Poker results?

Lonesome Gambler

Well-Known Member
#1
Sure, there's plenty of forums for poker, but I wonder about the perspective of blackjack players and other APs that have decided to add solid, winning poker to their repertoire. Since my bankroll has taken some hits recently, and there are no playable games in my area, I've been focusing a lot more on poker until I can get some time to travel to some good games; I play mostly online, but I prefer live. Here's the details:

Live: $1/2NL. It's not "200NL" due to certain restrictions that force a capped buyin on these games, so you're playing with 50BB stacks. In the $2/5 game, you only have 20BB stacks, so this game can be VERY profitable with some alternative strategies, but it's too high-variance for me at the moment. So far I've had some success over a very small sample size, and I find the players in these games to be hilariously inept compared to even micro-limit online players. I've been staying away from the live games for a bit so I could focus on clearing some bonuses online.

Online: I've moved up from 10NL to 25NL and currently play between 4-8 tables a couple of hours a day, when possible. Although I generally dislike the idea of tracking software, I'd be an idiot not to use it, since the site I play at is known for solid players at the micro stakes (all of which are likely using HUDs). The other reason I decided to get a tracker with a HUD (heads-up display, if you're wondering; the little box that tells you stats like how often people enter pots, how often they raise, and so on) is so that I can analyze my stats and see a visual depiction of my "table image," which has helped a lot. It also helped to verify that I'm a reasonably solid player once I compared my stats to stats on the 2+2 forum. So now I'm just grinding the micros, clearing bonuses, and getting plenty of hands under my belt.

How many of you guys have taken some serious time to add poker to your arsenal? Are there any tips/recommendations on books or concepts that have helped you? Do you wish you could just sit at a nice shoe game instead of getting your big hands crushed by bigger hands over and over?
 

mjbballar23

Well-Known Member
#2
poker

unless your blackjack bankroll is pushing $30k, i think online poker crushes blackjack in so many ways. zero travel expenses, no heat, no weather issues, lower variance, higher hourly WR, lower bankroll requirements....i could go on and on.
 

AWP

New Member
#3
I think you're absolutely right for low rollers. You can get started in online poker with < $100 and build it while you develop your skills. Many sites have almost no rake at the micro limits, where you can cut your teeth before moving up. There's also a wealth of information available on forums (big fan of 2+2).

As for live play, I've heard it's FAR fishier than online play because the worst online players play at the lowest stakes (2NL? 5NL?) whereas the worst live players play at $1/2NL... :)
 

Lonesome Gambler

Well-Known Member
#4
Let's just say that I definitely see higher-quality play at 25NL than $1/2 live. MUCH higher-quality, especially since a good portion of the competition are regulars multitabling the micros. But yeah, from a BR perspective, it's damn-near unbeatable.
 

1357111317

Well-Known Member
#5
I'm pretty sure if you took an average 10nl table and put it up vs an average 1/2 live table i think the 10nl table would win. But LG and MJ are right, the variance and bankroll requirements for an equal winrate for poker is wayyy lower. The only problem is poker requires much more practice than BJ does to start off.
 

mjbballar23

Well-Known Member
#6
1357111317 said:
I'm pretty sure if you took an average 10nl table and put it up vs an average 1/2 live table i think the 10nl table would win. But LG and MJ are right, the variance and bankroll requirements for an equal winrate for poker is wayyy lower. The only problem is poker requires much more practice than BJ does to start off.
This. With blackjack you can practice for 15 hours and play a winning game, though with high variance and low relative winrate. With poker, you can spend hundred of hours learning the game until you are able to earn a solid winrate online. With poker, its all about getting thousands of hands of experience under your belt and continually working to better yourself. Your reward for putting in the time with poker is a high hourly winrate and a low variance. Its up to you to decide what fits you best. I hate variance so the choice for me is easy.
 

DeTalores

Well-Known Member
#7
Starting with a 2k bankroll for 1/2$ live.
It's pretty much a consensus that 1/2 players live are ridiculously terrible for anyone who is decent at poker, playing tight aggressive is very profitable. While I've played before and had several winning sessions(just now starting to record) I'm just now thinking about switching over from recreational BJ to rec poker for a side income.

I've gone through just about every US poker site bonus whoring at the micro stakes. Online just isn't fun for me compared to live.

If anyone cares to follow my hot streak http://onlinepokerlog.com/blog/DeTalores, guess we'll see if I can hold up over the long run or if I'm getting lucky =]

I'd be glad to discuss types of play or hands if anyone has any interesting hands.
 

Deathclutch

Well-Known Member
#8
DeTalores said:
Starting with a 2k bankroll for 1/2$ live.
It's pretty much a consensus that 1/2 players live are ridiculously terrible for anyone who is decent at poker, playing tight aggressive is very profitable. While I've played before and had several winning sessions(just now starting to record) I'm just now thinking about switching over from recreational BJ to rec poker for a side income.

I've gone through just about every US poker site bonus whoring at the micro stakes. Online just isn't fun for me compared to live.

If anyone cares to follow my hot streak http://onlinepokerlog.com/blog/DeTalores, guess we'll see if I can hold up over the long run or if I'm getting lucky =]

I'd be glad to discuss types of play or hands if anyone has any interesting hands.
That is a terrible casino for blackjack by the way :whip::whip::whip:
 

Lonesome Gambler

Well-Known Member
#10
$1/2 live is hilariously soft at times, but there's a special rule in place where I live that makes the $2/5 games VERY profitable, much more so than normal 500NL games. A friend and I are currently working on a strategy to crush these games, and it's looking nice so far. Stay tuned..

Meanwhile, I'm just sitting here waiting for players to join the $75 SNG on FTP. I figured I'd see how far I could take a $2 sat buyin, and this is the top level I can find. Now I just need players!
 

hawkeye

Well-Known Member
#11
DeTalores,

I have a question on a hand, since you're asking. What's the general feeling on K/7-10? I seem to run into that hand all of the time and I lose to an Ace high all of the time.
 

SleightOfHand

Well-Known Member
#12
hawkeye said:
DeTalores,

I have a question on a hand, since you're asking. What's the general feeling on K/7-10? I seem to run into that hand all of the time and I lose to an Ace high all of the time.
Thats a pretty weak hand. Short handed, Id play that hand only on the button and KTs in the cutoff, but I'm not an expert player.
 

1357111317

Well-Known Member
#13
hawkeye said:
DeTalores,

I have a question on a hand, since you're asking. What's the general feeling on K/7-10? I seem to run into that hand all of the time and I lose to an Ace high all of the time.
Fold it. from everywhere except the button and CO
 

Lonesome Gambler

Well-Known Member
#14
Holy cow, do you mean that you're getting beat at showdown by people holding A high? What game/limit do you play? Small Kings aren't very advantageous, and I would be folding them unless I have tight players in the blinds that I can push around.
 

Deathclutch

Well-Known Member
#15
I just took on my very first casino poker tournament last night and ended up winning the whole thing. The players in a $42 buy in tournament seemed worse than what I face online at .01/.02. I plan to keep studying this game and hopefully become proficient enough for me to become a positive expectation player.
 

mjbballar23

Well-Known Member
#16
Deathclutch said:
I just took on my very first casino poker tournament last night and ended up winning the whole thing. The players in a $42 buy in tournament seemed worse than what I face online at .01/.02. I plan to keep studying this game and hopefully become proficient enough for me to become a positive expectation player.
I dont doubt this at all. congrats!
 

DeTalores

Well-Known Member
#17
Hawkeye it depends not only on your position but your image and the image of the players left to act at the table. If I have a tight image I'll raise it up late position with a few tight players that limped, if there are loose calling stations often I won't even think about it.
K10 is a nice hand to blind steal with, but in a multi-way pot its pretty useless, best you can hope for is Top 2, maybe a 10 high board, but again its hard to handle any aggression.
 

hawkeye

Well-Known Member
#18
It's happened a couple times on the button, with only one other person going on, usually from the second half.

Also, I'm not playing for money. Still doing that "play thousands of hands until you get good" type thing.

I know the obvious ones, the obvious hands, but poker is harder than BJ because I see SO many low hands taking pots. Hands that I had beat with a hand I folded.
 

DeTalores

Well-Known Member
#19
With play money you are going to get called with worse hands a majority of the time. Button stealing isn't really a concept at that level of play. As long as you get your chips in at advantageous times you'll be +ev. It's seemed to me that the difference while moving up through the stakes is reads and recognizing hand ranges.
 

fubster

Well-Known Member
#20
hawkeye said:
DeTalores,

I have a question on a hand, since you're asking. What's the general feeling on K/7-10? I seem to run into that hand all of the time and I lose to an Ace high all of the time.
need wayyyy more info to answer this question. it's very vague.
 
Top