For Live/Online Cash Professionals, Please

DoubleBarrelDoubleBarrel Hudson Valley, NYRed Chipper Posts: 870 ✭✭✭
Why did you decide to settle into being a cash player in the end? Did you start out that way? What influenced your decisions along your journey the most?

I prefer the cash game format, myself but with their being so many online formats today centered around a tournament structure, I'm naturally curious as to what your thoughts are and why you're playing cash games and not these same kind of MTT's I'm referring to.

Thanks in advance for your time and your wisdom...

Comments

  • DoubleBarrelDoubleBarrel Hudson Valley, NYRed Chipper Posts: 870 ✭✭✭
    I spent the last few weeks playing 99% HUSNG's, along with a nanostakes MTT or two, as well. I've repeatedly been interested in HUSNG's and I wanted to really make sure that the tournament structure was less for me than the cash game.

    The cash game is absolutely brutal, raw NLHE and I see that this is indeed where the money is to be made consistently. HUSNG's don't allow the margins between the good players and bad players to allow for enough of a profit, IMO. It enables a style of play that is truly exclusive to the structure and just doesn't allow us the freedom and depth of strategy many of us are playing the game for. Once again, IMO. I still like them but mostly because they're fun and addictive. Eventually, I wanted to make some money and thought I had learned enough patience, discipline, and push/shove knowledge for one month to try cash again.

    Immediately I can see it's still far more my thing and even more so than ever. Further, this is where I can get 24/7 volume online or in live play, on my own schedule and terms, as well as apply the same strategies I'm learning online to the game I'll be playing live. Clearing bonus's, getting perks from the online sites, and being able to apply information collected over larger sample sizes + huds is just all best attained through playing cash games at high volume online.

    I have my HUDs more set up and detailed than ever, renewed my PRO here yesterday, and am really going to dig into the game deeper than ever this winter. It's starting out extremely cold/snowy and I'm kind of trapped here until I can put a legitimate roll together and get into some live games.
  • MidnightFoxMidnightFox Red Chipper Posts: 321 ✭✭✭
    edited December 2017
    Tournaments are pure misery. That’s why I play cash.

    Also players play much worse in cash games because they aren’t playing with fake chips. I’ve seen the weak cash players, play somewhat competently in tournaments.

    If you think about it, to people with relatively small amounts of discretionary income, spending $90(more than a tournament buy-in) on a turn bluff for a single hand feels prohibitively risky.
    This is why live $1/$2 players play as timidly as they do.
    :Jd:Tc
  • DoubleBarrelDoubleBarrel Hudson Valley, NYRed Chipper Posts: 870 ✭✭✭
    edited December 2017
    Tournaments are pure misery. That’s why I play cash.

    Also players play much worse in cash games because they aren’t playing with fake chips. I’ve seen the weak cash players, play somewhat competently in tournaments.

    If you think about it, to people with relatively small amounts of discretionary income, spending $90(more than a tournament buy-in) on a turn bluff for a single hand feels prohibitively risky.
    This is why live $1/$2 players play as timidly as they do.
    :Jd:Tc

    I thought casino cash players were much looser than their online counterparts, no?

  • MidnightFoxMidnightFox Red Chipper Posts: 321 ✭✭✭
    edited December 2017
    Joseph F wrote: »
    Tournaments are pure misery. That’s why I play cash.

    Also players play much worse in cash games because they aren’t playing with fake chips. I’ve seen the weak cash players, play somewhat competently in tournaments.

    If you think about it, to people with relatively small amounts of discretionary income, spending $90(more than a tournament buy-in) on a turn bluff for a single hand feels prohibitively risky.
    This is why live $1/$2 players play as timidly as they do.
    :Jd:Tc

    I thought casino cash players were much looser than their online counterparts, no?
    Live players are looser preflop, but less willing to put in action as a bluff as online counterparts. Concerning casino’s, I wouldn’t know; Never played at one. I only play at poker clubs and home games. Casinos seem to have more upper-middle class who have more money than the players I typically play against. Even in the wild wealthy home games, players often make big calls allot more than big bluffs.
    In general, live, players are willing to call it off allot lighter than they are willing to get it in themselves. But theres plenty of scared money players at the poker club.
    :Jd:Tc
  • DoubleBarrelDoubleBarrel Hudson Valley, NYRed Chipper Posts: 870 ✭✭✭
    edited December 2017
    Joseph F wrote: »
    Tournaments are pure misery. That’s why I play cash.

    Also players play much worse in cash games because they aren’t playing with fake chips. I’ve seen the weak cash players, play somewhat competently in tournaments.

    If you think about it, to people with relatively small amounts of discretionary income, spending $90(more than a tournament buy-in) on a turn bluff for a single hand feels prohibitively risky.
    This is why live $1/$2 players play as timidly as they do.
    :Jd:Tc

    I thought casino cash players were much looser than their online counterparts, no?
    Live players are looser preflop, but less willing to put in action as a bluff as online counterparts. Concerning casino’s, I wouldn’t know; Never played at one. I only play at poker clubs and home games. Casinos seem to have more upper-middle class who have more money than the players I typically play against. Even in the wild wealthy home games, players often make big calls allot more than big bluffs.
    In general, live, players are willing to call it off allot lighter than they are willing to get it in themselves. But theres plenty of scared money players at the poker club.
    :Jd:Tc

    Thanks for detailing. As I play online here, build the roll, and study - I'm also studying everything I can pertaining to live poker so as to prepare myself properly for it. The discussions you guys have on the forums here, as well as the videos on the site, are absolutely perfect for me as I suspected would be the case when I originally signed up.
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    When your able to multi-table cash, sng, & mtt are more profitable than HU just due to how easy it is to multi table in general in six max or full ring. A break even player who mass tables (24 tables) can make more money purely off rake back than a winning hu player who crushes the game but only plays 1 table.

    I think sngs are nice as a beginner because they are mathmatically solved. You see the same thing over and over again with relative same stacks. You can progress very fast as an sng player and move up stakes easily based on volume you put in. Embrace the variance and practice good bankroll management. Obtain a 5-10% ROI. For example $10 sng you can make $1 per game which isn't a lot but if you 10 tabling thats roughly $12\hr long run + rake back if you continually 10 table and reload every time you win or lose on a table. This was my foundation as a beginner playing the $6.50s on stars at 100 sngs a day. Mix in 1 or 2 $3 rebuys on the side for fun to help boost my roll. GLITR is a very solid teacher on crushing sngs.

    Cash games are more advance due to stack sizes and higher SPR allowing different lines. You have to continue to study the game to keep up with the other players. Sngs are fun and exciting but you kinda capp your skills at a certain point and it becomes all about volume and discipline.

    Lets compare the two
    Six max 10 tabling @ 10NL
    5bb\100 win rate with 80 hands an hour.
    Hourly = $4\hr

    10 tabling 9 max turbos $10 sngs
    Roi say 7%
    Game length is about 45 minutes.
    70c x 11 games = $7.70 \ hr.

    Maybe I'm wrong but sngs seem like a faster way to build your bankroll.

    Obviously roi and bb\100 is a huge factor but these are standard solid tag win rates in both games.

    The decision point on moving from sng to cash is the higher stakes where your roi drops to 2% because the games are invested with regulars and no one has an edge over each other so you only earn rake back. Where cash you can continue to crush all the way up to the highest stakes if your a serious student.

    Im sure sngs could be the same but i read more about cash game crushers than high stakes sng crushers.

    Cash is great when you only have 15-60min to play..if you have all day sure load up some mtt and grind a way. When i use to get bored with cash i would load up one mtt and it would force me to grind long hours at my cash tables while i made a deep run. Then when i got close to final table I would exit my cash tables.

    Hope this helps. Glad to see your knowledge has progressed @Joseph F i can see you are much more serious about the game then when you first joined. Keep up the great post..
  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,426 ✭✭✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    When your able to multi-table cash, sng, & mtt are more profitable than HU just due to how easy it is to multi table in general in six max or full ring. A break even player who mass tables (24 tables) can make more money purely off rake back than a winning hu player who crushes the game but only plays 1 table.




    Maybe I'm wrong but sngs seem like a faster way to build your bankroll.



    Maybe you are right BUT
    - does 10NL NLH and $10 SNGs require the same BR?
    - once you get out of the micros can you even find enough mid-stakes HUSNG or other SNGs these days?

    I suspect 6m NLH or 6m PLO are really the only choices these days as it is just too hard to find much action at MS and above in other games.

    While you might be right about mass tabling + RB being highest hourly in the short term. It is a HUGE impediment for most player's learning and ability to move up and crush games where the money really matters.
  • DoubleBarrelDoubleBarrel Hudson Valley, NYRed Chipper Posts: 870 ✭✭✭
    Austin wrote: »
    Hope this helps. Glad to see your knowledge has progressed @Joseph F i can see you are much more serious about the game then when you first joined. Keep up the great post..

    Your advice always helps and I appreciate it immensely. As for my mentality and being more serious about the game: Much improved. About a month + ago I actually formally said goodbye to everyone I know in the Chess world and turned my back on it. It really had just turned into an escape for when poker wasn't going the way I wanted it to and after a while I realized how ridiculous that is. So, I made sure that I am 100% committed and focused on this and only this. It's a much, much better game for me at this point in my life.

    The other thing is that I've been through so much in my personal life at this point that I'm getting numb to "variance". In life and at the tables. I've even begun to embrace it (as you guys put it) to an extent. Rather than worry about whether or not I got unlucky anymore, my brain goes right to analyzing the hand and what I could have done better or differently, regardless of the result. I'm enjoying studying the strategy of poker more than ever these days. As I get older, this is more and more my speed.

    Tough game, though. Really tough game. I don't think people who just casually play poker now and then or haven't ever realize just how complex and deep this game is. That's one of the things that I like about it, though: The rabbit hole never ends.
  • DoubleBarrelDoubleBarrel Hudson Valley, NYRed Chipper Posts: 870 ✭✭✭
    kenaces wrote: »
    Austin wrote: »
    When your able to multi-table cash, sng, & mtt are more profitable than HU just due to how easy it is to multi table in general in six max or full ring. A break even player who mass tables (24 tables) can make more money purely off rake back than a winning hu player who crushes the game but only plays 1 table.




    Maybe I'm wrong but sngs seem like a faster way to build your bankroll.



    Maybe you are right BUT
    - does 10NL NLH and $10 SNGs require the same BR?
    - once you get out of the micros can you even find enough mid-stakes HUSNG or other SNGs these days?

    I suspect 6m NLH or 6m PLO are really the only choices these days as it is just too hard to find much action at MS and above in other games.

    While you might be right about mass tabling + RB being highest hourly in the short term. It is a HUGE impediment for most player's learning and ability to move up and crush games where the money really matters.

    What you bring up is a big part of the reason I'm sticking with cash games: Availability and progress. If I keep progressing, eventually my best way of making money is going to be in playing cash games. There's really no reason for me to focus on something else now simply to build a roll...which I'm already working on. SNG's and tournaments require scheduling, waiting on other people, and they don't run 24/7. Cash games do. Online and off. Further, I think I'll ultimately get best at the cash game if I spend the time, energy, and put in the work. It's definitely the most pure form of the game.
  • DoubleBarrelDoubleBarrel Hudson Valley, NYRed Chipper Posts: 870 ✭✭✭
    edited December 2017
    @kenaces: Whereas it's clear the SNG (especially HUSNG) action dries up as you move up, would you put heads up cash into a separate category as them? Or in the same category as ring games in general as in there's really no limit online or off? Are the SNG's more limited as you move up because of the virtually solved theory that's in place, whereas in a heads up cash game nash eq goes out the window?

    Thanks

  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,839 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Example. When my son was little he'd take a nap on a boppy pillow on my lap while I played poker. When he woke up, I was done playing. Do you think I was playing a tournament or cash? :)

    Both the variance and time commitment in tournaments can get silly. The variance in SNGs is better. Especially the turbos, which as Austin said are nearly solved. Some people say turbo SNGs are just bingo and whoever hits a hand wins. That's not true. They are simply shorter versions of longer tournaments, and you play more of them in the same span of time. To take an extreme example, why wouldn't the same person complain that a single hand of a cash game is bingo and depends on who gets dealt the cards? If you view SNGs more like a single hand of poker, and then just play hundreds of hands, then you'll see they are every bit as skillful (although different skills - short stack and ICM mostly.)

    Cash games are best for me.
  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,426 ✭✭✭✭
    Joseph F wrote: »
    @kenaces: Whereas it's clear the SNG (especially HUSNG) action dries up as you move up, would you put heads up cash into a separate category as them? Or in the same category as ring games in general as in there's really no limit online or off? Are the SNG's more limited as you move up because of the virtually solved theory that's in place, whereas in a heads up cash game nash eq goes out the window?

    Thanks

    While I haven't looked in a long while - last I did MS+ SNGs/HUSNGs action had died out. Could be that they are too "solved", slowdown in poker economy, became too hard for pros to grind for a living, increases in rake.........

    HUNLH was also tough to get action in. Even at 200NL pre-black friday when I gave this format a shot I was shocked how often other regs would sit out vs me in 10-20 hands. I wasn't a HUNLH crusher by any means and even I had hard time getting action.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file