how realistic is it to make money in small stakes...

[hotdog da 2rd 0]

Playing badly? lol. ok. Thanks.Yes. It's almost impossible for a good player to have a winrate as high as yours because they seek to minimize exposure to luck. A bad player who got lucky on the other hand could easily do it.

jealousy. lolthe guy's on a hot streak and makes $1700 in 45 days playing three .05/1 nl tables, totally believable. can it continue, probably not. pokerstar's duffmcguire made 14k in one day playing two $10/$2o nl tables. primapoker's thenizzles made 210k in 3 days playing 100-200 nl.this guy's story is just peanut money. all he needs is some explosive days plus consecutive days of non losing sessions and there u have it. remember he plays .05/1, where the game is soft and the pots are enormous.

[Drum Infected 0]

The fact that he won't let us watch him play makes it unbliveable. You don't have to tell me what your screenname is, like I said before..... I just wanted to know if this was in the fall,spring when this happened. I forgot what season the fish are tryin to swim upstream to mate.I'm definately interested in hearing your progress though, so tell us how your doing by posting your week, or monthly progress

[jlgosse 0]

smash: why are you being so rude to people who seem to be having a decent amount of success playing poker?Either you think everyone is lying, everyone is lucky, or they're going to go broke soon, so you tell them to give up.To the poster of this thread: I think it's entirely possible, and I know of 2-3 examples of people who have made huge amounts of cash in a few days online. However, these people have been playing for maybe 10-12 hours a day for three days to haul in huge sums of cash.

[THE ACE IS BACK 0]

I don't blame this guy for not giving out his "Handle".. The last thing he wants is a bunch of decent players sitting down in his easy games. I would guess the majority of the players on this site are better then the average player on most of these online sites. If I were him I would keep my online name secret as well.

[Royal_Tour 0]

Just to say to the original poster..Dont let Smash get to you.. I once posted a reply about making 1200 in two weeks at a local casino on very low limit tables.. His response was of course " quit while your ahead cuz your getting luck "Obviously this response was pointless, and had nothing to do with the original post., he just likes being a retard.. He's like the kid who takes his ball back so no one can play with it when he loses.Anyways. keep up the big wins

[TheMathProf 0]

My guess is that the law of averages hasn't fully caught up with you.I know that at the limits even lower than the ones being discussed that players will chase with all sorts of random stuff, and enough of them will do it that while you are still the most likely of any of the players to win the hand, the field is a favorite over you. (Of course, when you started at your appropriate level for your initial investment, you experienced some of this yourself, I'm sure.)The rate of return that you're having is absolutely phenomenal. I play about the same amount of time that you do, and was also 3-tabling NL. Playing at tables within my bankroll, I was lucky to double my initial investment at about the 3 week mark. Now I'm not claiming that I was an excellent NL player (I switched to limit for a reason ), but you've taken your investment and multiplied it by a factor of 85 in about 6 weeks.This suggests to me that one of three things likely happened:(A) You started outside your bankroll and had a good run to start. Given your current bankroll and your recent reported return rates, though, it seems likely that you started at the lower limits.(B) You're getting phenomenally lucky. If this is the case, then I just suggest that you not hang your head too low when this balances out.© Your results are exaggerated.A lot of people have said, "No, I know this could be very true, because it's happened!" and I know it certainly has, but maintaining this rate of return is simply not realistic.

[dms26 3]

Does Smash give out is PP name?

[AvoidReality 0]

Id be happy enough to consistently make that a day on the $5/$10 NL for just 2-3 hours play each day. You're just not going to be able to keep it up.

[Painkilla 0]

Does Smash ever say anything nice to people ?

[Bonobio 0]

Does Smash ever say anything nice to people ?

If the poster wants people to just give him the answers that he's expecting, why bother posting? Why is it not nice to assume that someone is on a lucky streak and that they'd better realize it before they go broke?

[Painkilla 0]

If the poster wants people to just give him the answers that he's expecting, why bother posting? Why is it not nice to assume that someone is on a lucky streak and that they'd better realize it before they go broke?

I'm pretty sure he was looking for some friendly advice about consistent winning... not about how lucky he's been and that he should stop playing. Why bother posting if you don't have anything nice to post, nobody wants to hear the constant barating of other forum members.My advice would've been to keep up the good work, keep playing the way he has to get him to the level he's at - maybe even move up in limits, not to buy a tv.

[BetItAll33 0]

Does Smash ever say anything nice to people ?

If the poster wants people to just give him the answers that he's expecting, why bother posting? Why is it not nice to assume that someone is on a lucky streak and that they'd better realize it before they go broke?

I agree. The poster asked if his win rate is sustainable. Smash said "No, you've either been lucky or you're lying." Simple answer to a simple question. Another poster suggested that he could sustain a win rate near [his current rate] with solid play. He replies "this is the feedback I was looking for".Why post if you don't want honest opinions? I tend to agree with Smash here, no offense intended.

[Painkilla 0]

I hear ya... all I'm trying to say is that it's alittle discouraging sometimes when your called just lucky or a liar. Isn't there a possibility that he's good, I mean not as good as "the great one" but good enough for some positive feedback.

[DeNuts1 0]

But to answer the question. No. Smash never says anything nice....and I find it hysterical.

[NegroPls 0]

I don't understand how so many of the posters find these numbers to be so unbelievable. Maybe some of the people replying (with totally inappropriate aggression, by the way. Why instigate negativity when there is none?) didn't note that he is playing 3 games at once. As someone before posted, that's 10-15$ hour. That's totally consistent with the results my friends who play these limits professionally report. Even if I'm mistaken and it is somewhat high, it's far from "astronomical."

[justblaze 0]

Does Smash ever say anything nice to people ?

If the poster wants people to just give him the answers that he's expecting, why bother posting? Why is it not nice to assume that someone is on a lucky streak and that they'd better realize it before they go broke?

I agree. The poster asked if his win rate is sustainable. Smash said "No, you've either been lucky or you're lying." Simple answer to a simple question. Another poster suggested that he could sustain a win rate near [his current rate] with solid play. He replies "this is the feedback I was looking for".Why post if you don't want honest opinions? I tend to agree with Smash here, no offense intended.

you've hit the nail on the head. OP has experienced some very good luck. he may be a decent player, but the fact that he was able to elaborate his whole game plan in one paragraph suggests he is a novice player, who read a couple books and decided he knew all he needed to know. He asked if his win-rate was sustainable. it clearly is not. Smash told him so, bluntly. OP became very defensive. Why would you ask a question if you already 'know' the answer?

[Downstream 0]

I'll take the bait.Forums are meant for expressing opinions, and that is what we all do. Smash always seems to be a lightning rod for criticism when he expresses his. I think its because Smash just puts out cold hard posts, full of practical advice that no one wants to hear. Maybe if he just added a smiley and said good luck! everyone would think Smash was a great guy.Anyway, this guy making this kind of money is totally full of shit. And if not, then by all means, cash it out and start over. If its this easy, then starting over again with $100 should be easy to get back up to $5000 in a week or two.Come back in two weeks and tell us how you are doing. Good Luck!

[Bonesy 0]

I had similar results when I first started playing NL on UB. And I played very similarly. It just seemed like I would always catch a few big pots nightly. Now it just seems far less common for me. I think your rate could be sustainable but not the way you are playing. You have a very safe low risk style which was what I employed, but eventually you will go on a cold streak which will last a few weeks maybe more and that may not include bad beats. Also, your big hands might not get action. Another thing is I think people underestimate the "strength" at those limits, mainly .25-.50 and .50-1.00 NL tables. Someone made mention of needing a very large bankroll to beat these tables. The variances can be huge no doubt. It's also inevitable that you may lose patience and confidence at some point. Since you never mentioned the site you played on, I have to assume it wasn't UB where I think the play is better than most.

[BetItAll33 0]

I hear ya... all I'm trying to say is that it's alittle discouraging sometimes when your called just lucky or a liar. Isn't there a possibility that he's good, I mean not as good as "the great one" but good enough for some positive feedback.

He could be good AND lucky. The two are not mutually exclusive. However, as Smash pointed out, bad players can have incredibly good results over the short term by repeatedly hitting their longshot draws and so forth. Good players are less likely to do this. We could probably tell him for sure by observing his play, but he won't allow that. If he can sustain these win rates, then I definitely want to watch him.

[Painkilla 0]

Maybe if he just added a smiley and said good luck! everyone would think Smash was a great guy. Good Luck!

Couldn't have said it better myself :-)

[justblaze 0]

I don't understand how so many of the posters find these numbers to be so unbelievable. Maybe some of the people replying (with totally inappropriate aggression, by the way. Why instigate negativity when there is none?) didn't note that he is playing 3 games at once. As someone before posted, that's 10-15$ hour. That's totally consistent with the results my friends who play these limits professionally report. Even if I'm mistaken and it is somewhat high, it's far from "astronomical."

thats $10-15/hour PER TABLE. thats ridiculous. these numbers are perfectly believable. im sure hes made this money. this is not the question. the question is can he SUSTAIN this rate. the answer is no. to suggest otherwise would require ignoring pretty much every mathematical principle relating to poker. you find me one player who is making 15bb/hr/table at any limit over a sample size >20k hands. find me one. i dare you. i double dog dare you.

[jayistheman 0]

i'm in for the triple and quadruple dog dare here.i've had extremely good variance swings on NL tables before... it can be decieving, but it always flattens out....if i were to sample just the 1k hands i played one night, i would have gotten a figure of about $120/hr in NL 100.... obviously not sustainable... in fact, i've never won that big again... i was sustaining a rate of about $75 an hour on paradise for a few weeks straight, so i know how you are feeling.... the draws will start missing and the AA will get cracked.

[MarionSauce 0]

I somewhat comprehend what he is going through. I started off with the $10 that Royal Vegas GAVE me and turned it into $400 because of some awesome hands and overall okay play, while that is not even CLOSE to buddy's success, the big hands stop coming and I started having to really polish my poker skills. Hopefully Phish can keep it up, it can be difficult when one goes on a crappy turd streak and not to overestimate their own skills... I see that a lot, when beginners start winning money they think they are the sh*t and try to buy every pot or chase. I'm not saying Phish is like that, I'm sure he's good.

[ChungAces 0]

I think u lot are being too harsh. Lets just say he started off with the $20, doubled up and doubled that up again, possibly through some good luck. Now he has $80. He can now play 2 tables at once and buyinging in with $40 for both tables on $0.5/$1 nl. He wins big on one table and loses abit on the other, he will still come out with a profit. As this continues and he plays he can bring more cash on the table and can doule up. Its hard to believe but it is believable. I've been playing poker for 6 months now, usually tournaments. But now I've been playing real cash games for 2 weeks at $0.5/$1 nl where most people bring $100 to the table. I've made $700 in that time. Although i started off with $50. You can get lucky and win big, then u got a bigger bank roll to play with. I usually look at tables where there are tight players, take notes and then join that table as i can bluff them more easily. Usually it'll take me bout 4 hours to make $80 though. If he is telling the truth just be happy for him, it does not seem true but are you really telling me noone in the world has done this before?

[justblaze 0]

I think u lot are being too harsh. Lets just say he started off with the $20, doubled up and doubled that up again, possibly through some good luck. Now he has $80. He can now play 2 tables at once and buyinging in with $40 for both tables on $0.5/$1 nl. He wins big on one table and loses abit on the other, he will still come out with a profit. As this continues and he plays he can bring more cash on the table and can doule up. Its hard to believe but it is believable. I've been playing poker for 6 months now, usually tournaments. But now I've been playing real cash games for 2 weeks at $0.5/$1 nl where most people bring $100 to the table. I've made $700 in that time. Although i started off with $50. You can get lucky and win big, then u got a bigger bank roll to play with. I usually look at tables where there are tight players, take notes and then join that table as i can bluff them more easily. Usually it'll take me bout 4 hours to make $80 though. If he is telling the truth just be happy for him, it does not seem true but are you really telling me noone in the world has done this before?

do you people not read? did you just look at the title, and then decide to respond? Its altogether possible hes made 1500$ off of 20$ or whatever. I'd say its even likely. But that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. the question is: CAN HE SUSTAIN THIS WIN RATE. if you dont know what that means, then i apologize for flaming you. but its pretty simple. Based on the stakes, the time, and the profit, this win rate is mathematically unsustainable. IT CANNOT BE SUSTAINED. the underlying mathematical principles of poker do not allow for it. if he can sustain this rate over a sample of 100k hands, he will, in fact, be the most prolific NL cash game player to play the game, in the history of poker. Thats a pretty bold statement to be making.