47 replies to this topic

[Arin]

Lets say that you are a poker player who has recently decided to play professionally. Is the correct strategy to determine a specific amount of money that you have to win each night and set limits for yourself or is the correct strategy to play as long as possible if you are winning even if you end up broke by the end of the night. I'm torn between the two because it seems like if winning at poker means whether or not you are eating for the week then playing for long hours seems a little risky but at the same time setting limits seems a little too strict of an approach. What do you guys think?

[xzanos]

Lets say that you are a poker player who has recently decided to play professionally. Is the correct strategy to determine a specific amount of money that you have to win each night and set limits for yourself or is the correct strategy to play as long as possible if you are winning even if you end up broke by the end of the night. I'm torn between the two because it seems like if winning at poker means whether or not you are eating for the week then playing for long hours seems a little risky but at the same time setting limits seems a little too strict of an approach. What do you guys think?

If how you do on Monday determines weather or not you eat on Tuesday, you should not play poker professionally.

If you feel you have an edge at a table, play until you don't feel you have an edge. It may be because the fish left, some good players sat down, or because you're tired, but don't limit yourself by leaving a good game early because you're up $X.

[Zach6668]

First of all, you cannot be a pro unless you are properly rolled. Well, you can, but you'll fail.

You should NEVER be close to being broke, although it does happen. Ideally, and for the purposes of any strategy, it doesn't.

You should play with a bankroll where your risk of ruin is so small it's negligible.

Now, to the next question, playing to win a certain amount in one day is awful. It will result in you playing more poker when you are losing, possibly tilting, playing poorly, getting more and more tired, etc, and it will cause you to quit when you're playing good, and winning. That's a terrible combination.

Secondly, variance is massive in poker. No matter how long you work for the day, it's still entirely possible to have losing days, weeks, months, no matter how good you are, etc.

So, some days you win, some days you lose. It's impossible to win every time, and it's impossible to avoid losing sessions. Play to maximize your returns over the long run. Play when you are focused, not tired, not tilting, etc, and quit when you don't feel like playing.

[navybuttons]

if you are having questions like this, you are not ready to play professionally. it's tough to swallow, but you asked. if i feel like it later, i might go deeply into it.

[Cappy37]

First of all, you cannot be a pro unless you are properly rolled. Well, you can, but you'll fail.

You should NEVER be close to being broke, although it does happen. Ideally, and for the purposes of any strategy, it doesn't.

You should play with a bankroll where your risk of ruin is so small it's negligible.

Now, to the next question, playing to win a certain amount in one day is awful. It will result in you playing more poker when you are losing, possibly tilting, playing poorly, getting more and more tired, etc, and it will cause you to quit when you're playing good, and winning. That's a terrible combination.

Secondly, variance is massive in poker. No matter how long you work for the day, it's still entirely possible to have losing days, weeks, months, no matter how good you are, etc.

So, some days you win, some days you lose. It's impossible to win every time, and it's impossible to avoid losing sessions. Play to maximize your returns over the long run. Play when you are focused, not tired, not tilting, etc, and quit when you don't feel like playing.

You need to save that to notepad, so you can re-copy it the next time this question is asked. You hit pretty much every basic point with a focus on brevity. Bravo.

[Pot Odds RAC]

First of all, you cannot be a pro unless you are properly rolled. Well, you can, but you'll fail.

You should NEVER be close to being broke, although it does happen. Ideally, and for the purposes of any strategy, it doesn't.

You should play with a bankroll where your risk of ruin is so small it's negligible.

Now, to the next question, playing to win a certain amount in one day is awful. It will result in you playing more poker when you are losing, possibly tilting, playing poorly, getting more and more tired, etc, and it will cause you to quit when you're playing good, and winning. That's a terrible combination.

Secondly, variance is massive in poker. No matter how long you work for the day, it's still entirely possible to have losing days, weeks, months, no matter how good you are, etc.

So, some days you win, some days you lose. It's impossible to win every time, and it's impossible to avoid losing sessions. Play to maximize your returns over the long run. Play when you are focused, not tired, not tilting, etc, and quit when you don't feel like playing.

Not a Pro here, but I will add one thing to this.

I have heard several Pros say that they do set "Targets". They will cap their session losses at 2 or 3 buy-ins. They will also set a target for winning, but adjust that. For example if they win 2 buy-ins, they may say to themselves, I'll leave if I slip back to $X, If they wind up moving up some more, they'll readjust that amount to $X Plus. This works very well for me because since adopting this mindset, I leave closer to my highest water mark for the session. Prior to that I'd often suffer the fate of having been up in the session only to leave when I got hit and be at a far lower or even negative amount. My average Session winnings have gone dramatically up.

[tj9422-]

you should read more, there is a book out by mark blade that my help you on this topic.

http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru...=111416&hl=

the link will tell you more about his book.

[Zach6668]

Not a Pro here, but I will add one thing to this.

I have heard several Pros say that they do set "Targets". They will cap their session losses at 2 or 3 buy-ins. They will also set a target for winning, but adjust that. For example if they win 2 buy-ins, they may say to themselves, I'll leave if I slip back to $X, If they wind up moving up some more, they'll readjust that amount to $X Plus. This works very well for me because since adopting this mindset, I leave closer to my highest water mark for the session. Prior to that I'd often suffer the fate of having been up in the session only to leave when I got hit and be at a far lower or even negative amount. My average Session winnings have gone dramatically up.

Things like these kinda work, but probably not for the reasons the people think they should.

Your average session result is pretty meaningless, to an extent. Like, leaving at your peak isn't really a big deal, since it's all one big session, right? I mean, over the long run, your average session will obviously be solid if you're a winning player, but you really shouldn't shoot for it as a stopping point.

The reason a lot of the guys do stuff like this, is simply for the emotional, psycological peace it brings. That's certainly understandable. I mean, we aren't robots, although it would be much easier if we were. People hate to be up in a session, then lose it back. I bitch about that every day, lol. I also probably, unconciously, try to quit when I'm up, rather than down, but that may result in a few leaks of my own.

In reality though, if you were to somehow play your A game 100% of the time, when you quit is meaningless. In reality though, we should try to play as much as we can under optimal conditions, and duck out of the sub optimal conditions when we are smart enough to. It's similar to the table selection thread, really. If you can play focused, non-tilted, solid poker, at a good table, you should really play as long as you can sustain these conditions.

Since we're not robots though, those stop loss thing work well to keep our tilt under control, etc. Even if do get up 5 buyins and say we quit if we drop a buyin, it probably stops us from playing poorly (conciously or otherwise), because we may try to force ourselves to get that buyin back before we quit, if we didn't have that stop loss limit.

This is really something that poker theory isn't built for, and that's the psycology of individual players. We all know about maximizing EV, and everyone as seen me preach that in a cash game we should be basically robots and ignore the swings, etc, and just make the play with the highest EV, but in reality, we are humans, and do have to deal with these swings. These are tools that people have come up with to help cope, but it's probably important to not that in theory, it won't be optimal, but it'll be close, and in practice, it will prevent us from playing sub-optimally.

[Acid_Knight]

if you are having questions like this, you are not ready to play professionally.

I was literally going to type the exact same words.

[navybuttons]

good post.

it's later and i don't feel like going into it. zach does a good job.

yesterday i verbalized something that i felt. say player 1 at his A+ game can beat the game for 1bb/hr and player 2 can beat it for 2bb/hr. Player 1 has a bigger edge in the game if he knows when and how to quit and player 2 doesn't.

[Acid_Knight]

say player 1 at his A+ game can beat the game for 1bb/hr and player 2 can beat it for 2bb/hr. Player 1 has a bigger edge in the game if he knows when and how to quit and player 2 doesn't.

This is not true. If player 1 is a proven 1BB/hr winner in the game, that implies long run results and it takes into effect all playing conditions including tilt and knowing when to leave. If player 2 beats it at 2BB/hr, then it must assume the same things and therefore already takes into account that he might play too long or chase his losses, but that overall he wins at 2BB/hr and therefore has a bigger edge in the game, which in this example is twice the edge that player 1 has in the long run.

[simo_8ball]

This is not true. If player 1 is a proven 1BB/hr winner in the game, that implies long run results and it takes into effect all playing conditions including tilt and knowing when to leave. If player 2 beats it at 2BB/hr, then it must assume the same things and therefore already takes into account that he might play too long or chase his losses, but that overall he wins at 2BB/hr and therefore has a bigger edge in the game, which in this example is twice the edge that player 1 has in the long run.

He means if their A+ games can win for 1BB and 2BB respectively.

Player 2 will play his D- game and lose regularly, but Player 1 will always play B+ at a minimum.

[Acid_Knight]

He means if their A+ games can win for 1BB and 2BB respectively.

Player 2 will play his D- game and lose regularly, but Player 1 will always play B+ at a minimum.

Right, I guess that's what he meant. It's also kind of meaningless though, becuase the only thing that matters is your overall winrate.

[Acid_Knight]

http://www.cardplayer.com/author/article/all/19/5293

[navybuttons]

It's also kind of meaningless though, becuase the only thing that matters is your overall winrate.

???

that is the meaning. i've played with guys that can read hands way better than i do. when they're on they make great bluffs and value bets. i play with them because they aren't always at their A+ game, and while i don't always have an edge on them, i do in the long run. surely, you know exactly what i'm talking about.

the fact that when they're stuck they dont play as well and play long hours, combated with my willingness to leave when i'm not playing well and they are means that my winrate in the game is higher than theirs.

there are many multiples in the equation where the answer is winrate, but my point was that knowing when to quit is a more important one than skill.

edit: i just now skimmed through the article, but i think it says my point in more words.

[Acid_Knight]

edit: i just now skimmed through the article, but i think it says my point in more words.

It does make your point. I'm just saying that I don't care what the varaible are, only the solution to the equation. If A+B+C+D= 1BB/hr from player 1 and the same equation yields 2BB/hr for player 2, then player 2 is a better player. I don't care if the variables A, B and C are all greater for player 1, becuase if D is outweighing those things, then he's not a better player. He may read hands better. He may know the odds more soundly, but the real determination in poker is winrate.

I guess that using the term "better player" is more accurate overall while "more knowledgable" is something that doesn't correlate with winrate.

[volcrazy]

I agree totally.

[Sick Boy]

I agree totally.

I also agree totally, as I have nothing smart to add.

[Sick Boy]

I do have a question though..

I want to be a pro so badly, it hurts.

I'm doing everything i physically and mentally can to accomplish my goal. I'm dedicating the rest of my life to poker. I dont care about the consequences. I dont care how hard it will be, (and I know it will be hard). I don't care what it takes. I dont care if I have to miss meals every tuesday. I'm gonna give it everything I've got and if it turns out that I end up being some 60year-old bum with a gambling addiction that no one's ever heard of or loves, so be it, at least I tried.

So I'm wandering, do you guys have any advice on how I should get started? I should probably keep my job and use money I earn to get started right?

Does anyone here think I can do it?

And please no "I think you should reconsider..." lectures. I've heard enough of those and I dont care what anyone sais. I will be a pro one day with or without anyone's help. This is not a phase that I will get over when I mature a bit. This is the real thing.

[Zach6668]

Serious answer:

Play part time until you've proven that you're a winning player, AND have significant savings to pay your expenses in the event that you go on a 6 month losing/breakeven streal. Seriously. Also, play within your bankroll.


Also, try to be of legal age, not 15.