question about smash's 19 word guide to nl

[JG8191 0]

Thanks for the quick replies guys... $500 is not my entire bankroll, it's just the money that I intend on taking with me to Vegas this weekend. I follow the cardinal rule of having 300BB in my roll at all times... this is just my vacation "ammunition". I usually buy in with $200 at 2/4 or basically 100 SBs when I play live games. It's what I will feel comfortable playing with and if I find that I am not playing well and have lost 30BB I will call it a day (Lederer-style). About the comparisons between live and online games, I agree with Smash. At these low limits people have absolutely NO memory about what kind of cards I am playing. For the most part, I believe low-limit and even lower NL live games in casinos are MUCH easier to beat than online games. I may continue to be turning over trips or flushes and raking in pots BUT people will be thinking that I have to be bluffing sooner or later and they will call me down with sub-par hands. I am a huge believer in the importance of table selection. I look for a low-limit game with tourists, young people, and people wearing sunglasses. I avoid games that seem to have older regulars in them because I know they will not be in there betting back at me, giving me action, and helping me pump up pots when I am sitting with the nuts. The reason I think live games are easier to beat than online games is for this is that people don't come to Vegas on vacation to play solid cards... they come to gamble. Online, people play more seriously and play more frequently. While on vacation and playing live games, most people will play good-solid-poker for about the first 30mins-1hour... after that they will pretty much be playing any ace or two face cards. That's how it's so much easier to beat live games than online games. This all being said...Smash... whats your recommendation for a $100 NL live game in Vegas... I saw you turned $100 into $1000 was it seeing a lot of flops OR by playing premium starting hands.

[Smasharoo 0]

The same reason Phil Ivey, Doyle Brunson, Chip Reese, Chau Giang, and Gus Hansen all play together every night.*I guess*Do you really think that if any of them could sit at a table of 9 complete fish who happened to have massive bankrols that they wouldn't?They understand what you seem not to here. It's about winning *money* not about beating the best players. If you have to beat the best players to win the most *money* that's just inconvience.

[Smasharoo 0]

Smash... whats your recommendation for a $100 NL live game in Vegas... I saw you turned $100 into $1000 was it seeing a lot of flops OR by playing premium starting hands.Sit in the $100 max buy in NL game at the Excal. You'll never leave.Say hi to Butch and Rocko for me.

[DKE_XP120 0]

I've only been to a live casino once, but the play was by far the worst i've seen, at least 5-7 per flop in a raised pot in a 1-3 spread... As per the flow of people online, its pretty bad live, the dealers were calling for 2 even 3 people at a time for the NL tables all night. By far the longest waiting list, and also the shortest time to wait...

[Random Fluke 0]

generally speaking live low stakes NL games are weaker than online. That goes for low stakes limit games as well. I would expect a profit following smash's guide to pushing with the nuts, but it would be pretty boring.

[HtotheNootch 0]

For those talking about the Doyle, Dan, Phil game remember one other thing. It's usually not just them. There's usually someone there who's not at their calibre but has the money to play the game - actor, rich businessman etc.

[HtotheNootch 0]

I actually tried this for kicks at the UB microtables today. I've got to say that this is the most boring form of poker I've ever played - but it IS profitable.