Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cash games or Tournaments

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Cash games or Tournaments

    The other day i was talking to a poker pro and he told me that tournaments are not reliable to make a living out of poker. He said it was extremely difficult and he suggested me that cash games are much better to get money.

    what do you guys think? Should i just play cash games if i want to be a poker pro?

  • #2
    It's all to do with the variance and the required bankroll for each. I'll give you an example:-

    NL5 ($5) Cash games for a competent player requires ~40 buy-ins to cover the swings = $200 plus a good strategy for how and when to take shots at moving up to the next level.

    Playing an ABI of $5 for MTTs requires 300-500 buy-ins (depending on the average size of the field eg if you are playing on a small site with average field size of say 200-300 players then 200-300 buyins; but if the average field is say 3000players then you'll need +500 buyins) = $1500- $2500 BR

    A good cash game player will generate a small and steady profit over many 10s of thousands of hands. A good MTT player will hit a big score maybe 3 times a year, which may or may not produce a profit in the same time period.

    In general a lot of players build a decent BR playing either cash or SNGs then move to MTTs later on.

    Having done both in the past, and backwards to most people i.e. MTTs / SNGs first then serious about cash games later on - my advice would be to start with cash games and learn as much about how to play them as you can whilst building a BR. I learnt so much more about fundamental poker play from playing cash then I ever did from just MTT play, which in tern has made me a better MTT player.

    Be under no illusion, which ever way you choose there is no quick and easy way to make money. It's called a grind for a reason! or as someone once said "Poker is a hard way to make an easy living"; but if you love the game and enjoy learning about the game, it makes it a bit easier.

    Comment


    • #3
      I also suspect mtt can not be beat in the long run.

      Comment


      • LondonImp
        LondonImp commented
        Editing a comment
        Totally wrong.

      • Cal42628
        Cal42628 commented
        Editing a comment
        I have seen people net $400,000 in less than 2000 games. It isn't sustainable. What really impressed me was the 98 score.
        Last edited by Cal42628; 01-18-2021, 05:14 AM.

      • LondonImp
        LondonImp commented
        Editing a comment
        Insane periods of run good are not sustainable, that it true.

        That does not mean MTTs cannot be beaten in the long term.

    • #4
      His $400-$600K profit not sustainable with average buy in 2k. At peak, I was 82 or 78, whenever given the minishark. Though I'm not sure how score is given, imagine 98 is no walk in the park.
      Last edited by Cal42628; 01-18-2021, 08:15 AM.

      Comment


      • #5
        In my experience, ranking the games in order of overall softness and ease to beat....

        1. Live cash
        2. Live tourneys
        3. Online tourneys
        4. Online cash

        The tourneys will always have much higher variance, for obvious reasons.

        If someone put a gun to my head and said "you have make a living playing poker," I think I would do it by playing live cash games.

        That being said, I think live tournaments are the most fun and satisfying of the four.

        Comment


        • Cal42628
          Cal42628 commented
          Editing a comment
          I rather make a steady profit however slim for recreation not living. Anyone heard of a "janku7" ?

      • #6
        I actually think live tourneys are easier to beat than live cash.

        Although that could be because I've never played cash live higher than £1/£1 and the rake was atrocious.

        For me it was the rake that made the game so tough to profit, moreso than the skill of my opponents.

        Comment


        • Cal42628
          Cal42628 commented
          Editing a comment
          which one is harder? waiting for Aq or knowing what to do with j5

        • Cal42628
          Cal42628 commented
          Editing a comment
          also variance creates tilt - another place to have edge

        • LondonImp
          LondonImp commented
          Editing a comment
          Cal42628 - your comment about tilt has some merit. The other comment, not so much.

      • #7
        turbo all pros, hard to argue reduced edge is good for win rate.

        Comment


        • LondonImp
          LondonImp commented
          Editing a comment
          JFletch is saying the opposite. That's why he stated he believes that live cash is easier than live tournaments.

        • JFletch2323
          JFletch2323 commented
          Editing a comment
          I suspect online pros play turbos simply because they can make up for the reduced edge by the increase in volume. But if you ask anyone where their skill edge is greater for a particular tournament, they would say it's a tournament with a slower structure. In live tourneys, you can't make up for the faster structure by playing more tourneys the same way you can online.

        • Cal42628
          Cal42628 commented
          Editing a comment
          if it isn't slow enough, they should give cash a try/ Kanu7

      • #8
        tournament draws in the dreamers. To think I played sng back in the day with him, now he sitting next to sam Greenwood. $30-60 turbo to $700k profit? Technical difficulty prohibits uploading for time being.
        Last edited by alma holzhertin; 01-24-2021, 11:56 AM.

        Comment

        Working...
        X