you must reduce your rake burden. You can have the same win rate at 24% or 30% VPIP, but the rake you pay will differ dramatically. At 28–29% VPIP, you might pay around 11bb/100 in rake; at 24%, it drops to 8–9bb/100. That might not sound like much — but over the long run, it’s an enormous number.

Let’s break down where you’re overpaying. First, blind defense. In MTTs, you’re taught to defend wide, but in cash games, that approach costs you dearly. You end up making too many marginal calls — they might be slightly profitable in theory but waste time and bleed rake.

Your current stats are fine for high-stakes games where rake is low, but at NL200, it’s better to 3-bet more often instead of calling.

In theory, you should defend closer to GTO, but in practice, you shouldn’t play as wide. Against an open, the solver often defends many near-breakeven hands from the big blind. But solvers don’t account for time efficiency — you can simply fold and move on to the next hand, increasing your hourly volume. That’s why in high-rake environments, you should defend your BB less often.

Prisoner's Dilemma in Poker

Avr0ra : The Prisoner’s Dilemma is a game theory concept suggesting that cooperation benefits both sides. In poker, it plays out like this: when one player exploits and the other adapts, both end up losing.

If your opponent gets greedy and starts opening every hand against you, and you respond by 3-betting and calling more often, you’ll both lose. The rake will skyrocket and push you into the red.

Cash games today are actually less competitive than MTTs, but trying to outplay other regulars — even solid ones — will hurt you. The rake is so high that your only sustainable edge comes from weak opponents who don’t adjust.

Professional cash games are, frankly, a dull ecosystem. You beat the VIPs and avoid other pros. The theoretical edge you might have over another reg is often smaller than the rake you pay.

Take BB vs SB spots, for instance. These are extremely skill-based positions — people even organize solver battles to see who can gain the most EV. But in real play, those spots get hammered by rake. I’ve studied them my whole life, and even if I squeeze out a 10bb/100 edge, the rake can easily cut that down to just 2bb/100.

In some cases, you can effectively reduce rake, such as by joining leaderboards or participating in rake-free promotions on CoinPoker. There, you can play as much as you want without the house taking a big bite.

In 6-max at NL200, you need to understand a harsh truth — you can’t realistically beat opponents who are roughly your level or even slightly weaker. It’s unfortunate, but that’s the reality. Win rates in today’s games are built almost entirely on VIP players and tilted regulars.

A professional’s advantage over another pro heads-up might reach 10bb/100, while in 3-max, it drops to around 5bb/100. For a player to be profitable, rake must stay below that threshold.

At NL1000 and higher, rake decreases enough that you can actually play for an edge. Some players intentionally battle other regs at NL200–500 just to hold tables and gain better seat selection later. There’s always some excuse to engage regulars — but in truth, doing so usually means you’re not playing professionally.

Kirill : Why do some 6-max tables have five regulars and one amateur sitting with 20bb and 30% VPIP? Are they just rake-cheating?

Avr0ra : Yes — they’re effectively playing at a loss. Some of them aren’t pros at all; they just enjoy playing. Others chase leaderboards, which can reduce overall rake, but plenty of those tables are still net-losing.

The GG network has strict anti-bum-hunting rules: if you table-select too aggressively, they’ll simply lower your rakeback. So you’re forced to open those “bad” tables too.

Playing the Big Blind in Multi-Pot Games

Avr0ra : Let’s analyze this: the button raises, small blind folds. What should your VPIP be from the big blind?

Kirill : Let’s say 50%.

Avr0ra : Closer to 40%, but that’s not the main issue. What if the SB calls?

Kirill: Maybe 25%.

Avr0ra : Correct. Many players think they should defend more often because of the dead money, but the reality is different. Heads-up, you can defend more broadly — but not when a third player is involved.

The rake is higher, your realized equity drops sharply, and you’ll rarely win the pot. In multi-way spots, your BB defense frequency should be extremely low — you should enter those pots like a gentleman stepping into someone else’s home (laughs).

Let’s apply a filter: open-raise from early position, button calls, and we’re in the BB. Your VPIP is 46%. Brutal! You’re paying nearly three times more rake than necessary.

Then come the “manly” calls — spots that might turn a small profit in MTTs, but never in cash games. Defend roughly as shown in Poker Wizard, or even tighter.

Over-defending is the main leak that destroys your win rate through excess rake. In multi-way pots, just fold everything marginal. Be extra cautious when entering as the third player.

(Looking through the database) Overall, your style is solid — you definitely have the makings of a good cash-game player. It’s clear from your postflop decisions and pots won. You just need structured game plans for each position.

Kirill : Sometimes I’m afraid to bluff shove on the river, even though I’m comfortable bluffing the flop and turn.

Avr0ra : If, across 100,000 hands, you’ve made more than one river all-in bluff in a 4-bet pot, that’s a red flag — by NL200 standards, that’s a weak-reg stat (laughs).

You can still bluff flop and turn, but here’s the logic: once the pot gets large, there’s no room left for river shoves. One or two is fine — but if you find five, you’re definitely losing money.

Strong regulars aim to stack opponents from smaller pots. You trap them, force tough decisions, and grow the pot from 5bb to 80bb. But once the pot’s already big, bluff-shoving makes no sense. The goal is to make it look like you’re bluffing in medium-sized pots, so opponents call lighter.

Let’s move through the positions.

We play tight from early position. The key factor is where the VIP sits. There are two main scenarios:

You open from LJ or MP, the amateur calls, and someone squeezes.
The amateur is in the blinds.

If the recreational player is in the blinds, you can open around 18–20%. If they’re in position, tighten up — multi-way pots out of position are almost always losing. There’s no point listening to solvers here.

It might sound grim, but in cash games, you need to enjoy the precision — treating every lineup as a puzzle to solve, repeating each scenario 10,000 times like Bruce Lee practicing one kick.

For instance, in multi-way pots with a loose VIP, your UTG range should be roughly 12%: 77+, KQ, AJ+.

Kirill : At first, I even cold-called deuces in MP — you know, for set-mining and all that…

Avr0ra : You can get away with that at high stakes, where rake structure is more forgiving. But at NL200, you can’t capitalize on small edges — the rake eats them.

About playing the cutoff. This is a steal position. Never call against early bettors here, only 3-bet or fold. If there's an amateur on the button who calls wide, play tighter. One of the key spots for winning is the CO vs. the BB. Strong regulars understand the difference between the CO and the BTN very well; they will have different continuation bet strategies and sizings. Weaker players play roughly the same.

Now, let’s talk about the cutoff — this is a steal position. Never flat-call early opens here; 3-bet or fold. If there’s an amateur on the button who calls wide, tighten your range.

One of the most important spots for win rate is CO vs BB. Strong regulars clearly understand how CO and BTN differ — their c-bet strategies and sizings change. Weaker players treat them the same.

I see you cold-calling from the button versus early opens. That’s fine only if the BB is a recreational, and your hand benefits from multi-way play.

But BTN vs CO is a different dynamic. Many good players don’t cold-call at all there — they only 3-bet. That’s also a strong, effective approach.

I’d recommend calling early opens only when rake is very low. If there’s an amateur in the BB, you can build a calling range around 66–TT, suited aces, and broadways.

Now, the small blind. Against a raise, you should have no calling range, regardless of position. This is one of the core rake-reduction principles — and it’s stood the test of time.

At higher stakes, you can experiment with flats and donk-leads, but at NL200, forget it. Even if the solver suggests a few calls versus UTG, in reality, it’s best to play tighter.

Hand Analysis

Button limps, SB raises to 5bb, Kirill calls. Button 3-bets to 16.25bb — call, call.

Avr0ra : Good — this is a perfect example. It’s a classic spot where rake eats all your EV.

Your calling range versus an SB raise must be extremely selective — only exists if there’s a super-VIP on the button. If it’s just a loose amateur, you should 3-bet or fold.

This is a bad hand for a multi-way pot. You’ll end up sandwiched between a player in position and the preflop aggressor. Hands like only work heads-up, not multi-way.

Kirill : It’s funny — in MTTs, we try to keep in weaker hands, but here it’s completely different.

Avr0ra : Exactly. That works for you with short stacks under ICM, but with deep stacks in cash, forget that approach entirely — it simply doesn’t apply.

Overall, this is a poor hand — you’ve already made two mistakes out of two. The second call is also bad; you need to realize 23% equity to make it work, and that will never happen.

Even calling with something like would be losing here, though those hands at least perform better in multi-way pots.

So we hit top pair — which feels great — but…

Kirill: Now I’m already happy...

Avr0ra : In cash games, this is exactly when you shouldn’t be happy. On the contrary, you should be thinking, “How do I extract one more small bet or get to showdown cheaply?”

Then your opponent bets 30bb — and of course, you can’t fold now. You’re already committed, just hoping he’s an amateur firing at everything.

Newer players often ask, “What do I do now?” — but by then, it’s too late. You should’ve thought ahead. There’s already 50bb of dead money, the SPR is 1.5, and now you’re forced to lose your stack.

There’s no point trying to find an IQ-200 fold — you simply shouldn’t have ended up in this spot.

Distribution #2

Avr0ra : The 3-bet is fine, but I’d recommend 9bb instead. In position, you’re not too worried about being called, so going that big is unnecessary — 11bb is overkill. You’re just forcing your opponent to 4-bet-fold more often, which isn’t what you want.

Now, think about range interaction between MTTs and cash. You don’t have to c-bet your entire range here — the SB still has top pairs and sets (JJ, 55, 66) strong enough to continue.

However, with something like , I’d still always continuation bet — you’ve got some equity, backdoors, and checking just feels awkward.

Your sizing strategy should follow logic: if you’re betting a third pot, the range is wider and more linear; if you bet half pot, it’s narrower and more polar. The key is consistency — you’re always betting for full weight, regardless of size.

On the turn, you opted to check. That’s okay, but betting could be better — you could barrel and bluff good rivers like a K, A, or a spade.

Always consider how often your opponent raises flops. If they raise a lot, their range is weaker, meaning you can barrel more. If they rarely raise and flat with KQ-type hands, then you should check more often.

The on the river is a great card. At NL200, players aren’t reading perfectly — this board looks scary, you have flushes and straight blockers, and if you’re given the chance to bluff, always take it in position.

Checking here is a pure EV loss — it shows a lack of understanding of basic theory.

For bluff sizing, choose ¾ pot, ½ pot, or overbet. In MTTs, people love those cringe ¼-pot bets, but solvers never do that — they either have the equity to bet properly, or they check.

Distribution #3

Avr0ra : Good 3-bet. You bet the flop and then checked top pair on the turn — not a mistake, but you need to read your opponent.

If he’s a recreational, fine — but if he’s a reg, adjust your range. After he calls 12bb on the flop, he usually has top pair, second pair, or draws.

On the turn, most draws complete. If he checks back, he likely has a made hand — maybe something like AQ, QJ, QT. Your goal is to target those hands — so a 2/3 pot bet is perfect. Nice play.

Avr0ra : Trust me — river bluff-catches don’t work. You have to be a gentleman and take people at their word.

Unless your opponent has proven otherwise, only call with the nuts.

When someone tells you, “I have a strong hand,” believe them. A theory-minded reg might check back two pair on the turn, while a straightforward player raises for value.

You have no right to hero-call here. You can call sets, sure — they still beat -type hands — but anything else is torching money.

Distribution #4

Avr0ra : The most important thing is learning to make disciplined folds. Let’s look at a spot where Level 1 logic applies.

You 3-bet preflop, check-call a third-pot bet on the flop. What next? On the turn, your opponent starts piling money in.

Your job isn’t to battle him on autopilot. You need to ask what he’s thinking — is he really trying to bluff you off Ace-high, or just value-betting strong?

Then comes the river, a total blank — and you fold perfectly. Beautiful play.

This hand is very telling. Players with GTO-only mindsets would never fold here — it’s technically the top of their range. But disciplined exploiters know better.

Distribution #5

Avr0ra : In a 3-bet spot, we should be pulling hands out of the call range, not out of the fold range. You took this one straight out of the muck.

Kirill : Not even defending offsuit for 2.5bb?

Avr0ra : The solver will technically show a zero-call frequency here, but in reality, it’s even worse — it’s a clear minus-EV play.

You’ve flopped a gutshot. From here, you can either check-raise, check-call, or continuation bet for half the pot. All options are theoretically valid. It’s better to bet slightly more than a third pot to reduce your stack-to-pot ratio. Remember, we don’t have a wide c-bet range here — and smaller sizings are used mainly when ranges are wider.

Always start from your value hands. In this spot, your value range revolves around overpairs — for example, pocket queens want to bet about two-thirds pot.

Avr0ra : Uh oh — you’ve been raised. That’s trouble. A call won’t work here. The solver might show a near-zero call frequency for balance, but in real play, this doesn’t hold up. In theory land, opponents raise “conditionally” and check turns; in reality, they raise polarized and continue barreling. So you decided to pull off a genius-level 3-bet bluff — a true IQ 200 move.

Kirill (laughs): Well, excuse me — I’m from MTTs. We don’t do that kind of thing there.

Avr0ra : The issue with raising is that your opponent may simply run out of bluffs. You’re trying to reassert control and outplay him, but spots like this are rake traps. They make sense at NL5K, where every small edge matters, but at NL200, the rake will just shred your profit. Unfortunately, this bluff didn’t work out.

It was a proper workout though. Sorry we didn’t get to the chat questions — but this session was definitely packed with action

Kirill : Thank you so much for the analysis — that was fantastic!

How to Beat NL200: Cash Game Training from Avr0ra