playing cash games

[jayo 0]

quick question. i consider myself a better tourney player than a cash game player but lately again ive tried a few cash games online . What i am doing now is play .50-1 dollar tables , buying in for min 40$ , now if i get up to say 55,60 $ i change to another table and start again. I play for maybe 1 hour a day and in the last week i am up nearly 300$. Now is this just pure luck that this is working for me at the moment ,or do some of you play this way also. One friend told me i should stick to one table get to know how they play and go from there. But people come and go so quicky i dont see the point of this .

[PokerDealer2005 0]

Some people will make a score and leave, but always stay in the game if its juicy, no point in leaving.

[Fluffdog87 2]

I AGREE JUICY GAMES ROCK!

[theredpill99 0]

IF you are confident in your skills, you should buy-in for the maximum. I always laugh when I see a short stack of maybe $40 get AA and a big stack of $200 get KK and all the short stack can make is $40. It's easier to play against a short stack for me, because if I'm wrong about a hand, I can only lose a small amount. I just never take short stacks seriously anyway. It's difficult to play as a short stack because if you buyin too short, people will just put you all-in with only a draw because they think they can push out of the hand.

[nicdenoc 0]

redpill your comment basically explains everything about your game.Saying you cant take seriously people who only buy in for eg $40,its all about 'investing'your money in +EV situations.That my friend is cash games.Saying that if some one has $40 and gets AA and moves in pre flop and gets called by someone with KK who has $200 saying that they arent making as much money and are at a disadvantage because of this is WRONG......how about the reverse,$40 stack has KK and moves in against an AA caller in this situation they are saving money??!if the AA caller had $1.5million and you had 1.5million you would have lost alot of money by buying in for alot.That is your logic???...then thats why your blog is so funny to read.PS-Im still in shock that your 29 years old.

[SHOTPUTSTAR 0]

quick question. i consider myself a better tourney player than a cash game player but lately again ive tried a few cash games online . What i am doing now is play .50-1 dollar tables , buying in for min 40$ , now if i get up to say  55,60 $ i change to another table and start again. I play for maybe 1 hour a day and in the last week i am up nearly 300$. Now is this just pure luck that this is working for me at the moment ,or do some of you play this way also. One friend told me i should stick to one table get to know how they play and go from there. But people come and go so quicky i dont see the point of this .

LHE or NLHE?So let me get this straight. You play a hour a day on a .50/1 tables. Up 300 in the last week.= 300/7/1= approximately 43 bb/hrNOT SUSTAINABLE. Enjoy the downside of variance.

[jayo 0]

LHE or NLHE?So let me get this straight.  You play a hour a day on a .50/1 tables.  Up 300 in the last week.=  300/7/1=  approximately 43 bb/hrNOT SUSTAINABLE.  Enjoy the downside of variance.

what kind of a comment is this " enjoy the downside of varaince" . i know there will be a downside there always is , i didnt post this to say i have this unbeatable strategy so use it , i was merely asking advice on wheter to stay on one table r keep moving .

[SHOTPUTSTAR 0]

LHE or NLHE?So let me get this straight.  You play a hour a day on a .50/1 tables.  Up 300 in the last week.=  300/7/1=  approximately 43 bb/hrNOT SUSTAINABLE.  Enjoy the downside of variance.

what kind of a comment is this " enjoy the downside of varaince" . i know there will be a downside there always is , i didnt post this to say i have this unbeatable strategy so use it , i was merely asking advice on wheter to stay on one table r keep moving .

It is simply a statment, like, "have a nice day" I'm not slamming you. My philosophy is if you enjoy the upswings, enjoy the downswings too. I'll explain. If you play GREAT poker and are up play 43 bb/hr you are happy right? Well, eventually you will lose, (nature of the beast) If you play good poker and lose you will enjoy it more than if you play bad poker and lose it, get it? Variance does not pay attention to what table you are on, so to answer your question, do what you want to, as long as you are playing good poker it doesn't matter. Keep in mind though, part of good poker is note taking and knowing who you are playing. If you are going to jump from table to table, use this more to your advantage by making notes on all players you encounter. When they bet, when the cold call, when the push. By doing this you will increase your edge. If the game is REALLY juicy and is full of people you have notes on, you will clean up more than if you simply sit down and hope for good cards. One more thing, What I like to do is keep the next table I want to play on open and watch it before you sit down for a few minutes, you will be amazed how much it will help. I am assuming you do not use PT? IF not, and you are a serious player, BUY IT, LOVE IT. PT=Poker Tracker. I meant no disrespect from my last post. Nice run, I hope it doesn't burst too quickly. Enjoy the downside of variance.

[jayo 0]

It is simply a statment, like, "have a nice day" I'm not slamming you. My philosophy is if you enjoy the upswings, enjoy the downswings too. I'll explain. If you play GREAT poker and are up play 43 bb/hr you are happy right? Well, eventually you will lose, (nature of the beast) If you play good poker and lose you will enjoy it more than if you play bad poker and lose it, get it? Variance does not pay attention to what table you are on, so to answer your question, do what you want to, as long as you are playing good poker it doesn't matter. Keep in mind though, part of good poker is note taking and knowing who you are playing. If you are going to jump from table to table, use this more to your advantage by making notes on all players you encounter. When they bet, when the cold call, when the push. By doing this you will increase your edge. If the game is REALLY juicy and is full of people you have notes on, you will clean up more than if you simply sit down and hope for good cards. One more thing, What I like to do is keep the next table I want to play on open and watch it before you sit down for a few minutes, you will be amazed how much it will help. I am assuming you do not use PT? IF not, and you are a serious player, BUY IT, LOVE IT. PT=Poker Tracker. I meant no disrespect from my last post. Nice run, I hope it doesn't burst too quickly. Enjoy the downside of variance.Sorry mate took it it up the totally wrong way apologies againjava script:emoticon(':oops:')

[benhoug 0]

I almost never buy in for less than the MAX. I guess if you're trying to work on your short stack game buying in for the min. is OK, but I've never really seen much point to it. I want to have as much money as possible on the table when I get doubled up.

[Abbaddabba 0]

IF you are confident in your skills, you should buy-in for the maximum. I always laugh when I see a short stack of maybe $40 get AA and a big stack of $200 get KK and all the short stack can make is $40. It's easier to play against a short stack for me, because if I'm wrong about a hand, I can only lose a small amount.

You laugh when you see someone with aces only make 40 off of kings. Do you laugh equally hard when you see someone only lose 40 with kings to aces? It's easy for you to play against a short stack because if you're wrong, you only lose a small amount. And if you're right? You only _win_ a small amount.

[jalexand42 0]

Come read my blog.http://theredpill98.blogspot.com

lol. Best. Blog. Ever.

[SFkid 0]

jay,are you playin your regular stlyle with your 40 or are you just waiting for a hand and then moving all in?

[TheCinciKid 0]

There is a valid strategy for playing a shortstack in NLHE. You should check out Ed Miller's Getting Started in Hold'em, or one of the many threads on it in the NL strategy section.

[PA32R 0]

quick question. i consider myself a better tourney player than a cash game player but lately again ive tried a few cash games online . What i am doing now is play .50-1 dollar tables , buying in for min 40$ , now if i get up to say  55,60 $ i change to another table and start again. I play for maybe 1 hour a day and in the last week i am up nearly 300$. Now is this just pure luck that this is working for me at the moment ,or do some of you play this way also. One friend told me i should stick to one table get to know how they play and go from there. But people come and go so quicky i dont see the point of this .

LHE or NLHE?So let me get this straight. You play a hour a day on a .50/1 tables. Up 300 in the last week.= 300/7/1= approximately 43 bb/hrNOT SUSTAINABLE. Enjoy the downside of variance.

Man, sorry to be off topic but you're avatar most definitely creeps me out. That is one angry critter.

[Uppie_ 0]

sure your going to make some quick scores doing that and i did it for a little while myself, mainly when i played a ton of touraments. You will find that if you buy in for the maxium at a table you will do better in the long run, because your able to play poker a little more and not be forced to let the cards fall as they may. 40 at .50 1 i don't think is the min anywhere i play it is normally 20. But you will find your profits go up if your able to play at the table maxium, because your able to take all of someones money when they make a mistake, and your also able to push some people off some maginal hands that would have called you because of pot odds. Thus leading to a few more suck outs that would have folded if could have put a bigger bet in. Createing much more varanice in you bankroll. i would suggest if your not comfortable playing for 100 bucks move down to a level your comfortable at for the max. Then if its juciy and you keep winning don't leave cause you winning only leave once the game is no longer good for you.

[Pokerdad2222 0]

redpill your comment basically explains everything about your game.  Saying you cant take seriously people who only buy in for eg $40,its all about 'investing'your money in +EV situations.That my friend is cash games.  Saying that if some one has $40 and gets AA and moves in pre flop and gets called by someone with KK who has $200 saying that they arent making as much money and are at a disadvantage because of this is WRONG......how about the reverse,$40 stack has KK and moves in against an AA caller in this situation they are saving money??!if the AA caller had $1.5million and you had 1.5million you would have lost alot of money by buying in for alot.That is your logic???...then thats why your blog is so funny to read.  PS-Im still in shock that your 29 years old.

I agree that redpills blog is off the wall and I think a lot of his logic is flawed but yours is as well. You are saying that you shouldnt buy in for very much because you might lose it all. This is stupid. You should be playing at a level you are confident that you can beat not that you are scared of so you can buy in for the minimum. His logic is right in that most draws are more likely to see more cards and get cheaper looks against you because you cant chase them away. You dont have enough money to push anyone off a hand. if you want to sit on a short stack and wait for the nuts at everytable then this is fine but I like to be able to make a bet and be able to get away from a hand if I need to but with this short of a stack any bet puts a very large percentage of your stack in play

[TheWynn 0]

Some people will make a score and leave, but always stay in the game if its juicy, no point in leaving.

Agreed, why switch a table if you are doing well.

[benhoug 0]

 Do you laugh equally hard when you see someone only lose 40 with kings to aces?  

This is the kind of negative thinking that I love to play against. You're worried about your KK losing to AA, while I'm worried about maximizing my earn when I flop a set w/ 66. I want as much money as possible on the table when I'm in a pot. Period. As others have said, if you don't feel comfortable w/ losing $100 on a single hand then move down in limits. Sure, it's gonna happen sometimes, but if you play your cards right you should be able to more than make up for those rare and unfortunate situations.

[NoSup4U 0]

PS-Im still in shock that your 29 years old.

You're.For what its worth, I think if you feel like you can beat a level, then buy in for the max and beat it to the max. At the tables, I generally don't respect anyone sitting down with 1/3 of the max buy in or something. Not saying that good players shouldn't do that. Everyone has their own style, and I know this works for some people. I'd just hate to see myself flop trips, in a 3 way hand against someone with an overpair and someone with a draw, and not be able to push out the draw because I'm too short stacked....Mark

[Abbaddabba 0]

This is the kind of negative thinking that I love to play against. You're worried about your KK losing to AA, while I'm worried about maximizing my earn when I flop a set w/ 66. I want as much money as possible on the table when I'm in a pot. Period.  

Uhm, right.Im not suggesting that a short buy in is better than a large one.Im saying that it's not superior for the reasons listed.There are as likely to have KK run into AA as you are to have AA run into KK. These situations are absolutely trivial. The only difference is the scale of the outcome, since you're basically going to be moving in preflop with either, and so is the villain. You're not going to be making a fortune off of someone playing short stacked properly. If anything, it hurts you, if you have a relative post flop advantage. There's no reason why you'd want someone at the table who's pushing hard with premium hands and folding otherwise. There's little room to out play them besides stealing their blinds.