|
Stinky Pit posted:An OP with some general information would be really helpful guys. I'm sure a lot of new people like me are reading the thread and have loads of questions. If I'm right JCarver won $5 from a free tournament online and now has $2.5m in live winnings and $1.2m on PokerStars alone as well as that small deal of being a WSOP bracelet winner. He certainly isn't alone in finding this level of success. That said, the vast majority of people have a dedicated bankroll for the purposes of playing poker which can range from a couple hundred dollars to tens of thousands, usually proportional to the stakes being played for (AKA "Bankroll Management"). For example, I play large-field multi-table tournaments online and started with a $500 bankroll to play $5 tournaments. The hope is that this will be a one-off investment and that I'd not need to deposit again afterwards.
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 12:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 06:27 |
|
|
Sypher posted:I am not saying there should be two separate megathreads. I think it would be nice if the title of the thread was just "Poker Megathread" and the OP had separate sections for online and live. Makes it a bit less misleading and maybe would generate more traffic. I moved at least four threads over, IIRC, you can sort by the Poker tag for ease of finding them. As far as multiple threads go, feel free to make whatever. If the OP wants the thread topic changed that is do-able too. Baddog posted:139, never forget olin posted:oh thank Christ it's finally gone Elephanthead posted:We don't deserve more then one topic. Just post anything poker related in here. I get y'all are upset at the transition, but check the sass. What is done is done.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 13:58
|
|
|
Sypher posted:I am not saying there should be two separate megathreads. I think it would be nice if the title of the thread was just "Poker Megathread" and the OP had separate sections for online and live. Makes it a bit less misleading and maybe would generate more traffic. I made it Online Poker deliberately because I thought live and online should have separate threads. Just my opinion, yo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 14:10
|
|
|
Stinky Pit posted:An OP with some general information would be really helpful guys. I'm sure a lot of new people like me are reading the thread and have loads of questions. Being good enough at MTG to support the hobby is much much more difficult than being good enough at poker to sustain a bankroll. Poker has stakes ranging from .02/.04 blinds and $4 buyin to $500/$1000 blinds and $100,000 buyin. MTG has very few options in terms of the amount you want to play for. I've played poker for something like 4 years off the $30 i deposited. I started at $1 tournaments and .02/.04 cash games and now I play up to $500 tournaments and $2/5 cash games. I've played magic for like 3 months and I probably already dumped $200 into it. The name of the game is Bankroll Management. You account for the variance (luck) in poker to play games that don't leave you at a high risk of ruin. If your bankroll is $200 and you buy in once to 1/2 for $200 that's a very high variance spot with a high risk of ruin. If your bankroll is $200 and you buy in to .02/.04 for $4 it's obviously a lot more sustainable. Usually it's advised that you deposit some money and that's your bankroll and you play within that. MY INEVITABLE DEBT fucked around with this message at 16:32 on Sep 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 16:28
|
|
|
General rule of thumb is something between 20-40 buyins of your respective stake level for cash, and I think 40-50 for MTTs. Assuming you aren't trying to pro it up. It's much much more if poker is your sole, or primary, income. That level of bankroll gives you some latitude to make mistakes and to learn from them without going broke so quickly that you just kind of go 'what the gently caress'.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 20:57
|
|
|
Teppec posted:General rule of thumb is something between 20-40 buyins of your respective stake level for cash, and I think 40-50 for MTTs. Assuming you aren't trying to pro it up. It's much much more if poker is your sole, or primary, income. That level of bankroll gives you some latitude to make mistakes and to learn from them without going broke so quickly that you just kind of go 'what the gently caress'. Bankroll advice from 2004 ITT Bankroll management for recreational players is pretty much a moot point unless they specify how much risk they're willing to take on and whether or not they would redeposit. If you want your Risk of Ruin to be effectively 0 then don't play anything you're not "over-rolled" for, pretty much. Lord of the Llamas fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Sep 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 21:18
|
|
|
RIP PITR please come back soon.
GlobalHero06 fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Sep 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 22:12
|
|
|
GlobalHero06 posted:swap Yea good luck with this not getting you banned or something now that we are in gently caress city. Lord of the Llamas posted:Bankroll advice from 2004 ITT Bankroll management is important regardless of your skill level. You get the most bang for your buck when you are playing appropriate stakes for however much your bankroll is. Alternatively you can just treat it as a hobby and deposit money to play as needed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 22:26
|
|
|
Teppec posted:General rule of thumb is something between 20-40 buyins of your respective stake level for cash, and I think 40-50 for MTTs. Assuming you aren't trying to pro it up. It's much much more if poker is your sole, or primary, income. That level of bankroll gives you some latitude to make mistakes and to learn from them without going broke so quickly that you just kind of go 'what the gently caress'. Playing MTTs with only 20-40 buyins is beyond retarded. That wouldn't even be enough for STTs. Minimum you'd want 100 and at higher stakes that's probably not even enough.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2012 23:37
|
|
|
If you plan on playing seriously down the road, it would behoove you to start developing good bankroll management now. If you're doing this for the long term, it's an absolutely essential survival skill. If you just wanna donk around and play for fun, please, let me direct you to my table.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2012 01:56
|
|
|
ultimatemike posted:Playing MTTs with only 20-40 buyins is beyond retarded. That wouldn't even be enough for STTs. Minimum you'd want 100 and at higher stakes that's probably not even enough. Yeah, I agree with you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2012 11:36
|
|
|
Well for someone who is wanting to get back into online poker what is a good bankroll to have for cash games only. Will 20-40 work for cash or should it be 100 like STT's?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2012 17:23
|
|
|
As long as you have more money to reload with you don't need to have 40-100 buy ins on-line. I actually keep a small bank roll on-line because I got a savings account I can just dip into if I ever run really really bad. I also keep about 600 for the express purpose of capping reload bonus's.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2012 17:42
|
|
|
Right -- it's fine to only have a few buy ins on your account if you're OK with re-depositing when runbad/playbad happens.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2012 18:05
|
|
|
e: thank you! winvirus fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Sep 5, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2012 22:25
|
|
|
wh1te posted:Well for someone who is wanting to get back into online poker what is a good bankroll to have for cash games only. Will 20-40 work for cash or should it be 100 like STT's? The rare times lately I have time to play, I still try to keep a minimum 50 of whatever cash level I'm at. I tried to keep even more when I was grinding full time, if I could manage it. However, I'm what is referred to as a bankroll nit. I don't shot take much, and I very rarely play MTTs for more than 1% of my roll. All I was trying to say earlier is that the amounts I mentioned are probably an okayish point to give you some room to gently caress up without necessarily needing to redeposit every week to cover the learning curve.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2012 23:26
|
|
|
winvirus posted:
This sort of thing, sadly, has to find some other home in accordance with the NEW POKER ORDER.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2012 00:27
|
|
|
Winson_Paine posted:This sort of thing, sadly, has to find some other home in accordance with the NEW POKER ORDER. Aww nuts, sorry about that 
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2012 00:32
|
|
|
winvirus posted:Aww nuts, sorry about that It's cool, you aren't banned or anything, it is just a result of the shiftover.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2012 00:39
|
|
|
I'm fat.
MY INEVITABLE DEBT fucked around with this message at 01:01 on Sep 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2012 00:59
|
|
|
I went to check in to my PLO thread and this is what I find. Good lord.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2012 01:25
|
|
|
Sheep-Goats posted:I went to check in to my PLO thread and this is what I find. Good lord. God damnit that fly gets me every time. Sorry I haven't had time to update the OP guys. I've got people visiting this weekend but I will get around to it!
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2012 11:18
|
|
|
wh1te posted:Well for someone who is wanting to get back into online poker what is a good bankroll to have for cash games only. Will 20-40 work for cash or should it be 100 like STT's? The old wisdom for casual players was 20 buyins, so 20-40 will be absolutely fine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2012 19:28
|
|
|
What is the go-to book for basic poker strategy nowadays?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2012 22:06
|
|
|
winvirus posted:What is the go-to book for basic poker strategy nowadays? These guys know a lot more than I do, but for me the Harrington books (HoH for tournaments, and H on Online Cash for 6 max) really helped me conceptualize the game better. It was overwhelming coming back to poker after taking 3 years off between 2007 and 2010. The quality of the analysis just seemed to skyrocket (that and my level of comprehension was never as high as I thought it was). I think there might be better books for cash games, but these are always good starts from my perspective.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2012 22:20
|
|
|
winvirus posted:What is the go-to book for basic poker strategy nowadays?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2012 22:26
|
|
|
Virtue posted:I'm just starting too so so my advice might not be the greatest but I'm getting a lot out of Harrington on Cash Games and Phil Gordon's Little Green Book. Your much better off with Harrington than Gordon. That book hasn't aged well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2012 22:44
|
|
|
ultimatemike posted:That book hasn't aged well. Would you mind elaborating? I read Gordon pretty quickly once through just to get my foot in the door and began more serious "studying" with Harrington.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2012 22:46
|
|
|
Virtue posted:Would you mind elaborating? I read Gordon pretty quickly once through just to get my foot in the door and began more serious "studying" with Harrington. It's just a very a high level book and from what I remember most of his advise is hilariously nitty, even when compared to Action Dan.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2012 23:33
|
|
|
Little Green book is okay as an intro book but it and doesn't really get into hand reading too much and only works against weak competition. His main advice was "bet or raise if you think you are ahead, fold if you think you are behind, and call if you're somewhere in between" which is overly simplistic at best and horribly wrong at worst.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2012 00:01
|
|
|
Also because Phil Gordon minraise/folded the button to my shove at the beginning of a high stakes super turbo (10 bbs). To his credit, he did say "ahhhhh I guess thats why you dont do that at these!" afterwards. Maybe he just didnt realize he sat at a super turbo instead of a regular sng, although minraise on the button with nearly any hand seems dubious at any game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2012 00:09
|
|
|
Baddog posted:although minraise on the button with nearly any hand seems dubious at any game.  I know at least one bracelet holder on this forum that would disagree
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2012 00:17
|
|
|
ultimatemike posted:
I could have sworn I wrote sng, not 'any game'. edit - although I guess there are plenty deep/slow/multi table sngs, at least there used to be on ftp. Baddog fucked around with this message at 01:55 on Sep 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2012 01:46
|
|
|
When I'm heads-up, I just click buttons with no rhyme or reason. I'm hillaribad at heads up. Any recommendations for heads up play in the literature?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2012 03:31
|
|
|
Does anyone play on club WPT?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2012 05:09
|
|
|
Lote posted:When I'm heads-up, I just click buttons with no rhyme or reason. I'm hillaribad at heads up. Any recommendations for heads up play in the literature? I think Moshman had a HU book. It's probably decent but if you really want to get good at HU I would look into training videos.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2012 06:16
|
|
|
moshman's HU book really hasn't aged well. i'm not a fan of it. memorize the nash chart. get a husng.com subscription and watch mersenarry's vids. his ebook is way better (and free!) than moshman's so get that. though reading both can't hurt you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2012 08:31
|
|
|
Is Deuces Cracked still recommended for learning both live and online?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2012 08:37
|
|
|
winvirus posted:What is the go-to book for basic poker strategy nowadays? For MTTs you want Harrington 1/2 > Kill Everyone > Raiser's Edge.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2012 10:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 06:27 |
|
|
I miss the golden age of blackjack whoring $100 every month into $300-$500 then bonus whoring that money in poker to make it $1000+. It helped pay my way through college.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2012 11:40
|
|
