14 replies to this topic

[JFarrell20]

OK, guys, my $5000 freeroll is tonight. I'm assuming its a NL tourney. My question is... how should I play it? I figured play it normal at first, but the more I think about it, the more my opinion varies.Here are my thoughts1) It's a new player freeroll, so I'm assuming these guys are not that great yet. It's always hard to bluff crappy players, etc.2) It's free money. Should I play for rank? Or first? Of course I want to play for first, but ranking in the money is also going to be pretty sweet.3) If I play for first, and get knocked out by being over-aggressive, that will leave me more time to play at the limit tables and earn $.4) If I play conservatively and go out on the bubble, I will have wasted time and not made money.5) I think I can make it in the money pretty easily. My short-stack on-the-ropes strategy is outstanding. I find a way to stay in for much longer than I probably should.What are your thoughts?I will probably play aggressive and try to steal blinds + bluff, etc. Go for first or nothing. Thats probably best. The upside is so much better than the downside. And if I get KO'd early, like I said, I will have time to play limit tables.

[Smasharoo]

Ultra tight for at least the first hour. You're a bad beat story waiting to happen if you try to steal blinds in the early stages of a freeroll.Unless you play better than you post, I wouldn't bother playing...Just kidding.Good luck. Think of it like a real money cash game against 5 year old children and you should do fine. Their actions mean absolutely nothing. Betting, raising, calling, it's all random.

[JFarrell20]

That's what I was afraid of. This is gonna suck. Freeroll my A$$. My time ain't free.

[NYSPOKER]

Well, how did you do?

[JFarrell20]

I talked about it in one of these other posts.The short version is I lost with pocket rockets within the first 15 hands. Yadda yadda I bet he calls I raise he calls. I check he moves all in on the turn. I call. flip over AA he's got 44 with a board of 5 8 6 6. I'm ahead. He's got 6 outs. 7 comes on river to drop me to 35. Next two hands I triple up and double up on respectively. Then I pushed all in and got sent home.So it sucked. I really was planning on playing tight for a while but AA early... come on.I guess I'll just have to sign up at all the websites and play all the free rolls. lol.By the way, Howard Lederer said that winning 1 big bet an hour at the limit table is pretty good. Just 1. At 4K-8K I can understand how 8 grand an hour is good. lol. but 1 dollar an hour is not of too much interest to me! I thought he said 4-5 big blinds. (1 big bet at .5/1 = 1 dollar. 4-5 big blinds = $2-$2.50, so there is a slight difference) He also said you should win 300X the big bet to move to the next level. Additionally, he said it took him 2 years to consistently beat 1/2 tables. Wow. I believe this is the level he started at though, and I think he said in the beginning he just played for fun (didnt realize it was a skill game).After 13.5 hours at .5/1 I'm at 8.51 big bets/hour. All I'm waiting on now is my bankroll...which begs the question... should I just deposit more so that I can move up quicker? I know smash will say play 5 K hands. I've probably played 800 +/-I'm thinking 1500-2000 hands, that should get my 'roll where it needs to be anyway.

[NYSPOKER]

JFarrell20 said:

After 13.5 hours at .5/1 I'm at 8.51 big bets/hour. All I'm waiting on now is my bankroll...which begs the question... should I just deposit more so that I can move up quicker? I know smash will say play 5 K hands. I've probably played 800 +/-I'm thinking 1500-2000 hands, that should get my 'roll where it needs to be anyway.

The main thing is whether or not you intend to use your bankroll, and only your bankroll to fund your poker playing. If you do not wish to keep investing money in the learning process, you need to move up slowly.You can grind it out at any level but, the higher you start; the more expensive it can become to your personal finances, outside of your poker bankroll. If you have a million bucks to blow playing poker, start at $1,000-$2,000. If you want to start on a modest investment of a couple hundred bucks, grind it out at $.50/$1 until your bankroll grows.b.t.w. It is not only your bankroll that will be growing. There is much to learn about this game, much of which needs to be reinforced through experience (read "# hands played").Good luck, however you choose to proceed.

[JFarrell20]

Well, here is my thought.I've been wondering what the win-factor is when moving up. For instance, should you expect to win... 80%-90% as many big bets/hour as you do a level one lower? I'm sure there must be a pretty accurate factor, I just have no idea what it is. Of course everyone hits the ceiling sooner or later unless you are at the 4K-8K game in which there is no higher level.This is to say that, hypothetically, if you were winning 10 big bets per hour at .5/1, would you win 8-9 big bets an hour at 1/2? Then, 6.4-8.1 big bets per hour at 2/4? Then 5.12-7.29 big bets per hour at 3/6? etc, etc, etc..... until you top out at between 0-0.5 big bets per hour...has anyone thought about this yet? This is the only reason for wanting to move up immediately. If I can win 8 or so big bets per hour at .5/1, maybe that correlates to 6.4-7.2 big bets per hour up 1 level. in which case the big bets are worth twice as much so as long as your win factor for moving up levels is greater than .5, this seems to make sense. Why waste time grinding at this level if i can just throw my own money into my bankroll and expect to see my time pay off better immediately?

[Smasharoo]

For instance, should you expect to win... 80%-90% as many big bets/hour as you do a level one lower? I'm sure there must be a pretty accurate factor, I just have no idea what it is.Impossible to say whan you have no idea what your BB/100 actually is.There's not too much diffrence from .50/1 to 1/2 though. Just in terms of variance, moving up in limits after the good luck run you're on sort of begs for a run of bad luck to hit you at a higher limit.Play more hands at .50/1.Play until you have two losing days in a row.

[JFarrell20]

Smasharoo said:

For instance, should you expect to win... 80%-90% as many big bets/hour as you do a level one lower? I'm sure there must be a pretty accurate factor, I just have no idea what it is.Impossible to say whan you have no idea what your BB/100 actually is.There's not too much diffrence from .50/1 to 1/2 though. Just in terms of variance, moving up in limits after the good luck run you're on sort of begs for a run of bad luck to hit you at a higher limit.Play more hands at .50/1.Play until you have two losing days in a row.

I understand that I don't want to move up to be hit by a bad streak. But in terms of projecting your success rate... if you assume that players are 20% better at each sequential level, then you should be able to win 80% as many hands per 100, correct? And that is not including improvement which will come after a while. So my point is...if I can deposit from my personal bankroll enough to put my poker bankroll at say $600 right now, why not?Let's assume I play at least 2K hands and my BB per hour is still at 8. Wouldn't I safely be able to project to win about 6-7 big bets per hour at that level after playing another 2K hands or so? So my point is, if I can be winning 6 big bets per hour at a $2 table that yields $12/hour. OR, if I choose to stay and play 5K hands at .5/1, I should only expect to win $8/hour...In other words, wouldn't my time be more valuably spent at the next level? As long as I can draw from my personal bankroll and add it to my poker 'roll? This is assuming the skill factor at each increment is 1.2 of what it was at the immediate lower level. Honestly, I don't even think it is that different. I think it's probably more along the lines of 10% harder at each elevated level.

[Smasharoo]

So my point is...if I can deposit from my personal bankroll enough to put my poker bankroll at say $600 right now, why not? Because you don't yet understand the variance.Go ahead, though. It's your money.

[dominiksdad]

JFarrell20 said:

I understand that I don't want to move up to be hit by a bad streak. But in terms of projecting your success rate... if you assume that players are 20% better at each sequential level, then you should be able to win 80% as many hands per 100, correct? And that is not including improvement which will come after a while.

What makes you think that that players at the next level are 20% better than the ones at the previous level? They may be the same level of players just richer or they could be 100% better.The only way to find out is to take the jump but be prepared to drop back down again if you start taking heavy losses.

[JFarrell20]

[/quote]What makes you think that that players at the next level are 20% better than the ones at the previous level? They may be the same level of players just richer or they could be 100% better.The only way to find out is to take the jump but be prepared to drop back down again if you start taking heavy losses.[/quote]I GUARANTEE you, that the players at the next level cannot be more than 20% better overall, in the long run. Like I said, it's probably like 5-10% better. This is just a guess, of course. But I can assure you, they do not improve 20% at each level. Logistically, it's not possible. You do make a good point though, and I'm aware of it. That is, that there are two types of players: Good ones, and rich ones. (example is Rene Angelil playing with Daniel, Doyle, etc at the 4K-8K table. lol. There's no way in hell that guy can compete with them. He's simply there to hang with them and lose money. That guy is probably worth upwards of 100 million. So yes, you do need to consider the fact that, the higher you move up, the more likely you are to see bad-rich players. At the lower levels you will see good-poor players and bad-poor players. But at the higher levels you should run into quite a few rich morons who will pay you off. This point just helps solidify my argument. Thanks.

[Smasharoo]

Watching JFarrel try to post about theory is what I imagine a caveman discovering fire would look like talking to Robert Oppenhiemer.

[JFarrell20]

Smasharoo said:

So my point is...if I can deposit from my personal bankroll enough to put my poker bankroll at say $600 right now, why not? Because you don't yet understand the variance.Go ahead, though. It's your money.

Smash, you are the one who said you need $600 to play at 1/2. If I have $600 (regardless of where it came from), and I can project my success rate at that level, whats the problem? Why waste time grinding at a level that I don't have to???We've already theorized on the variance of skill. The only question is the variance of luck/earnings. So if I win a million in the lotto tomorrow (which I don't play), should I not move up if my projected success rate justifies it???i'm not trying to prove you wrong or fight or anything. But seriously, if you can accurately project your success rate at the next level, and can find the money to add to your bankroll, what is the problem?

[Smasharoo]

Smash, you are the one who said you need $600 to play at 1/2. If I have $600 (regardless of where it came from), and I can project my success rate at that level, whats the problem? Why waste time grinding at a level that I don't have to??? You need $600 if you're a winning player at 1/2.A losing player cna lose any amount of money.Stick around and beat .50/1 for a while to figure out if you're even a winning player.