|
In my experience, it's really hard to get people to take poker seriously when it's not for some amount of money. Poker is all about putting prices on your decisions, and without money to back it up, play money games often just turn into people getting bored and shoving any two cards and not really caring. In theory, yeah, it seems like people should play the same no matter what's on the line, but in reality, it just never works that way. Psychologically, you have to feel like there's some pain to each decision you make. As JCarver likes to say, "money is how we keep score in poker."
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 15:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 23:34 |
|
|
In chess, nothing is up to luck. If you whoop someone's rear end, there is no debate that you are better. In poker, there is a lot of luck. If you whoop someone's rear end, they will say "ok but you got lucky". Then you say "alright, if you think you're better, we will put money on the line, surely this is no problem if you expect to win." And then they will still say you got lucky when you win but at least you are getting paid now.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
Asimov posted:Would you enjoy poker and play it for fun if there was no money involved? It seems to me that most of the appeal of the game is due to gambling, if you removed the money do you think there would still be a professional scene like chess? Bet with fake money or points and try to win the world champion title? Pit your wits against Deep Flop the ultimate computer poker AI opponent? Poker is the purest form of a pricing game, the most minimal setup you can have and still have interesting decisions about relative valuation between parties. The stock market is another such "game." Without real money at stake poker isn't nearly the same game any more. At the highest levels it gets abstract and point-like but the whole ramp to those games is predicated on losses actually being losses to you in a material, away from the table sense (and wins actual wins). Poker is a good game on its own but the fact that its real money at play adds a real richness to it that elevates it above every other card game. The key to good strategy isn't to win the hand or the tourney, but to make the most money long term. To think of the money as some kind of gambling component that's welded onto the game isn't right. Poker is PRIMARILY an expression of money changing hands and all that that entails. The card stuff really is secondary. Poker is money. The cards are just tiebreakers. raton fucked around with this message at 06:17 on May 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2017 06:12
|
|
|
Without money, the biggest loss would be -EV players trying to get even. The best players make a living talking mediocre players into jumping up in stakes, or staying at the table when they are clearly at a disadvantage. At the lowest levels there are lots of losing players that keep coming back for more punishment thinking a winning session means they are winning players. Without money this side of the game wouldn't really exist. I feel like my real turning point from not making a profit to making a profit was the realization that variance keeps bad players in the game. Before this realization I thought I could stack any session in my favor, quit early, out think or outplay any opponent, and this mentality led me to steam pretty bad. I took every loss as a blow to my ego rather than looking at it as statistical variance. If you look at most other competitive endeavors, skill is hard earned, and it is rare that you would ever see a novice beating a professional, even when the novice is granted a large handicap (e.g. golf, American football, hockey, chess). In poker you often see novices or beginners having winning sessions, days, or even tournaments, but statistically they are not winners. When I realized this, and started thinking in terms of maximizing expected value, I stopped getting mad at myself when I made equitable decisions and lost, (although I'm still susceptible to tilting when I go on a downswing i.e. losing 10+ coin-flips/hands in my favor with cards to come, especially when these situations occur in short succession, also accumulating tilt over several losing sessions or weeks or months without profit). These issues are exacerbated by the fact that I'm playing mostly live games. Anyway when I encounter this situation now, I try to remind myself that the variance giving my opponents hot streaks keeps them donating to my piggy bank in the long haul. Two books that helped me with this were Elements of Poker, and The Mental Game of Poker I & II. I strongly recommend both books, although some of the advice in Elements runs contrary to TMGP and I tend to side with TMGP on the psychological hangups. The best piece of advice I recall from Elements was when playing Limit Hold'em you should buy in with enough chips that you are accustomed to having a huge stack in front of you, also when you lose you still cash out with a lot of chips. Whenever I play limit now I buy in for at least two racks but usually three, and I build myself a chip castle. Noobs think you made a lot of money at the table, and swings don't weigh as heavily on your mind, and you never have to buy back in when you sink say 50BB in a long sad losing session. IED enthusiast fucked around with this message at 14:15 on May 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 14:09
|
|
|
IED enthusiast posted:stuff Glad to see a good poker thread pop up. I occasionally read 2+2, but it's mostly for site/software news/updates. Poker is 100% a money game. In "The Theory of Poker" David Sklansky notes (correctly) that poker would be a boring game for boring/bored people comparing no-money poker to a coin flip or a dice roll (I'm paraphrasing), since you could call down or shove all day long with no risk or challenge, and it's money creates that risk and challenge. By contrast, I love playing tien len, but that's a card game that definitely doesn't need money in order for it to be challenging and fun. If newbies or the unpracticed are looking for resources, I've read the following: Crushing the Microstakes (ebook only) - Nathan "Blackrain79" Williams - Williams is the most winningest microstakes player with the most hands played. I went from a losing player, to breakeven player, to winning player with this book in a very very short time. He lays out player types, seat positions, hand ranges and betting ranges in this fairly short book. This book is very instructional, i.e., "if this, then do that' with the aim of getting the losing reader to start winning ASAP if they follow the directions and don't get out of line. It's also about microstakes onlie poker, but you can apply the principles to low stakes live if you substitute $1/$2 for $.01/$.02, etc. and learn how to internalize HUD data. His website/blog is also a great companion to his book. I don;t know about Jonathan Little's Little Green Book, but I would recommend this as the place to start. The Theory of Poker - David Sklansky - Sklansky is kind of the godfather of poker theory and while much of what he says in his books is outdated, this book is really about the, uh, theory of poker in general. He introduces concepts like pot odds, implied odds, reverse implied odds, value betting, bluffing, outs etc via the various types of poker games, so it is not Holdem specific. This is the second book I read and I've read it twice. The Elements of Poker - Tommy Angelo - This is more philosophical in how a player approaches (or should) poker. It's easy to read, thoughtful, and witty -- I personally like his section on the EV of mouse smashing (I have never smashed a mouse.....yet). The Grinder's Manual (ebook only) - Peter "Carroters" Clarke - Clarke is a young pro-turned-coach with a philosophy background, and this book is basically Crushing the Microstakes on steroids. It's massive with lots of examples and explanations and concepts. I wish this was around when I started playing, so I "re-started" and slowed my game and took my time to think about and apply the concepts he lays out. Starts out basic and gets pretty advanced to the end. This just came out last April and is slf-published, so be sure to overlook typos and other miscellaneous errors. There's a 2+2 thread about this book that the author and Mason Malmuth participate in. Clarke has a podcast and YouTube channel called "Carrot Corner." The Mental Game of Poker - Jared Tendler - Tendler is a former sports (golf, if you count that) psychologist who does poker mental game coaching now. He discusses tilt, what it is, how it manifests itself, and how to manage and overcome it in realizable ways. I recommend this for anyone serious about poker. Professional No-Limit Holdem: Vol 1 and Small Stakes No-Limit Holdem - Sunny Mehta, Matt Flynn, Ed Miller - This is a pair of, in my opinion, pretty good, but not great poker books, but I'm pretty novice of a poker player, so what do I know. The chapter on SPR is really the meat of what they talk about (I forget which book). I find a lot of the other concepts either highfalutin or filler - their examples seem a bit pie-in-the-sky. Poker Math That Matters - Owen Gaines - Gaines is a full-time online pro and family man. Simple, easy-to-read book with problems at the end of each chapter to work through. He covers counting outs, pot odds, implied odds, and other poker numbery things. Very useful. I've read several others, but these are the ones that really stick out in terms of beginner/novice usefulness. Harrington's Online Cash Games is pretty good, I guess. I read it after Theory of Poker, and it helped fill in gaps of Crushing the Micros info with 6-max play and plenty of examples and fleshing out thought-processes. Oh, and if anyone wants to hear my bad beat story (you probably don't), I just had my worst day ever yesterday - I found a nice aggro-whale and handed him ~500BBs by running my TP+ w/draws on the flop and him drawing out on me every time in under an hour. edit: Oh, for anyone interested in tournament books, Kill Everyone and The Raiser's Edge are pretty much the universally agreed-upon books to read. They talk about ICM, M-number (I think the authors call it a C-number or something different), shove ranges, etc. I'm not a big tourney player, so I mostly skimmed them. Subjunctivitis fucked around with this message at 11:24 on Jun 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 11:17
|
|
|
Subjunctivitis posted:Glad to see a good poker thread pop up. I occasionally read 2+2, but it's mostly for site/software news/updates. quote:I can play my “A” game at any stake. I regularly play 1-2 and 100-200 on the same day and it makes no difference to me. edit: It does turn out that, practically speaking, most people don't care about games, and the only way to motivate most people to play poker properly is to make them pay for it, but that's on those people, not the game. twodot fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Jun 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
twodot posted:This is real dumb, it's possible to make dumb, thoughtless moves in any game with "no risk" so long as you don't care about the outcome of the game. Other bluffing/price setting games exist, but no one blathers about how playing those games without money versus playing for quarters is a fundamental change. I'm going to go with Phil Gordon on this: I think you're confusing poker with "Whose Line is it Anyway?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 00:36
|
|
|
Yeah, I still struggle with the "why does poker require money to be fun?" question. I can say that empirically, it really does; every "for fun" game I've ever played has just devolved into sillyness where people are shoving every hand out out of boredom. Websites that offer "free poker" have players doing insane things that you'd almost never see at a real table. I hear "higher stakes" play money games - where you have to have earned tons of fake chips to get there - tend to be a little more competitive, but still aren't the same. I think a big part of the "why" is that at first glance, poker can really look like a game of luck. You can start with the best hand, do everything right, and get destroyed by a bad runout. It's too easy when you're playing for free to just attribute everything to luck. Playing for money - where results matter - makes you stop and think. You start to see players that are consistently winning, and wonder if there's something more to it. You want what the winning players have, and that drives you to figure it out. What's interesting is that the stakes really matter as well. If you take a player who plays $1000 buy-in games and put them in a $5 buy-in game, most of the time they're not going to take it seriously. They know they can play for much more elsewhere, and once you've lost a $5000 pot, losing a $10 pot seems like child's play. So not only do you need to play for money, you have to play for money that means something to you. That all being said, this is a trap for new players. If you make a decent amount of money in your daily job, that doesn't mean you should go hop in a $1000 tournament because winning anything less would be nothing to you. Good players see money as a points system. You start with a small amount of points, and build it up until you can play for a big amount of points. Starting at high stakes just means you're going to be incredibly crushed for a long time, and most players won't enjoy that and can't sustain it. You should start at small stakes to learn the game and take that poo poo seriously, even if that money means nothing to you. In best practice, the money shouldn't mean anything to you; it's just how you keep track of how well you're doing. Work your way up, and you'll do much better in the long run. Imaduck fucked around with this message at 13:40 on Jun 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 02:22
|
|
|
Indeed, and to expand on your post Imaduck, money's the reason why good winning players have higher winrates at lower stakes than at higher stakes. I (surprise, surprise) prefer to play against people who make dumb or careless plays because "it only costs $.25 or $5 to see the flop" with J4o and "anything can happen" or who frequently open shove preflop. I play $5NL online and have friends who wouldn't even touch those games because the stakes are so low they couldn't be bothered to care. One of those friends will still play about 50% of hands in home games because the blinds are often so much cheaper than in casinos. All this mentality does is make poker more profitable for someone like me (or someone better). There have been a few times where I've played in spontaneous "$0NL" home games, but I play the same as usual because I view it as a training/practice opportunity for when I DO play for money. Regarding different games for different limits, I saw a YouTube series by a mid-high stakes online pro (Felix Schneiders) who went back and started grinding his way from $2NL to a $8000 bankroll and was losing big time when he started because he was playing his GTO game at the lowest stakes where that strategy doesn't work and was leveling himself into making losing plays, so he had to adjust to a more fit-or-fold TAG style in order to beat those games.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
Imaduck posted:Yeah, I still struggle with the "why does poker require money to be fun?" question. I can say that empirically, it really does; every "for fun" game I've ever played has just devolved into sillyness where people are shoving every hand out out of boredom. Websites that offer "free poker" have players doing insane things that you'd almost never see at a real table. I hear "higher stakes" play money games - where you have to have earned tons of fake chips to get there - tend to be a little more competitive, but still aren't the same. I was in Treasure Island playing at their one going table one time and this old failed wizard looking fucker that was in there was complaining about the day Vivek Rajkumar and his friends came in and "ruined the game" by just shoving 500 in every hand. Made me wanna bust him but that game is terrible and I can't take playing in there very much. They offer this thing where if you do I think 40 hours at the table they give you 500 bucks at the end of the week, I forget the details, but it means it just attracts some real bone dry grinders at a 1/2 table. No thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
Any suggestions on places to play for an amateur in Vegas? I mostly hung out at the 1/2 limit table at Golden Nugget last time, going to give NL a shot this time. I read a David Sklansky book so I'm basically a pro 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 03:38
|
|
|
Sheep-Goats posted:They offer this thing where if you do I think 40 hours at the table they give you 500 bucks at the end of the week, I forget the details, but it means it just attracts some real bone dry grinders at a 1/2 table. No thanks. So sit down and basically only play a 5%-10% range and you get a "free" $500? Which Treasure Island is this? Edit: Just looked it up - Vegas. Tiered cash-in-hand for every 10 hours of play with brackets end up breaking down to $5/hr up to $9.99/hr. Subjunctivitis fucked around with this message at 04:07 on Jun 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 04:00
|
|
|
Sheep-Goats posted:I was in Treasure Island playing at their one going table one time and this old failed wizard looking fucker that was in there was complaining about the day Vivek Rajkumar and his friends came in and "ruined the game" by just shoving 500 in every hand. Made me wanna bust him but that game is terrible and I can't take playing in there very much. They offer this thing where if you do I think 40 hours at the table they give you 500 bucks at the end of the week, I forget the details, but it means it just attracts some real bone dry grinders at a 1/2 table. No thanks. Haha, that was like 6 years ago at the Wynn, 7 of us joined a 1/3NL table and proceeded to make it 1/3/6/12/24/48 and sometimes 96
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 05:38
|
|
|
JaySB posted:Haha, that was like 6 years ago at the Wynn, 7 of us joined a 1/3NL table and proceeded to make it 1/3/6/12/24/48 and sometimes 96 Well there's some old fucker still bitching about it
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 10:42
|
|
|
Bahaha. I love live poker.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 10:47
|
|
|
maskenfreiheit posted:Any suggestions on places to play for an amateur in Vegas? I liked to play Caesar's on the weekend because the nightclub would draw in drunks sometimes but I think that club is past its prime now so maybe that's no longer true. If the rodeo convention or anything else that draws southerners into town the games at Harrahs can get pretty sloppy. Venetian is the best run room in town even though they cut it in half size wise recently. Overall there's enough local grinders that if a room gets too good they come and even that out, so pretty much play where you like the room and keep an ear out. Some of the games have worse rake structures but that also means a lot less of the nitty older locals -- not that its hard to make money off of them but they can parch up a table pretty bad. Subjunctivitis posted:So sit down and basically only play a 5%-10% range and you get a "free" $500? Which Treasure Island is this? Maybe it's more out in the open now but that promo used to be something they tried to keep under wraps for obvious reasons -- no one wants to come play at a table where the attraction is you can be a huge loving nit for 60 hours a week and collect a salary for it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 10:51
|
|
|
fisting by many posted:Bahaha. I love live poker. I would like to add that this man was actually angry and offended at what Vivek had done to him, this wasn't like a good old days story, it was like a "the day the blacks moved in" story
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 10:52
|
|
|
Sheep-Goats posted:I would like to add that this man was actually angry and offended at what Vivek had done to him, this wasn't like a good old days story, it was like a "the day the blacks moved in" story Oh I know, it's funny because I can imagine this guy at any room I've played in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 11:26
|
|
|
maskenfreiheit posted:Any suggestions on places to play for an amateur in Vegas? Caesar's is the best place to play on the strip now, deal wise. They have the lowest rake pretty much anywhere: 5% rake, $4 max, no drop for bonus. They also give $2/hr. in comps. If you're in Vegas between now and July, go to the Rio and check out the World Series of Poker! Even if you're not a poker player, just walk through the room; it's really an amazing thing to see thousands of people playing poker at the same time in the same place. If you are a poker player, play the cash there. The action is loving amazing. Sheep-Goats posted:They offer this thing where if you do I think 40 hours at the table they give you 500 bucks at the end of the week, I forget the details, but it means it just attracts some real bone dry grinders at a 1/2 table. No thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
Imaduck posted:In general, 1/2 games are going to be pretty casual and newbie friendly. Harrah's and The Flamingo tend to be very casual and full of tourists and new players. If the Mirage has games going, they're usually pretty relaxed as well. If you're on the south end of the strip, Excalibur is a good option. Thanks for the tip! I'll be there late July during Defcon. (Which has discounted rooms in The Flamingo, Linq, and Harrah's that will be pretty popular) I don't want to get destroyed and there's a strong overlap between people who play poker and people who hack gibsons so I may avoid the strip's poker rooms. I'm thinking of heading downtown since I had a good time at Golden Nugget. Oh, also I want to actually gamble on this trip a little, are there any sub--5 dollar craps/blackjack/roulette tables anywhere? (Also down for slots if they're old timey and literally spew coins)
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 01:39
|
|
|
maskenfreiheit posted:I don't want to get destroyed and there's a strong overlap between people who play poker and people who hack gibsons so I may avoid the strip's poker rooms. quote:I'm thinking of heading downtown since I had a good time at Golden Nugget. quote:(Also down for slots if they're old timey and literally spew coins)
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 06:59
|
|
|
Imaduck posted:I wouldn't be too worried about it (or at least, no more worried than you should be at a 1/2 table anywhere else). Just play tight and don't go too crazy and you should be fine. And remember to keep a healthy attitude about it: you're only going to be playing for a relatively short time, so luck will still be a huge factor in your outcome, even if you play well. Enjoy yourself, be conservative, and make sure that no matter if you win or lose it all, you're still going to feel like you had a good time. Thanks a ton, and my bad, I actually crossed my wires and posted some of these in the wrong thread
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 15:07
|
|
|
maskenfreiheit posted:Thanks for the tip! I hear conventions make the poker games better. Being smart (even computer smart!) doesn't necessarily translate to poker skills. But the golden nugget is a fine place to play 1/2 and if that time I went to vegas five years ago still means anything probably has as soft a game as you're going to find. I hope they still rake in 50c increments giving players actual half-dollar coins in change. I'm not sure why but I thought that was cool.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 15:48
|
|
|
fisting by many posted:I hear conventions make the poker games better. Being smart (even computer smart!) doesn't necessarily translate to poker skills. Obscure currency is always good. I like to stock up on two dollar bills before I go, people seem to like them. (Ex: Tipping a cocktail waitress with a $2 is a great ticket to a literal glass of whiskey next time she comes around) Speaking of tipping, what is the etiquette for tipper poker dealers? I usually throw a dollar when I win a pot... I've so far been playing low limit so pots are usually only like 20-30. maskenfreiheit fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Jun 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
maskenfreiheit posted:Speaking of tipping, what is the etiquette for tipper poker dealers? Most of the grinders tip less, because we know how much it'll cut into profits in the long run (that poo poo adds up fast). A lot of tourists tip big, because they're just there for fun anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
When I play live ($1/$2 and not often), I'm similar to Imaduck -- I tip $1 to every dealer no matter what (my bad variance/bad play isn't their fault) and $1 for every middling pot (~30bbs), then throw in $1-$3 on top of that if it's a big/huge pot (100bb+). It's not worth it to tip when I Cbet the flop and take down a couple standard preflop bets. Since I'm not a live grinder and only play these games for a few hours (1-4), I can typically expect my tipping budget to stick between $5-$10. Like Sheep-Goats has said, at low limits it is often tough to stay ahead of the rake especially when you add in dealer tips.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
maskenfreiheit posted:Thanks for the tip! A lot of those dorks are terrible so play at the Flamingo during that, they make the usual dork errors of thinking they're pot committed when they're obviously crushed and doing bad aggro against old men with white hair who would have been out three streets ago if they didn't have the immortal nuts. Flamingo also has Vegas's second best dealer, Mike, who may or may not be just running the room at this point (Best dealer is the half Dominican girl in Venetian but I forgot her name unfortunately) For tipping if you win a 50BB+ pot give the dealer a dollar and you'll be in the "guy's a little stingy but not a dickhead" zone -- if you're running over table or something and it's like your fifth 3-bet / c-bet take it down in a row then maybe give a dollar too. I tip the dealers sometimes when they go out of their way to keep the game going fast or when they call for rake reduction or something like that that actively makes / saves me money. I would only really tip more than a dollar if I tripled up or something like that, I'm very bad tipper though, sorry poker dealers I know you deserve better If you're looking for cheap tables I kinda like Orleans for that. It's not too far off the strip, you don't have to go all the way downtown, and its not so remote that it feels desolate or gross in there. I mean, there are a lot of old people and you can tell you're not on the strip any more but it's a huge place and at least they give half a poo poo. Taught my dad Pai Gow there and they had a five dollar blackjack table with good rules. They probably have three dollar craps outside of peak hours -- you can call them and ask. On the strip I don't think you're going to find less than five dollar craps much any more. raton fucked around with this message at 03:57 on Jun 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
What's the typical payout structure for tournaments? I downloaded that Bravo app to scout stuff to checkout in Vegas, and I've noticed pretty much every poker room seems to offer these 75-150 dollar tourneys. How far in do you need to get to at least win your buy in? Or is it usually all or nothing? I was thinking of budgeting about 150 to do a tournament and 150 for some low limit cash game fun
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
Lower buy-in live tournaments typically have a large percentage of the entry fee going to the casino. You should inquire with the specific card rooms to get information on what the casino's take is. Very often for $75 tournaments, something like 40-50% of the entry fee goes straight to casino, which makes this tournaments basically unbeatable. They're also often structured with few chips and very fast blind structures. If you're just trying to play something cheap for fun, this is probably okay, but if you're trying to build up a bankroll, $75 live tournaments are probably a bad investment. Payout structures vary wildly, but typically 8-20% of the field gets paid. I'd say 10-12% is probably the most common payout, and re-entries usually don't count towards the player count. Typically, the minimum payouts will be very close to whatever you bought in for. First place will usually get a hefty chunk of the prize pool; usually somewhere in the 25-50% range. There usually aren't big prize jumps until you get to the final table. In smaller tournaments, there might only be 2-4 spots that pay out, and the jumps can be pretty big for those.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
Also depending on how many hours you plan to play you might qualify for the weekend freeroll tournaments -- I forget how many hours it is. Harrahs and Flamingo ran them, maybe some other places like that that have trouble getting a 2/5 table going. They use the same kind of small stack fast structure things the cheaper paid ones do. They run early in the day (they're catered to the older locals that love them) I don't know if that's worth the time for you or not, just call the rooms and ask them about it (the numbers are on the Bravo app and sometimes, if they've updated it, I think the promos are listed in the app too) The Harrahs one had usually 8-10 tables at start, like three or four hours to finish up I think. I don't remember that stuff very well. Oh and almost always the freerolls are actually ten dollar tournaments where you get a double stack if you pay the ten when you sit -- they use that money as an apology to the dealers for making them show up for that poo poo. I think the final table is the same as finishing in the money for those but only the top three get any sort of three digit payout, maybe it's more spread out though. I only played two of them. raton fucked around with this message at 08:27 on Jun 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 08:21
|
|
|
maskenfreiheit posted:What's the typical payout structure for tournaments? I downloaded that Bravo app to scout stuff to checkout in Vegas, and I've noticed pretty much every poker room seems to offer these 75-150 dollar tourneys. How far in do you need to get to at least win your buy in? Or is it usually all or nothing? Your budget will probably last you a total of 90 minutes  I would recommend finding a 4/8 O8 game and pounding free drinks until you run out of money or get kicked out. You don't even have to know how to play O8.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
fisting by many posted:Your budget will probably last you a total of 90 minutes I thought 50*BB was a good heuristic for minimum to bring to a table? I played a pretty long time with a bankroll about that size playing 1/2 limit... maybe I need to adjust for NL? Sheep-Goats posted:Also depending on how many hours you plan to play you might qualify for the weekend freeroll tournaments -- I forget how many hours it is. Harrahs and Flamingo ran them, maybe some other places like that that have trouble getting a 2/5 table going. They use the same kind of small stack fast structure things the cheaper paid ones do. Cool, I mainly see it as a way to cheaply get some experience. Bravo says 12 hours to qualify for the freeroll at the Flamingo - I'll keep that in mind. (Time spent in a paid tournament counts towards that, right?) It's 70 to enter (split 49 "entry fee", $21 "admin fee"), 1k payout guaranteed. So on one hand, probably not best odds but OTOH it's likely people won't be as experienced as Caesar's or fancy places like Aria or the Bellagio. (Or is my fear of sharks stupid and I should just find a low limit table at someplace fancy and learn?)
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 15:34
|
|
|
As mentioned super low stakes tournaments have really high rake and generally fast structures to kick out the plebs the casinos are only making a few bucks from as quickly as possible. If you are a winning tournament player (not just better than average but enough so to have an advantage over the rake+structure) you are probably looking at a few dollars an hour at most expectation. 50bb at 1/2 is nothing given a typical opening raise is 5bb or more. You could bust in 10 minutes, you could run it up to infinity, but most likely you will be bored and sad in far less time than anticipated if that's the entirety of your poker budget. There are no sharks at low stakes, everyone is either really bad at poker or stupid enough to split an apartment 4 ways to try and grind it for a living.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 15:39
|
|
|
I agree with the others; unless your only goal is to play an hour or two in tournaments just to say you did it, $150 isn't enough to play in a casino with. Even for a very good player, there's a very high chance you'll bust long before you hit the 12 hour mark at Harrah's. This is even worse if you're playing with scared money since you're unwilling to rebuy. Buying in for 50BB is short at a cash game, and requires a different, high variance strategy. Casino cash games often involve deep stacks and big preflop raises. I don't think tournaments count towards the 12 hours for freeroll. I don't want to discourage you, but you need to figure out what your goals are and plan accordingly. If you want to just play, then yeah, $150 will get you a median of 2 hours of play, be it cash or tournament. Sometimes you'll win and get to play much longer than that, but that's a rare result. 1/2 games attract some low level pros sometimes, but it's mostly gonna be vacationers that play at home a bit and are okay, but not great. There will not be any good players at $75 or even $150 multi table tournaments. Imaduck fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Jun 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2017 23:23
|
|
|
Total gambling budget for the trip is up to 500, it looks like the maximum buy in at both Flamingo and Caesar's (two spots I was eyeing) is 300 for their 1/2 NL so I think I'll give that a shot and if I bust out or do poorly will probably use the remaining two hundred on non-gambling fun. Honestly I'm mostly looking to have fun and learn, but winning would be nice obviously. I'm a bit of a statistics geek, been reading a copy of Sklansky's Theory of Poker. maskenfreiheit fucked around with this message at 00:49 on Jun 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 00:41
|
|
|
maskenfreiheit posted:Total gambling budget for the trip is up to 500, it looks like the maximum buy in at both Flamingo and Caesar's (two spots I was eyeing) is 300 for their 1/2 NL so I think I'll give that a shot and if I bust out or do poorly will probably use the remaining two hundred on non-gambling fun. If I were you, I'd skip the tourney thing for above reasons. Find a local casino with lower entry fees/rake and play those, and the games *should* be pretty soft. One of the casinos I go to has a $30 tourney ($20+$10) w/ $10 add-ons and $5 re-buys. I can take $60 and play for a few hours (I've never won anything there myself  ).If you're in Vegas for a few days and want to make your $500 last, I'd play short-stack $1/$2 for $100 - just fold like 90-95% of hands (download Equilab to see what this looks like) from the first 4 seats, and fold all but QQ+, AQ+ in the blinds -- this means you'll be playing almost exclusively from the Button, Cutoff and Hijack. You'll be looking for spots to shove your whole stack ASAP, so you'll have to be very aggressive when you have something good (TPTK+). Otherwise, you don't want to chase draws or bluff. It's a lousy way to play if you want action, but great if you're interested in chilling with free drinks and playing a hand here and there. Tommy Angelo noted in "The Elements of Poker" (I'm paraphrasing): My wife was out with some friends and a couple guys that were there said to her, "So your husband's a poker pro, eh? You must learn some secrets from him - got any advice for us?" She said, "Fold more hands." On the topic of bankroll in general, I don't show up to a casino without at least 300BBs. I plan for the possible/inevitable bust and rebuy. I have friends who will beg me to go when I don't have proper bankroll and they say, "Dude, you can just buy in for $40. You don't have to buy in for a full stack." But I'm there to win money, and the most possible, not fart it out slowly (though that happens sometimes). A 20BB, 40BB, 60BB BR just doesn't cut it. If you're playing a SS game, you especially need to be bankrolled properly with more rebuys.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
Subjunctivitis posted:Tommy Angelo noted in "The Elements of Poker" (I'm paraphrasing):
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 07:33
|
|
|
You could drag it out for a while with 150 on a 1/2 table but I always sat with 300. As mentioned people generally open bigger live at 1/2 (like 10 is normal) so even if you're used to playing at the 75BB buyin level it's not going to feel the same. The logic for sitting with a max buyin at 1/2 is usually along the lines of "people make a lot of bad mistakes here, I want to get paid as much as I can for them" but if you're a new player and your logic is more "I hope I play okay and don't embarrass myself" playing shorter can be okay too. And of course you can make a profit shortstacking poker in some (many) situations but it's hard to do that with a 4 or 5 dollar rake and it's a little dry trying when you get like 40 hands an hour in. I don't think the time you play in tourneys counts towards the freeroll as I never played many tourneys but you can call the poker room and ask them. They're happy to answer questions about this stuff because if they can lock in a tourist for 12 hours that's pretty good win for the room (people tend to play a few hours and then bounce). Flamingo, Harrahs and Caesars are all in walking distance from each other. The last time I was in Vegas I played for a while in Harrahs because some hillbilly convention was in town and they all went to bed or had busted out by midnight and I walked over to Caesars to hopefully catch some people coming out of the nightclub. The level of play is pretty consistent at the 1/2 tables in all three of those places. The only room that I'm aware of that has a rep for generally worse 1/2 players is Planet Hollywood but that's because the rake is higher and the room setup is garbo so more of the locals stay away (locals aren't great players necessarily, especially at 1/2, but they're generally better than tourists if for no other reason than they've got more hours in). 1/2 at Aria or Bellagio is only different in that there's a tiny bit more aggression. It's pretty much the same game at any property on the strip. If you buyin for 200 I think you can probably play your normal game. raton fucked around with this message at 11:30 on Jun 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 11:27
|
|
|
maskenfreiheit posted:gambling Buy SSNLHE FOR .75 and 3.99 shipping on half dot com read the book. make a starting hand spreadsheet or pm me and ill give you mine. play 2/4 or 3/6 limit. 3/6 is beatable 2/4 is probably not (rake) although im up significantly this year playing 2/4. 500usd should last you at least 24 hours even if you drink yourself into oblivion and forget your starting hand chart. if you follow it religiously you should be able to play for quite a while. "fold more hands." IED enthusiast fucked around with this message at 13:54 on Jul 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2017 12:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 23:34 |
|
|
So what are most people's heuristics for when to go in vs fold? I've been practicing and notice I have tendency to get bored and try to see the flop with sub par hands like J8s. Just don't see the flop w/o at least a pair or suited face cards?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 14:30
|
|