Well you just get used to it i guess. Start with 4-6 talbes and then slowly add tables as you get more comfortable . Its all about making quick decisions. Now in FR you don't want to be playing more than 15% of your hands anyways so most of it is just hitting the fold button. I wish I had a macro so I could just hit a key and it would fold rather than havin to click. Now granted i timed out on a couple big hands PF but i think overall i was winning more due to the more hands per hour I was getting
The Lure of Hold'Em
- Thread starter StandardDeviant
- Start date
I suppose I was a bit overzealous in my comment. I agree that there is creativity in BJ, just not in the actual play of the game, but in everything that surrounds it.
As I learn more about poker, I am coming to believe that there isn't that much more creativity there either -- just a little bluffing now and then -- and I would have to agree that BJ is 24/7 bluffing against the house
As I learn more about poker, I am coming to believe that there isn't that much more creativity there either -- just a little bluffing now and then -- and I would have to agree that BJ is 24/7 bluffing against the house
now this statement is pure poppycock!!!
For one thing, I know for a FACT that online poker is FULL of COLLUSION.
Why replace BJ which:
has fixed rules for your opponent
is completely mathematics based
is beatable
with Poker which has opponents:
that act on hunches
have peculiar tolerances for risk
that unknowingly (to you) team play
with tells to continuously try to decipher
For one thing, I know for a FACT that online poker is FULL of COLLUSION.
Why replace BJ which:
has fixed rules for your opponent
is completely mathematics based
is beatable
with Poker which has opponents:
that act on hunches
have peculiar tolerances for risk
that unknowingly (to you) team play
with tells to continuously try to decipher
10 Hours Under My Belt
I just completed my first 10 hours of 2-4 hold'em play at my local casino, and I have to say that I really enjoyed the experience. The experience is quite different from BJ in some respects, and quite similar in others. Bottom line, I enjoyed myself and will be playing more in the future. Can a WSOP entry be far behind? :laugh:
I just completed my first 10 hours of 2-4 hold'em play at my local casino, and I have to say that I really enjoyed the experience. The experience is quite different from BJ in some respects, and quite similar in others. Bottom line, I enjoyed myself and will be playing more in the future. Can a WSOP entry be far behind? :laugh:
Im curious to hear what facts you have that online poker is full of collusion. And please dont use the Ultimate Bet example because that is old news. Im guessing you have deposited a few times on full tilt or poker stars, gotten sucked out on when you had AA and utimately concluded that online poker is rigged and cant be trusted. A true sob story.
Being a successful poker player takes many qualities that arent necessarily required to succeed at blackjack, some have it and some dont. Its survival of fittest, evolve or die.
Being a successful poker player takes many qualities that arent necessarily required to succeed at blackjack, some have it and some dont. Its survival of fittest, evolve or die.
An Analysis of the Thread
It appears that with very small bankrolls online poker offers very low limits that allows one to play and learn.
Some are saying poker is hard and others saying easy. This is probably due to experience and/or game selection. This seems to underscore there can be quite a learning curve.
Possible order of profitability:
Online poker, if many tables
Blackjack
Brick and Mortar Poker
I would think the mental effort to play multiple tables online would lead to more fatigue then BJ.
With all the games you face the issue of some form of cheating or human error from the player.
Coming from a very experienced bj background with some online poker playing experience. The issues that concern me are:
Pokers long learning curve
A skill one may not be able to master
Some have mentioned the idea of having different investment opportunities. There is something also to be said for mastery of one strategy. If one is already highly proficient in one game then you face opportunity costs for every moment not involved in your primary game. Probably worse would be to damage your bank while learning a new game.:joker::whip:
It appears that with very small bankrolls online poker offers very low limits that allows one to play and learn.
Some are saying poker is hard and others saying easy. This is probably due to experience and/or game selection. This seems to underscore there can be quite a learning curve.
Possible order of profitability:
Online poker, if many tables
Blackjack
Brick and Mortar Poker
I would think the mental effort to play multiple tables online would lead to more fatigue then BJ.
With all the games you face the issue of some form of cheating or human error from the player.
Coming from a very experienced bj background with some online poker playing experience. The issues that concern me are:
Pokers long learning curve
A skill one may not be able to master
Some have mentioned the idea of having different investment opportunities. There is something also to be said for mastery of one strategy. If one is already highly proficient in one game then you face opportunity costs for every moment not involved in your primary game. Probably worse would be to damage your bank while learning a new game.:joker::whip:
Actually; if you go all-in with AA and get called by an underpair you have about an 82% chance of beating him. But that's beside the point. Poker is not about winning hands, [/B] it's about winning money.
Supposing you're playing blackjack, and the house decides to make a rule whereby you are ALWAYS dealt an 18. If you play, you're playing at a "coin toss" of about 49%. But suppose the house tells you that winning hands pay 2 to 1! This is exactly what is happening in your poker analogy.
Let's carry this even further. Supposing you're playing poker in a 9 handed game; you pick up pocket rockets; and decide to go all in. What is the optimal number of opponents that you would like to have calling you? The answer is ALL EIGHT of them! You'll only win the hand about 30% of thlie time, but you'll be getting 8 to 1 on your money, and that's not even including the money in the blinds.
Supposing you're playing blackjack, and the house decides to make a rule whereby you are ALWAYS dealt an 18. If you play, you're playing at a "coin toss" of about 49%. But suppose the house tells you that winning hands pay 2 to 1! This is exactly what is happening in your poker analogy.
Let's carry this even further. Supposing you're playing poker in a 9 handed game; you pick up pocket rockets; and decide to go all in. What is the optimal number of opponents that you would like to have calling you? The answer is ALL EIGHT of them! You'll only win the hand about 30% of thlie time, but you'll be getting 8 to 1 on your money, and that's not even including the money in the blinds.
WHY?
BECAUSE:
Blackjack "Has fixed rules for your opponent
is completely mathematics based
is beatable"
and because poker "has opponents:
That act on hunches
have peculiar tolerances for risk
with tells to continuously try to decipher"
I left out the part about team play because your statements about it are simply not true.
this is SO true. it's very easy to second-guess yourself and doubt your abilities at poker. if you don't show an immediate positive return, lots of people get frustrated and assume they suck or something.
truth is, variance in poker can be almost (or just as) brutal as in blackjack.
fun fact: it takes a lottttt longer for your expectation to regress to the mean in poker because you're getting something like 25 hands per hour (assuming live play), and you're folding around 85% of those hands.
this may be a horrible analogy, but imagine you were playing blackjack and you were, for some reason, wonging to the point that you only play when you'd have a max bet out. that opportunity comes along once every few shoes or so (not entirely sure, but that's close, right?). as soon as the TC drops below +5, you wong out. let's assume you average out to one max bet per shoe. how long would it take, in this obviously contrived example, for your expectation to regress to the mathematical mean?
my apologies for what is probably an absurd example, i'm still learning this whole wacky "blackjack" thing, where 74o is actually a hand worth playing.
truth is, variance in poker can be almost (or just as) brutal as in blackjack.
fun fact: it takes a lottttt longer for your expectation to regress to the mean in poker because you're getting something like 25 hands per hour (assuming live play), and you're folding around 85% of those hands.
this may be a horrible analogy, but imagine you were playing blackjack and you were, for some reason, wonging to the point that you only play when you'd have a max bet out. that opportunity comes along once every few shoes or so (not entirely sure, but that's close, right?). as soon as the TC drops below +5, you wong out. let's assume you average out to one max bet per shoe. how long would it take, in this obviously contrived example, for your expectation to regress to the mathematical mean?
my apologies for what is probably an absurd example, i'm still learning this whole wacky "blackjack" thing, where 74o is actually a hand worth playing.
this can be a slippery logical slope... don't mean to reference other threads but i posted a bit about expectation vs perceived ranges in some other poker thread. basically, if you lose because you run into the top of someone's range, don't sweat it. you played it fine.
SnGs are 100% solved. they are incredibly dull. you can beat them for around 10% ROI if you care to learn how. SnGs above the $100 level are completely dead.
SnGs are 100% solved. they are incredibly dull. you can beat them for around 10% ROI if you care to learn how. SnGs above the $100 level are completely dead.
1/2 online, the play is hoooorrrrribleeee. i'd say if you can beat 1/2 online you can probably beat most 10/20 live games. if you can beat 25c/50c online you can probably beat 5/10.
bj is lots of luck, too. ez game when you split 8s vs a dealer 5 at a TC of +5, catch a 3 on each, double, get 18 and 19 and "oh lol 6 card 21!"
lose your stack? i mean there are times when you can get away from aces but when you open, someone flats in the blinds and flop comes K49 rainbow you just lose your stack. that's how it works...
bj is lots of luck, too. ez game when you split 8s vs a dealer 5 at a TC of +5, catch a 3 on each, double, get 18 and 19 and "oh lol 6 card 21!"
lose your stack? i mean there are times when you can get away from aces but when you open, someone flats in the blinds and flop comes K49 rainbow you just lose your stack. that's how it works...
i don't mass multitable, but most people who do stack the tables on top of each other. as soon as you act on one table, another pops up in its place.
i'd probably be -EV trying to play like that, but some people do it and they absolutely crush (look up nanonoko on pokertableratings.com, he's a beast)
i'd probably be -EV trying to play like that, but some people do it and they absolutely crush (look up nanonoko on pokertableratings.com, he's a beast)