tourney question for smash

[MLMarkland 0]

I'd like to publically apologize to custom36 for saying he was kissing smashs' ass.custom36 is not an asskisser

Is there irony in this post?YOU BE THE JUDGE!

[StackOSociety 0]

There is some pretty good tournaments coming up in September put on by RGP at gamesgrid or whatever that look very interesting, WSOP format for the larger (50-150) buy ins. 10,000 starting chips and slow blind levels, multiple days for the big ones. All different kinds of poker too, like an online WSOP for small buy ins.

[poguemahone68 0]

I'd like to publically apologize to custom36 for saying he was kissing smashs' ass.custom36 is not an asskisser

Is there irony in this post?YOU BE THE JUDGE!

I never said I wasn't an asskisser, so no, no irony herebut I do find irony in the post directly above me

[custom36 4]

I'd like to publically apologize to custom36 for saying he was kissing smashs' ass.custom36 is not an asskisser

Is there irony in this post?YOU BE THE JUDGE!

YSALGKY

[Chiggleslap 0]

censored Smash! I think Juanda, Lindgren, Fischman, Ferguson, and other tourney specialists have figured out how they can make the most money! It doesn't matter if their rate is less than the best cash game players.....let me explain why dumbazz.....it only matters that their own rate playing tourneys is greater than their own rate playing ring games.They all make more money playing cash games.Well, maybe not Fischman.Good luck.

Ferguson doesn't play cash games.

Yes he does

Googled it.excerpt from an interview w/ Chris Ferguson (full article at http://www.palisadespost.com/content/index...Story_ID=1369):"NM: Do you ever gamble on anything besides poker? CF: Not really. I don't play in cash games either. I prefer tournaments because there's a goal in mind'to win. It doesn't get monotonous because as the money builds, the cost to stay in the game increases. This changes the strategy and helps keep me interested."

[KDawgCometh 2]

censored Smash! I think Juanda, Lindgren, Fischman, Ferguson, and other tourney specialists have figured out how they can make the most money! It doesn't matter if their rate is less than the best cash game players.....let me explain why dumbazz.....it only matters that their own rate playing tourneys is greater than their own rate playing ring games.They all make more money playing cash games.Well, maybe not Fischman.Good luck.

Ferguson doesn't play cash games.

Yes he does

Googled it.excerpt from an interview w/ Chris Ferguson (full article at http://www.palisadespost.com/content/index...Story_ID=1369):"NM: Do you ever gamble on anything besides poker? CF: Not really. I don't play in cash games either. I prefer tournaments because there's a goal in mind'to win. It doesn't get monotonous because as the money builds, the cost to stay in the game increases. This changes the strategy and helps keep me interested."

he plays in teh 50-100 NL games on full tilt, so you're wrong

[poguemahone68 0]

censored Smash! I think Juanda, Lindgren, Fischman, Ferguson, and other tourney specialists have figured out how they can make the most money! It doesn't matter if their rate is less than the best cash game players.....let me explain why dumbazz.....it only matters that their own rate playing tourneys is greater than their own rate playing ring games.They all make more money playing cash games.Well, maybe not Fischman.Good luck.

Ferguson doesn't play cash games.

Yes he does

Googled it.excerpt from an interview w/ Chris Ferguson (full article at http://www.palisadespost.com/content/index...Story_ID=1369):"NM: Do you ever gamble on anything besides poker? CF: Not really. I don't play in cash games either. I prefer tournaments because there's a goal in mind'to win. It doesn't get monotonous because as the money builds, the cost to stay in the game increases. This changes the strategy and helps keep me interested."

Well, then he's either a liar or just started playing cash games, cause I played in one with him not too long ago. I'd say he probably rarely plays cash games, but to say never is just not true.

[MLMarkland 0]

Back to seriously smashing Smash -This is by no means a complete analysis, but...Let's say Phil Hellmuth has bought in for full price to every WSOP event for the past 16 years...That's probably around $1 million in entry fees.Hellmuth is currently at $3.6 mil in all-time WSOP money (not including 2005).Investment: $1 millionRoI: 138%That's a very large RoI.I am Un-smash-able

[Chiggleslap 0]

censored Smash! I think Juanda, Lindgren, Fischman, Ferguson, and other tourney specialists have figured out how they can make the most money! It doesn't matter if their rate is less than the best cash game players.....let me explain why dumbazz.....it only matters that their own rate playing tourneys is greater than their own rate playing ring games.They all make more money playing cash games.Well, maybe not Fischman.Good luck.

Ferguson doesn't play cash games.

Yes he does

Googled it.excerpt from an interview w/ Chris Ferguson (full article at http://www.palisadespost.com/content/index...Story_ID=1369):"NM: Do you ever gamble on anything besides poker? CF: Not really. I don't play in cash games either. I prefer tournaments because there's a goal in mind'to win. It doesn't get monotonous because as the money builds, the cost to stay in the game increases. This changes the strategy and helps keep me interested."

he plays in teh 50-100 NL games on full tilt, so you're wrong

keith, i'm having trouble with how i could possibly be wrong for submitting a direct quote from Chris Ferguson. i never said he didn't play ring games, i'm just contributing some information.he plays on full tilt because he has a contract with him. so i guess you're wrong, too.

[MLMarkland 0]

he plays in teh 50-100 NL games on full tilt, so you're wrong

I do not know anything about pros playing online, so this is purely conjecture, but...I would be very surprised if most of the pros playing online are not staked by the site. So, that's a good bit different than playing with your own BR in a cash game.

[BigFish 0]

On a side note, I'm really interested to try the Smash method tonight at around 2a.m. when the drunk college kids get home.

I doubt people get drunk and player NL poker at 2AM

I do. :oops:

[KDawgCometh 2]

he plays in teh 50-100 NL games on full tilt, so you're wrong

I do not know anything about pros playing online, so this is purely conjecture, but...I would be very surprised if most of the pros playing online are not staked by the site. So, that's a good bit different than playing with your own BR in a cash game.

well, Full TIlt would have to be paying him and phil ivey a real pretty penny to have them playing with FT's money in a 50-100 NL game, its like a 10-15K buy-in, so I'd be pretty sure that they are playing with their own money when they sit down in those games. when they sit down in like 4-8 games, then they are playing with FTs money

[poguemahone68 0]

You are just plain wrong Smash.Now, taking into account odds and such, SnGs and ring games might still be a better bet, maybe 99% of the time maybe 50% maybe not at all, depending on the player, but...WSOP Main Event - 8 daysJoseph Hachem - $7.5 millionI'm not sure how many hours a day they play, but let's say 15.Not sure how Hachem got in, but let's say he paid full price.If he only played in that one event:Investment: $10,000ROI: Almost 75,000% (74,900%)If he played in 50 $10,000 buy-in tournaments in 2005, and only won this once:Investment: $500,000ROI: 1,400%Ever seen someone get a 1,400% RoI in a ring game? In a limit ring game?I'm the best

Good work MLM

[Smasharoo 0]

Good work MLMYeah expansive sample set.

[poguemahone68 0]

Good work MLMYeah expansive sample set.

larger sample set than yoursprobably my last post before I'm banned

[steve7stud 0]

Alright. I actually took the time to read EVERY single response. I'm going to give my opinion. But first, I do think it's ironic that some people say that tournaments are for suckers. When the guy who owns this site is arguably the most successful tourny player ever. I think it's safe to say that I'm better at cash games then tournaments. But that's because I have spent more time in cash games. Here are some of the reasons why someone should play a tournament as opposed to a cash game:Super competitiveSuper aggresivePoor money managememtAbility to take advantage of new/weak playersFearlessHuge overlayThese are just a few reasons to play tournaments. As far as poor money management goes, that can be a good thing for a tourny player. Because they can only lose their buy in. If a person is prone to going on tilt or steaming off his entire roll or playing higher then he should. Tournaments can be a great thing. I can't tell you how many people I know, who are now successful cash game players that created their BR from a tourny win. I personally love tournaments. But can't play as many events as I would like to. As far as luck goes. The simple truth is. There is luck in cash games and luck in tournaments. The key is to minimize luck in both arenas and maximize your edge. A no limit tourny is a great example. If I was at the table with Daniel, Phil Ivey, Howard Lederer, Johnny Chan, etc. Any way you slice it. I am a HUGE dog. I don't care how quickly or slowly the blinds are moving. Unless I get a Aces and Kings every hand, those guys will outplay me ALL the time. They're just better then me.It's sad that some people have the perception that tournaments are largely based on luck. Most of that comes from the media. People only get to see what the media feeds them. And they want everything to look exciting. I can tell you first hand, that there is nothing more exciting then being at the final table of a tournament when a lot of money is at stake.Don't knock till you've REALLY tried it. Good Luck.

[Smasharoo 0]

Unless I get a Aces and Kings every hand, those guys will outplay me ALL the time. Nah, you'll just move in preflop over any open raise with any playable hand.They'll fold most of the time.Ask Mason.

[steve7stud 0]

Unless I get a Aces and Kings every hand, those guys will outplay me ALL the time. Nah, you'll just move in preflop over any open raise with any playable hand.They'll fold most of the time.Ask Mason.

That was my original advice to Suited Up when he went to the WPT. When you are facing a pro, you should always move in and put them to the test. USUALLY it works too. Mason and Sklansky actually give pretty good advice from time to time.

[lovedrunk 0]

Yes, but still quite similar.... and the post before you got knocked out, was "I will probably last 10 minutes"Seems similar as well.No.One of those people who can't say "Oops, I was wrong" eh?Ok. Good luck.

IRONYYYYMan, your great.

[Allie 0]

As far as luck goes. The simple truth is. There is luck in cash games and luck in tournaments. The key is to minimize luck in both arenas and maximize your edge. A no limit tourny is a great example. If I was at the table with Daniel, Phil Ivey, Howard Lederer, Johnny Chan, etc. Any way you slice it. I am a HUGE dog. I don't care how quickly or slowly the blinds are moving. Unless I get a Aces and Kings every hand, those guys will outplay me ALL the time. They're just better then me.It's sad that some people have the perception that tournaments are largely based on luck. Most of that comes from the media. People only get to say what the media feeds them. And they want everything to look exciting. I can tell you first hand, that there is nothing more exciting then being at the final table of a tournament when a lot of money is at stake.Don't knock till you've REALLY tried it. Good Luck.

Once again, Steve comes in and takes a bunch of silly stuff and puts it back into intelligent perspective. The notion that touraments are for suckers, NL is for morons....etc etc....is so profoundly ludicrious and such a gross generalization. And insulting to world class tourament players such as DN, etc.Do lots of inexperienced "donkeys" play tournaments....and do they get lucky sometimes and win? Sure. For a poor player, they DO need luck to win. But for a good player, making the correction decisions, and getting their money in with the best of it the majority of the time....they don't need to get lucky....they just need to NOT get unlucky in critical hands. And of course, sometimes all those correct decisions go out the window when someone makes a bad call or whatever and outdraws you, and you're out of the tournament. But in the long run, just like in limit....the best players are going to cash consistantly.

[Loismustdie 0]

Smash-I know you feel tournaments are for suckers, but lets say I still wanted to play them. What type of strategy would you recommend?Thanks.

It would make more sense to ask me or Zimmer, we rock in tourneys.

What buy-in range do you guys 'rock' at? Lower? Not a flame, but if you guys really do have good track records (sorry I don't pay much attention to all the 'i made a FT' threads), then I'm always interested in finding good tournament players to back.If you are already playing the higher buy-in events, then disregard this, but I figured I'd recognize either of your screen names via playing with you if that was the case.PM me if interested. Ha, I guess I could open up that offer to others, but you have to have some sort of credible (and verifiable) track record.Patrick

20 dollar buy ins or higher- I'll do a ten dollar rebuy type setup here and there. I find that at the higher buy ins I am much more successful, although I started my bankroll by winnning a 5 dollar buy in on UB. Obviously having to wade my way through 200 people is alot easier then 600. As far as being backed goes, what for? I can afford to do it without it and I like the fact that 100% of the winnings are mine. This year I have 2 goals- One, put aside a years worth of expenses outside my bankroll so I can stop working and Two, win my way into at least 15 of the events in next years World Series. I have confidence that I will accomplish both goals, and I guarantee that when I go I will not be selling not 1% of myself. If I manage to win, place, show, whatever, that money is all mine, minus tip of course.

[Chiggleslap 0]

he plays in teh 50-100 NL games on full tilt, so you're wrong

I do not know anything about pros playing online, so this is purely conjecture, but...I would be very surprised if most of the pros playing online are not staked by the site. So, that's a good bit different than playing with your own BR in a cash game.

well, Full TIlt would have to be paying him and phil ivey a real pretty penny to have them playing with FT's money in a 50-100 NL game, its like a 10-15K buy-in, so I'd be pretty sure that they are playing with their own money when they sit down in those games. when they sit down in like 4-8 games, then they are playing with FTs money

of course they're not being staked by the site at those levels. i never said they were.but the FTP pros are in contracts that require them to play a certain amount of hours a week on the site, so if they are required to play, why not play for something worthwhile?all i'm saying is that chris ferguson probably wouldn't play big cash games online if he weren't in a contract w/ the site.

[Abbaddabba 0]

Now, taking into account odds and such, SnGs and ring games might still be a better bet, maybe 99% of the time maybe 50% maybe not at all, depending on the player, but...WSOP Main Event - 8 daysJoseph Hachem - $7.5 millionI'm not sure how many hours a day they play, but let's say 15.Not sure how Hachem got in, but let's say he paid full price.If he only played in that one event:Investment: $10,000ROI: Almost 75,000% (74,900%)If he played in 50 $10,000 buy-in tournaments in 2005, and only won this once:Investment: $500,000ROI: 1,400%Ever seen someone get a 1,400% RoI in a ring game? In a limit ring game?I'm the best

Is that a joke?You're either a second rate comedian, or a top notch retard.

[Loismustdie 0]

Alright. I actually took the time to read EVERY single response. I'm going to give my opinion. But first, I do think it's ironic that some people say that tournaments are for suckers. When the guy who owns this site is arguably the most successful tourny player ever. I think it's safe to say that I'm better at cash games then tournaments. But that's because I have spent more time in cash games. Here are some of the reasons why someone should play a tournament as opposed to a cash game:Super competitiveSuper aggresivePoor money managememtAbility to take advantage of new/weak playersFearlessHuge overlayThese are just a few reasons to play tournaments. As far as poor money management goes, that can be a good thing for a tourny player. Because they can only lose their buy in. If a person is prone to going on tilt or steaming off his entire roll or playing higher then he should. Tournaments can be a great thing. I can't tell you how many people I know, who are now successful cash game players that created their BR from a tourny win. I personally love tournaments. But can't play as many events as I would like to. As far as luck goes. The simple truth is. There is luck in cash games and luck in tournaments. The key is to minimize luck in both arenas and maximize your edge. A no limit tourny is a great example. If I was at the table with Daniel, Phil Ivey, Howard Lederer, Johnny Chan, etc. Any way you slice it. I am a HUGE dog. I don't care how quickly or slowly the blinds are moving. Unless I get a Aces and Kings every hand, those guys will outplay me ALL the time. They're just better then me.It's sad that some people have the perception that tournaments are largely based on luck. Most of that comes from the media. People only get to see what the media feeds them. And they want everything to look exciting. I can tell you first hand, that there is nothing more exciting then being at the final table of a tournament when a lot of money is at stake.Don't knock till you've REALLY tried it. Good Luck.

Man I could never have said it better, this is a verbal painting of me, although my BR management has gotten quite a bit better. I would have to say though I do not believe that I would be a huge dog at a table full of pros- for a good NL tourney player it is alot closer than you would think. I win and place well in alot of tournaments and often times the difference is things that you would never see on T.V., how I folded for an hour and pretty much just stole blinds once every other rotation just to not get to low, or how I managed to not pay off tight players when they hit a big hand and I knew it. Btw, for anyone listening NEVER SHOW!!! If you raise with a big hand and I fold and you show me all you have done is affirm that I know what I am doing which is BAD FOR YOU. I never show, ever, and many times especially at final table times these guys have no idea how to play me- it's just wait for a big hand time at a crucial point when you cannot afford to wait for big hands because of the structure. As far as Smash goes, Smash is Smash. He is set in his ways.

[KDawgCometh 2]

of course they're not being staked by the site at those levels. i never said they were.but the FTP pros are in contracts that require them to play a certain amount of hours a week on the site, so if they are required to play, why not play for something worthwhile?all i'm saying is that chris ferguson probably wouldn't play big cash games online if he weren't in a contract w/ the site.

don't worry, I'm jsut being argumentative to be argumentative. He has to play some cash games cause I can't see any pro playing nothing but tournies for a living, I just can't see how you would be able to make enough purely off of tourenis to play as long as he has