Blew my bankroll on cash when I first started playing and then won abit playing tournaments, thought now I actually now know how to play I can go back on cash tables.
Still no joy
If anyone see's me on a cash table please call my mother.
Having played tournaments with reasonable success over the last few years, I have been trying quite hard to improve my cash game, and regularly play on 40/50p nl tables. There are obviously players who are very successful here but I cant seem to crack it. I try to be selective in which tables I play, avoiding those with known strong players. I find playing one cash table very tedious, so usually play 3. It usually works out that I will make a steady profit on 2 tables but will have an accident on the other which will wipe out any real gains. So maybe after an hour I will have a profit of £20 or so for which I have put £150 at risk. How do I stop these accidents happening ? A typical situation from yesterday was holding KQ on a Q high flop and facing a shove for a whole BI. I knew I was in front and made the call and lost to QJ on the river. I will persevere but would appreciate any tips. But at the end of the day I dont think anything will beat the buzz of a good final table in a tournament. Posted by penguin7
A very good winrate at nl50 is 10bb/100hands/or hour,So thats £5 pounds per hour * how many tables. Its not really risking 150 pounds if you have good bankroll management as the collers will even themselves out over time. My winrate at 50nl over 100,000 hands is 7bb/100 but some days i can be down over £400.
In Response to Re: Cash game or tournament poker : A very good winrate at nl50 is 10bb/100hands/or hour , So thats £5 pounds per hour * how many tables. Its not really risking 150 pounds if you have good bankroll management as the collers will even themselves out over time. My winrate at 50nl over 100,000 hands is 7bb/100 but some days i can be down over £400. Posted by DeuceAK-47
Is this on sky or elsewhere? Out of interest, how are you working this out if on sky?
In Response to Re: Cash game or tournament poker : Is this on sky or elsewhere? Out of interest, how are you working this out if on sky? Posted by OMahonyO
Yeah your right lol,these results are from other sites and tracked on holdem manager, i only play on sky for fun and to practice playing poker without a hud as i rely on it too much on the other sites.
If i only played on sky i would work it out by writing down how much i won and loss each cash session as well as how long i played for.
for example if i played 50 hours and was up 300 pounds.
50 hours= approx 5,000 hands
£300/5000 hands *100= £6 per 100 hands/hour
£6/0.50 (big blind)= 12bb/100
I know this is boring and time consuming lol but i would like to know how i was doing.
I've always thought that having a lot of success in one form actually hurts your performance in the other (or at least how people perceive you in the other). This is not down to the forms of the game themselves, but how we deal with adversity. Tilt protects the tourney player, you blow up, you go out and you lose one buy in. You go out the the tourney and no one remembers it the next day but they do remember the ones where you run really deep, the ones where you don't blow up and everyone says what a great tourney player you are. Now our tourney player sits a big chunk of his winnings down at the $100/$200 table. It can go right for a while but then he or she is forced to play his pocket Kings down all the streets and our crazy Scandi hit his straight with 57 off on the turn. The river gave us a set but we were already drawing dead, we growl, we moan, we think 'how could that guy play that junk.' We're also allowed to buy straight back in so we do, because that Scandi's luck has got to run out sometime. Before you know it you're playing through the red mist and people at chipping your bankroll away one piece at a time. And everyone calls you a 'Tourney Donk' who can't play real poker.
Examples: Phil Hellmuth of course Mike The Mouth is probably a better example (well known in the cash game circuit as being only one bad hand away from dumping every cent on him). I hate to say it but Stu Unger is in here too.
Now let's flip reverse to our cash player. You've been a regular winner on high stakes tables, you've got your moves and you can play down all the streets. You're an animal. Anyway, tourney's are full of wannabes and donks who put it all in with pocket fours. So you and your ego sit down and you don't realise is that all you need is for one of you 'moves' to go wrong and your crippled. You play far too many pots, forgetting that every time you put your chips out there you are putting them at risk, and there is no reload. We're forced to put it all in with AK v 55 preflop and don't improve. And we call all tourney players donks because htey can't hack it at cash.
Examples here would be Tom Dwan, definitely Patric Antonius and Sammy Farha.
Sorry about the essay but the point is it's how we perceive the games. Although it's all poker, both use a deck and chips and both have the same hand rankings, Cash and tourneys are a million miles apart. We don't respect the difference and we assume we can do the other because we are so good at the first.
The only top class players in my mind that really get by this are Doyle, Ivey and Chip Reese (who by a million miles had the most mental strength of any poker player, living or dead).
My forte? I regard myself as a decent cash player, an excellent STT player but I frankly suck at online MTTs (although my live play is a lot better). But I'm still trying to learn the little differences in all of the games.
Excellent post there Tommy ! I think it is very true that some cash players think the tourny guys are donks and will perhaps be more aggressive when facing them. What I need to learn is how to use that to my advantage. Why do you think you are better live than online in MTT ? Dont you think your obvious STT skills should benefit you in tournaments. I think there are two kinds of successful STT players.... aggressive and non aggressive, and an easy mistake is being too aggressive in the early stages of a tournament. Perhaps people are less aggressive live because they have probably travelled to get there and cant just press a button to enter another if they go out. And of course 10 seat tables are a factor.
I found your posts very helpful DeuceAK. I have never analysed my cash play at all. It is difficult on a return on investment basis, but looking at return on time invested and hands played could be useful. I find the idea of dropping £400 in a day horrific, knowing I would have to put in 50+ good table hours to get it back. One more question. ....If you lose a buyin on a table do you go back for more ? I never do,even if I have lost to a bad beat, preferring to take a break or find another table. And if I see another player reload I see it as an opportunity, Am I right ? One more!.....Do you have a profit target on a table ? I tend to run away if I have doubled my BI, thinking that in some way I am protecting my gains. Or should I use my psychological advantage to push for more ?
Excellent post there Tommy ! I think it is very true that some cash players think the tourny guys are donks and will perhaps be more aggressive when facing them. What I need to learn is how to use that to my advantage. Why do you think you are better live than online in MTT ? Dont you think your obvious STT skills should benefit you in tournaments. I think there are two kinds of successful STT players.... aggressive and non aggressive, and an easy mistake is being too aggressive in the early stages of a tournament. Perhaps people are less aggressive live because they have probably travelled to get there and cant just press a button to enter another if they go out. And of course 10 seat tables are a factor. I found your posts very helpful DeuceAK. I have never analysed my cash play at all. It is difficult on a return on investment basis, but looking at return on time invested and hands played could be useful. I find the idea of dropping £400 in a day horrific, knowing I would have to put in 50+ good table hours to get it back. One more question. ....If you lose a buyin on a table do you go back for more ? I never do,even if I have lost to a bad beat, preferring to take a break or find another table. And if I see another player reload I see it as an opportunity, Am I right ? One more!.....Do you have a profit target on a table ? I tend to run away if I have doubled my BI, thinking that in some way I am protecting my gains. Or should I use my psychological advantage to push for more ? Posted by penguin7
I completely agree that it was an excellent post by Tommy. With regards to your statements about profitability in cash play, most successful players would say that you're going about it the wrong way. However, you should play how you feel "comfortable". If you use lose a BI to a loose player who made a bad call and got lucky, you should re-buy (assuming that you do not tilt). The reason is that you should have a good expectation of making a profit on your next BI. Forget the money that you have lost, just consider if you expect to make money from thereon. If you are up a BI then you are, presumably, playing better than the rest of the table so, again, you have a reasonable expectation of making further profit. Also, as you say, it will give you a psychological edge against some players who play worse against a "big stack" on a cash table.
The wonderful Post by elsadog sums up my views. Can we be good at both? Unlikely, very few - vey few indeed - excel at both. I cannot think of a single Pro player, or major "name", who is very good at both. Even at the very top, guys like Hellmuth are great tourney players & suck at cash, & Mr Dwan is the abso-nuts at Cash, but has never shown a shred of ability in tourneys. What is better? Subjective. For recreational players, Tourneys are terrific fun, & good value, but if you want to make a living at the game, forget Tourneys - 99.5% of us are not good enough, but most of us could eke out a living playing cash. Posted by Tikay10
In Response to Re: Cash game or tournament poker : I completely agree that it was an excellent post by Tommy. With regards to your statements about profitability in cash play, most successful players would say that you're going about it the wrong way. However, you should play how you feel "comfortable". If you use lose a BI to a loose player who made a bad call and got lucky, you should re-buy (assuming that you do not tilt). The reason is that you should have a good expectation of making a profit on your next BI. Forget the money that you have lost, just consider if you expect to make money from thereon. If you are up a BI then you are, presumably, playing better than the rest of the table so, again, you have a reasonable expectation of making further profit. Also, as you say, it will give you a psychological edge against some players who play worse against a "big stack" on a cash table. Posted by MereNovice
How did I know you would say that Vince ???? I am sure that you are 100% right. But as you also say it is also a matter of feeling comfortable or confidence. If I miss out in a £50 DYM through a bad beat I have no hesitation in entering another against the same players. Similarly if I win one I would love to go straight back for another ! I need the confidence to transfer this onto the cash tables. TY M8 !
In Response to Re: Cash game or tournament poker : How did I know you would say that Vince ???? I am sure that you are 100% right. But as you also say it is also a matter of feeling comfortable or confidence. If I miss out in a £50 DYM through a bad beat I have no hesitation in entering another against the same players. Similarly if I win one I would love to go straight back for another ! I need the confidence to transfer this onto the cash tables. TY M8 ! Posted by penguin7
Errr, you're psychic?
You are absolutely right about the confidence and you have worked it out for yourself. If you're not feeling confident, you will not play "optimally". (Sorry, I over-use that word!). The confidence comes from winning consistently at whatever game you play and negative variance can affect this, especially if you suffer it early in your experience of a new type of game. Obviously your game is good enough to gain that confidence (quickly) at cash. After that, I'd just say that it's a matter of playing what you enjoy most.
In Response to Re: Cash game or tournament poker : guy called... ivey... phil ivey... heard of him? Posted by BlackFish3
See my Post on Page 1 of this thread, timed at 1.55pm.
I could actually tell you a great Phil Ivey story, but maybe another day.
PS - By the bye, did you know that Mr Ivey has NEVER won a WSOP Bracelet at Hold 'EM? All his WSOP Bangles have been in the more exotic variants - which have much smaller fields. Some call them "soft" Bracelets......
In Response to Re: Cash game or tournament poker : See my Post on Page 1 of this thread, timed at 1.55pm. I could actually tell you a great Phil Ivey story, but maybe another day. PS - By the bye, did you know that Mr Ivey has NEVER won a WSOP Bracelet at Hold 'EM? All his WSOP Bangles have been in the more exotic variants - which have much smaller fields. Some call them "soft" Bracelets...... Posted by Tikay10
This has sparked a little question in my head that I can't answer.
Gus Hansen - Is he a great tourney player? On one side he rolled over the WPT and has won the Aussie Millions. On the other side he has one of the worst WSOP records of anyone when you consider his standing in the poker world and the ratio of events played to cashes (Unless he's won one in 2009 that I missed I'm sure he's got no wins, don't think he has any FTs and only a handful of cashes). On the negative side he was rolling over the WPT in the early seasons, I'm not sure how well he's done in the last couple of years.
I disagree, but only to an extent, that you can't be good at both cash and tournament poker. I believe players with a predominately tournament background - such as Hellmuth - can never be great cash game players. I do, however, believe that the best cash game players have the ability to become the best tournament players. This can be seen in the 'big game' regulars such as Ivey, Brunson, Greenstin, Harman, Chip Reese (he didnt play tournament poker for many years but played the inaugural 50k H.O.R.S.E event at the WSOP (holdem, omaha, razz, stud Hi, stud hi/low split with an 8 qualifier) and won it (also the final table was played in the Cadillac of poker games - no limit hold em).
I hold these views for many reasons:
1. Deep stacked, ring cash game poker is about playing hands after the flop and on later betting rounds - this is similar to the play in the early stage of a deep stacked, slow clock MTT such as the main event at the WSOP.
2.Cash game players have different skill sets in regards to playing v.s strong opponents and playing v.s weak opponents. Tournament players, however are used to extracting money from weaker players and do not have solid experience in playing vs better opponents. (Look at how Phil Hellmuth does in those short field 'big name' tournaments such as the 'premier league'; where the competition is tough and contains many good cash game players - not very well at all)
Comments
Blew my bankroll on cash when I first started playing and then won abit playing tournaments, thought now I actually now know how to play I can go back on cash tables.
Still no joy
If anyone see's me on a cash table please call my mother.
A very good winrate at nl50 is 10bb/100hands/or hour,So thats £5 pounds per hour * how many tables.
Its not really risking 150 pounds if you have good bankroll management as the collers will even themselves out over time.
My winrate at 50nl over 100,000 hands is 7bb/100 but some days i can be down over £400.
If i only played on sky i would work it out by writing down how much i won and loss each cash session as well as how long i played for.
for example if i played 50 hours and was up 300 pounds.
50 hours= approx 5,000 hands
£300/5000 hands *100= £6 per 100 hands/hour
£6/0.50 (big blind)= 12bb/100
I know this is boring and time consuming lol but i would like to know how i was doing.
I think it is very true that some cash players think the tourny guys are donks and will perhaps be more aggressive when facing them. What I need to learn is how to use that to my advantage. Why do you think you are better live than online in MTT ? Dont you think your obvious STT skills should benefit you in tournaments. I think there are two kinds of successful STT players.... aggressive and non aggressive, and an easy mistake is being too aggressive in the early stages of a tournament. Perhaps people are less aggressive live because they have probably travelled to get there and cant just press a button to enter another if they go out. And of course 10 seat tables are a factor.
I found your posts very helpful DeuceAK. I have never analysed my cash play at all. It is difficult on a return on investment basis, but looking at return on time invested and hands played could be useful.
I find the idea of dropping £400 in a day horrific, knowing I would have to put in 50+ good table hours to get it back.
One more question. ....If you lose a buyin on a table do you go back for more ? I never do,even if I have lost to a bad beat, preferring to take a break or find another table. And if I see another player reload I see it as an opportunity, Am I right ?
One more!.....Do you have a profit target on a table ? I tend to run away if I have doubled my BI, thinking that in some way I am protecting my gains. Or should I use my psychological advantage to push for more ?
With regards to your statements about profitability in cash play, most successful players would say that you're going about it the wrong way. However, you should play how you feel "comfortable".
If you use lose a BI to a loose player who made a bad call and got lucky, you should re-buy (assuming that you do not tilt). The reason is that you should have a good expectation of making a profit on your next BI. Forget the money that you have lost, just consider if you expect to make money from thereon.
If you are up a BI then you are, presumably, playing better than the rest of the table so, again, you have a reasonable expectation of making further profit. Also, as you say, it will give you a psychological edge against some players who play worse against a "big stack" on a cash table.
I am sure that you are 100% right. But as you also say it is also a matter of feeling comfortable or confidence.
If I miss out in a £50 DYM through a bad beat I have no hesitation in entering another against the same players. Similarly if I win one I would love to go straight back for another !
I need the confidence to transfer this onto the cash tables. TY M8 !
Errr, you're psychic?
You are absolutely right about the confidence and you have worked it out for yourself.
If you're not feeling confident, you will not play "optimally". (Sorry, I over-use that word!).
The confidence comes from winning consistently at whatever game you play and negative variance can affect this, especially if you suffer it early in your experience of a new type of game.
Obviously your game is good enough to gain that confidence (quickly) at cash.
After that, I'd just say that it's a matter of playing what you enjoy most.
I could actually tell you a great Phil Ivey story, but maybe another day.
PS - By the bye, did you know that Mr Ivey has NEVER won a WSOP Bracelet at Hold 'EM? All his WSOP Bangles have been in the more exotic variants - which have much smaller fields. Some call them "soft" Bracelets......