Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Full Tilt Update

As happens regularly from time to time, when I went to fire up my full tilt to play some stud hi-lo with bloggers on Tuesday night, I got the message that a new version of the poker client was available on the full tilt servers. I dutifully clicked over and got the update over with, expecting as usual to not even notice the changes but to be able to play. But for the first time in a long time, two changes jumped out at me, both of which I think are very positive overall, one of which, frankly, things I can't believe I never thought about myself, and the other which everyone has thought of but it looks like a major online poker site has finally executed on.

The first cool change in the new ftp update is that all mtt's now have their break at the same time, at 5 minutes before the hour, every hour. This is starkly different from how full tilt has been for years, which is that every mtt has a break every hour, 60 minutes from the end of the last break. The old system made sense, in that you sat down to a tournament, played 60 minutes, and then got a break every 60 minutes to be able to go to the bathroom, grab a snack, hit some Wii baseball home runs, whatever it is you like to do during your online mtt breaks.

But that was also exactly the problem with the old break system -- for anyone who plays more than one mtt at a time, ever, then you don't typically get that 5-minute break period to do all those breaky things. If I sit down and play the Skillz game at 9:30pm ET, the $14 token frenzy or whatever it's called at 9:45pm ET and the 28k at 10pm ET (which Chad won again the other night btw, for only the sixth time though), then that means I get a 5-minute break in the Skillz at 10:30, but I'm still playing through my other two tournaments at that point. At 10:35 the Skillz resumes, and then at 10:45 comes the break for the token frenzy, which ends at 10:50, and then ten minutes later comes the break for the 28k. So that is three 5-minute breaks in the span of 30 minutes, butfor all practical purposes, I have gotten no real break at all, because there was never even one second where I could actually get up and pee like I've had to for a good 30, 40 minutes now.

Well now, with the new change, this will no longer be an issue. Now all mtts will take their break at 5 minutes before the hour. So on Tuesday, for the first time ever, I was able to take a true break while multi-tabling a turbo FTOPS satellite and the Skills event at the same time, at 10:55pm ET. Good stuff, and a good change. Like I said above, I can't believe nobody has thought of that before now.

The other change I noticed as part of the new full tilt update is that they now offer cash no-limit games with antes for the first time. This one is not particularly relevant to my own online poker experience, in that I haven't focused much on cash games for the past year or two, but still it is surely an improvement to have such games available. For the Real Men out there who recognize full ring cash poker as the slow, boring time-passer that is is, the real action junkies who play shorthanded or even heads-up cash just to avoid the incessant folding that can basically guarantee you a very small but fairly easy-to-scratch-out profit, adding antes to the structure is a very welcome turn of events for sho.

I am so into the idea of online nlh cash play with antes that I've been toying with the notion of starting some formal or informal challenge to get myself back into no-limit cash game play after a long time away. As I think I've mentioned previously, somehow, some way, a switch was flipped a couple of months back, and I just stopped being interested in playing the large multi-table tournaments like I had focused on for the previous year and more. It was definitely nothing specific that happened, not some kind of bad mtt run or something, but if anything I think it was probably health-related in that I contracted a cold or flu virus, and for a few weeks solid I was really unable to maintain my focus anywhere near late enough to make even a mediocre run in an mtt. Honestly I bet if I search my stats I won't see a single true mtt played by me in at least two months. No 50-50, no 32k, no 28k, no 35k, no stars 70k, no UB and no bodog multi table tournaments. It's just something I have gotten away from as I do from time to time, and I'm sure I'll be back in mtt land soon enough. But for right now, playing some nlh cash with antes sounds like it could be right up my alley.

Maybe I can convince some of you diggheads to join me and donate to the cause?

Labels: , , , ,

Thursday, August 02, 2007

Cash vs. Tournaments...Again

Today I'm going to refocus on a popular topic here at the blog, and a topic that has been percolating in my head for some time as I have started to focus over the past four months or so on cash games almost every single night I sit down to the virtual (or live) poker tables. On Wednesday I caught Don's latest post on how he looked over his stats for July and noticed a huge leak in his poker play over that time -- tournaments. Don went on to write a great post that captures the frustration and madness that is regular tournament poker play. There is just nothing else to say about it -- playing poker tournaments, especially if you play them with any serious regularity, is an incredible, unbelievable grind that requires the absolute utmost control of mind to withstand the inevitable bad beats in horrible spots, plus even the streaks of bad beats or late-game eliminations that invariably occur due to the randomness of variance. I have spent the better part of the last two years focusing almost exclusively on online multi-table tournaments, and I have had a number of nice scores to show for it. But if I recounted some of the bad stories from that time focusing on mtts, and I bet I could make most of you puke in your shorts.

Stories like bad beat eliminations in 14 consecutive mtts. That's actually what got me to really start writing this blog to begin with. Times when I lost with AA to KK allin preflop in 3 or 4 tournaments in a single week. Remember that, my longtime readers?! God that was death. Or how about when I went so long without even being able to double up one time in an mtt last summer, so bad that I ended up focusing on HORSE and other cash game play for the first time in my foray into online poker for a period of repeated months? I've gone so long in between big scores as an mtt player that I bet I've lost more money in one streak than most of you out there have lost in your online poker careers. Being a tournament poker guy is a tough thing to do, and as Don points out in his post, that's why there are so few people who consistently profit from them.

Then early this morning I read Chad's latest post, and I have to say it really resonated with me. Chad presents sort of the opposite view from Don, arguing why tournament poker is very profitable for some people, and why many others continue to chase the elusive big score even knowing the longass odds they are clearly up against. I think the reason I loved this post so much is that I have had enough of a taste of the good life in mtts to want to keep taking shots and keep coming back for more. I'm no Chad, not by a longshot, but I've won just enough in live and online tournaments and satellites to have the feeling, that bravado, that every time I go into a tournament -- in any poker game and against any competition, mind you -- I know I have what it takes to win. That's right, to win the whole thing. I've done it before. When I won the Party 40k more than a year ago now, I finished first out of 2,323 players. How many people can say they did that? When I won the $11 Rebuy Madness on pokerstars about 11 months ago, I beat out 1500-some players and more than 4500 total buyins to take down the 15k first prize. I've won and scored big in plenty of other tournaments along the way, enough for me to have the beginnings of the feeling I can tell Chad has every time he sits down at a poker table and hears "Shuffle up and deal!"

Chad makes lots of great points in his post. For example, he is certainly 100% correct that of all the people who decry tournament poker and say how it's impossible to profit over the long term, nary a single one of 'em has ever won a big tournament. I mean first-place, big cash payout, the whole shebang. Not one of 'em. Because once you've won it once, it's like finally seeing that optical illusion that you never were able to see previously -- you can't help but see the thing again and again every time you try from then on. Once you break the seal so to speak and win a large tournament, you see things in a different light, a light that only big mtt winners can ever see. You just never hear a guy who recently won out over 2000 other poker players saying that tournament poker is losing poker. He's been there once, and now he thinks he can get there again.

Chad also hits on what I think are the two big points to be made about why poker tournaments are so popular even today. First and foremost, because of the tournament aspect, poker tournaments are simply more "fun" than cash games. They just are. The prizes available at the end are much larger than anything you could win in a night of cash play, and with the freezeout aspect and the increasing blinds, it just adds several layers of complexity and randomness that cannot even be approached by anything at a cash game table.

And secondly, Chad makes the very good point that most of us are not playing for a living, like Don is. As a play-to-make-your-nut-every-month strategy, cash games are probably where it's at. I know very, very few people -- KOD included in some months -- who could successfully rely on poker tournament winnings every month to make their monthly living expenses and maybe have some extra change left over to go out to the movies or take a vacation once in a while. I do know of a few guys -- mostly some of the widly successful guys I run into on a nightly basis in the largest buyin mtt's regularly available on full tilt (i.e., the $163 buyin 55k at 8pm ET, the $300 buyin Avatar Race at 9pm ET Tuesdays and Thursdays, etc.), but really we're talking about a small handful of people out of the entire population of the online poker scene. If you're playing for a living, tournament poker is not going to be where you punch your ticket unless you are one of the few and the proud. Which I and pretty much anyone who plays with our group on a regular basis are not.

Guys like me, we have day jobs and other sources of income. I'm not using poker as a means to make my nut, and as a result, I actually enrich my life by playing mtts on a nightly basis. I like it. Maybe that makes me sick and demented, and of course on its worst nights it's all I can do to stop from smashing my laptop repeatedly over the head of your family pet, but as a general statement I play poker tournaments because I love them, not because I know I will make a steady monthly profit. Who knows how long I would have continued with my focus if I had not started winning some big scores? We'll never know, because I did. I don't win tournaments as big or as often as Chad does -- there can only be one K.O.D. -- but I've won, say, more than $1000 probably twenty times now and I have to tell you, every one of those has utterly kicked ass. Better than any cash game run I've ever experienced. Those are the things that keep me coming back for more. For more suckouts, more recockurivers, more abuse.

And one more quick item -- after several months now of playing cash game poker almost every single night at one or more tables, I am ready to make a proclamation. Tournaments require more skill than cash games. I knew this already several months ago when this topic last came up on the blog here, but back then even though I already knew I was right, I did not have the cash games experience to be taken credibly. Well now I do. I've been a winning player at every limit up to and including 2-4 nlh on full tilt over four months. If not for three horrific suckouts at 3-6 and 5-10 nlh (two flush-over-flushes and one QQ < AK allin preflop), I would be up several grand at those levels as well. I know how to play cash and I have played it enough now to be able to make this statement confidently.

Cash games require less skill than tournaments. I said it a few months ago here, and I say it again now. The bottom line is that there is a really different skill set to win tournaments than to win cash games. Chad makes that point in his post as well. That's what it comes down to, really. Yes, deep stack cash can present some postflop challenges that are typically not present in the latter stages of mtts. But in some ways that is like comparing apples to oranges. In the early stages of mtts, you typically are playing fairly deepstack poker, and thus many of the same challenges and strategies present themselves there as in ds no-limit cash games. But the later stages of mtts, and just play vs the escalating blinds generally, add multiple entire layers of complexity to tournament poker that is simply never present in cash games. At this point -- and make no mistake I do not consider myself a great cash game player and in relative terms I am still much better in tournaments than in cash -- but I've played enough of each and succeeded enough at each to be able to make my own determination, and to me it's a no-brainer. Both types of poker are very difficult to really excel at on a consistent, grinding basis, but if you need to try one form of poker to try to make your monthly nut, cash games will always be the easier choice.

Tournament skill > cash game skill. Don't forget it.

Now also don't forget about the BBT Re-Freeroll rescheduled for Thursday night at 10pm ET on full tilt. No registration, no password required. Just all 56 players who qualified for the Freeroll through the Battle of the Blogger Tournaments, now battling it out this evening for a $2500 prize pool thanks to the efforts of Al and the recognition on the part of full tilt that the poker blogging community, as a group, can do wonders for full tilt that far exceed any few hundy or even several hundred dollars they can give back to us as a showing of good faith. Tonight I plan to play tight-aggro, the only way I really know how, and I will try to get back to the quick start that I was off to last week when we first tried to run the Freeroll before the full tilt server debacle began. That, and my other big plans for the night are to try to play in that 9:50pm ET $10 rebuy satellite into FTOPS Event #1 in no-limit holdem. See you at the Freeroll where I plan to bust out of the tournament all you donkeys who eliminated me from any BBT event with donkeyplay of your own.

Labels: ,

Tuesday, May 01, 2007

MATH Recap, and Cash vs. Tournament Play

Not sure why I did not post this yesterday, but for those of you who live under a rock or something, this weekend our esteemed colleague Lucko won his WSOP Main Event seat in one of those $650 qualifier satellites on pokerstars, where 574 entrants created WSOP prize packages for the top 32 finishers. Go over and read an awesome writeup from Lucko about his incredible win, and for adding yet another blogger to the growing list of bloggers who will be playing in the 2007 WSOP. We've had a few notable cashers in WSOP events, but still no final tabler that I know of, right? Awesome work, Lucko!!

OK, so on to today's regularly scheduled post. The fourth MATH tournament of the BBT circuit, and the last one of the first month of the challenge, saw 49 runners chipping in $24 apiece (plus $2 apiece that will come 100% directly back to us in the BBT freeroll Tournament of Champions in a couple of months), for a total $1176 prize pool. Way to go once again to all you out there for showing up for some good times, donkey poker, big prizes for the top finishers, and a chance at the really big prizes offered to the BBT's best at the end of the challenge. My night was actually better than most of my recent blonkaments, as I managed to stay above the starting 3000-chip stack basically from the first hand and through to the middle of the second hour of the tournament. Eventually, with my stack down to around 2300 at a time when the average stack was probably around 5000, I made the laughably amateurish open allin push from the small blind with ATC, just to make sure that brdweb would fold his big blind and give me some much needed chips (one blind steal at this point would increase my stack by around 15%). At the time I was in roughly 25th place with 30 players left, with just the top 24 making the BBT points bubble. Of course now I realize that this kind of silly overbet only gets called by a hand that beats me, especially given that I was totally weak like 64o or something. brdweb calls instantly, and not only do I know I'm down around 2 to 1 by two overcards, but then brdweb realy rubs it in by flipping up pocket Aces. Hmmmm. Two seconds later and I'm done, out I think in 29th place or something. In the end, sad to say, it's one of my better blonkament performances of the last few months, and my bustout was truly one of the worst plays I've ever made in a blogger event. It happens. I was focusing hard on the Monday 1k tournament all through the Hoy, so that may have played a small part, I don't know.

It's funny, because last night in the 1K Monday tourney, which btw had 220 runners for a 220k prize pool, way bigger than I've seen this thing over the past several weeks, I also played well for a couple of hours, very tight, no good cards except for one AA hand where I chipped up pretty solidly in the first 30 minutes or so. Otherwise, by the middle of the third hour in this thing, I am down to 49th place out of 59 remaining players because as the blinds have moved up I haven't seen one playable hand, and not even one stealable hand because there were always preflop raises already in ahead of me. It sucked. I end up pushing my short stack allin preflop with KQs from middle position. Just the small blind calls my allin, and what's he flip up? Pocket Aces. And IGH in 59th place overall out of 220 (top 27 cashed in the event). So that was my run in the first Monday 1k of my career, and hopefully not the last. I did great against one of the very toughest mtt fields out there, busting in 59th place out of 220 runners in a tournament where I could never get anything going due to positional issues and poor starting cards. I'm pleased. Always hurts to lose in a big tournament like this, but I played pretty well given the circumstances I think. But I did push allin preflop on a short stack in both the MATH and the Monday 1k and ran into pocket Aces behind me in both situations. That hurts.

Anyways, back to the MATH. As the Hammer Girls have been up for parts of the last few nights since they're sick, I was more tired than usual and as such I only made it awake to when the final table happened. This consisted basically of waiting out Waffles until he busted on the ft bubble in 10th place, adding some more valuable BBT points to his now 3rd place standing in the challenge. When I checked in this morning I was very pleased to see the final Hoy leaderboard from Monday night's event.

Now, why would this particular leaderboard please me, you may be wondering? Two reasons, I guess.

First, I'm a big fan of the Goat. Julius Goat is a fairly new blogger, and in fact he is actually the most recent addition to the blogroll on the left there, as most of you know I choose to be very selective about what I include on the roll as I like to keep that limited to only high quality product for you to link to. But I am always adding new blogs that I find myself reading more than infrequently. Usually I bury them in the middle of the blogroll since I don't want proximity to the top or bottom to mean anything to anyone (although I do admit to the best of the best being at the very top of the roll, mostly because they're the first people I thought of that I knew had to be on there), but I've added a number of you over the past few months as there always seems to be a new crop of bloggers looking to pick up the reins from those who have let their blogs fizzle out or become stale. Anyways, Julius Goat is the last blog added to my roll, and there are good reasons for that. Not only is Goat a dam good poker player, having hit the final table in the last Riverchasers event for example with a big chip lead over all the remaining players before taking the MATH down this week, but he is a dam fine writer. And I'm not just saying that. The Goat is funny and the Goat is clever, and his writing will be enjoyable for anyone who likes what I'm doing over here day in and day out. Now so far my biggest complaint about Goat's blog is that the guy doesn't update quite enough for me, but when he posts, the shit is good. Goat does his weekly take on Lost which anybody who's a fan of the show will love to laugh at and shake their heads in agreement, and he's even started reviewing his good tournament performances in 12 hands or less, depicting those hands on his blog for everyone to kinda be there next to him as he runs deep into the BBT points race. I find myself thinking of Goat as the 2007 version of an unknown blogger named Iakaris, that brand new blogger guy whose writing you really love to read, who is clever as balls, and who posts just enough to leave you wanting more. If you haven't checked out Goat's blog yet, go pop by now and take a read. He is my kind of blogger no doubt.

Ok so that's reason #1 why I am happy about last night's results. That's the kind, generous and gracious side of Hoy, the one I want you guys to see. But then there's the other side. The greedy, ultra-competitive pompous ass side. And when I went to bed with 9 players left in the MATH last night, all that dark side of me could see was that, at the time of the final table beginning, Columbo, who is running the WPBT tournaments this year, had a huge chip lead over everyone else at the table. Something about that struck my dark side as bad, though I couldn't put my finger on what. But then I ran and checked the 2007 Math moneyboard and quickly realized the problem. Columbo was the only guy at the final table last night who could displace me atop the 2007 board with a win on Monday night. And he had a huge chip lead. No wonder my sinister side wasn't happy. So imagine my relief this morning when I log in to see that Goat somehow managed to overcome that huge chip lead and leave Columbo as just one of the big movers and shakers of the week on the moneyboard, without touching the coveted top spot for one more (and only one more) week.

Here are your cashers in this week's Mondays at the Hoy tournament:

6th place: $70.56 Alceste, the New York blogger who's not really a poker blogger, making his first MATH cash of the year (and, I think, his first cash here ever).

5th place: $94.08 Gracie, fresh off of winning 1% of brdweb's WSOP action in this past Sunday's Blogger Bracelet Race and relieving me of my stack early on in the event, her second straight blonkament top-6 finish, and also her first Hoy cash of the year.

4th place: $129.36 Pushmonkey72 (link updated)

3rd: $176.40 23skidoo, just back in Atlanta from a trip to nyc where I was unable to get together thanks to work obligations, but where he played in an underground club with Jordan and won the entire tournament, I think even his second win at this club in two lifetime trips there (way to go Ski!).

2nd: $258.72 Columbo, now making his third cash in the MATH in 2007, and really making a run at the Hoy moneywinner of the year race.

And in first place, winning his first MATH tournament ever and finally getting his name off the very bottom of the Hoy 2007 moneyboard, to the tune of a $446.88 cash, is Julius Goat.

Congratulations to everyone who cashed and who played well, and we'll see you next week at Mondays at the Hoy.

And oh yeah, there is the little matter of the freshly-updated 2007 MATH moneyboard, inculding the results from this week's tournaments (rounded to the nearest dollar as always):

OK so here is the updated 2007 Hoy money leaderboard as of this week's tournament:

1. Hoyazo $580
2. Julius Goat $507
3. scots_chris $474
4. Columbo $463
5. Fuel55 $458
6. Iggy $447
7. Bayne_s $410
8. Chad $379
9. IslandBum1 $357
10. Zeem $330
11. Miami Don $312
11. cmitch $312
11 oossuuu754 $312
14. VinNay $310
15. Wigginx $288
16. ScottMc $282
16. Pirate Wes $282
18. Blinders $275
19. Manik79 $252
20. Byron $234
21. Omega_man_99 $210
22. NewinNov $190
23. Astin $187
24. Waffles $180
24. bartonfa $180
26. 23Skidoo $176
26. Tripjax $176
28. Santa Clauss $170
29. Iakaris $162
29. Smokkee $162
31. l.e.s.ter000 $147
32. DDionysus $137
32. lightning36 $137
34. Pushmonkey72 $129
34. InstantTragedy $129
36. Ganton516 $114
37. RecessRampage $100
38. Gracie $94
38. Scurvydog $94
40. Shag0103 $84
41. PhinCity $80
41. jeciimd $80
43. Alceste $71
43. dbirider $71
45. Easycure $67

So what a week for the MATH moneyboard -- we've got two new faces in the top 5 on the list. Columbo's 2nd place finish this week combines with his two previous 2007 cashes to lift him into 4th place overall, behind only myself, last week's winner scots_chris, and this week's winner, Julius Goat. Goat's big win this week combined with his paltry $60 cash previous to this one to propel him up to lone position in 2nd place on the current board. And who's that still in first? My glasses are foggy sonny, I can't read the screen, could you read it to me out loud please? Ha ha that's right. My Era of Futility persists with another no-points, no-cash in the MATH, and yet my Reign of Terror continues as well for one more week, now into May as I have owned -- no, make that pwned -- the competition in the Hoy through the first third of the year in 2007. And you just know somebody's gonna pass me next week, so why not let that person be you? If you've cashed anywhere else on the board so far this year, then a win in next Monday night's MATH should vault you right up to where you want to be. Cuz you know I won't be cashing that shit. Congrats again to this week's MATH payout receivers and to everyone who has made an appearance on the 2007 leaderboard to date.

I thought I would end today with mentioning a few key differences that I have seen between the way I actually play certain hands in cash games vs. in tournaments. For my part, I play a ton of 6-max no-limit holdem. The nightly 30k on full tilt is 6-max, and I play at least one satellite into that event almost every single night I play. And lately I've been playing a lot of 6-max cash at the $200 level as well, several thousands of hands worth at this point, so I've gotten quite a bit of experience at both the cash and tournament level. Enough for me to begin to compare how I think the game is best played at each particular form of poker.

The biggest general difference I see between cash and tournament play is that I find that, in cash (at least at the 1-2 level), it pays to be much more straightforward, generally speaking, that it does in a tournament. With actual cash on the line, the damage to me just seems so much more significant, more real, when I allow someone to catch a miracle card and crack my pair of Aces at the cash table than it is in a tournament. So I have found it more important to bet your strong hands and not to try to lay traps at the cash tables than at the large tournaments. In tournaments, I have long believed and continue to believe that the biggest way to excel in large-format mtts is to trap, and to avoid getting trapped. Trapping others for all their chips, when they cannot just go back to their pockets for more, is the way that I have built up my stack in most cases in most of the deep mtt runs I've ever had. That, and avoiding being trapped. So I find large mtt play is about trapping, while in my view, low-limit cash play is more about betting for value when you've got something, pushing the small edges, and aggressively going after pots when you believe you are best. I would bet my life that trappiness increases again in importance as one climbs the limits in the cash games, where the skill levels of your opponents are clearly rising along with your own, but at the low limits I find straightforward play to be the best policy.

In light of this "more aggressive" theme in cash vs. tournament play for me, when I put in any preflop raise at 6-max cash, invariably that raise is the size of the pot. In tournaments, on the other hand, I usually don't quite raise the size of the pot in standard raise situations. In tournaments I am generally closer to 3x the size of the big blind, depending on my position, but almost never quite as high as the size of the pot once the antes grow large enough. So for example, my standard open-raise from middle position at a 200 nl 6-max cash table is $7, which is a pot-raise of the $1 and $2 blinds in the current pot, whereas in a tournament, I would be raising this to $6, or 3 times the big blind. So my preflop raises are generally a tad larger in relative terms in cash games than what I would normally be raising in tournaments.

There are some other differences in my own personal play in cash games vs. tournaments that also relate to the gravity that I tend to take actual cash losses with as compared to $T losses in my usual $20 buyin or so tournaments. For example, in a 6-max tournament, I might open-raise from EP with KQ early in the tourney. If someone reraises me, I know I'm folding 90% of the time and I'm only losing a typically insignificant amount of $T that is not likely to prevent me from winning the tournament. But in a 6-max cash game, where every raise means $7 out of my stack at your typical 1-2 table, I am very reluctant to ever raise from early position without an Ace or a pair in my hand. It's one thing to lose T$50 out of my starting stack of 1500 chips in the Mookie. It's a whole other thing to lose $7 out of my $150 stack because I raised utg with KQ or QJs, something I would be somewhat likely to do in tournament play.

Going along with the Aces theme for a minute, I am also less likely to play a weak Ace from utg or utg+1 in a cash game than in a tournament. Any Ace in 6-max is a good opening hand from any position, but of course playing a hand like A2 or A3 for a raise utg is going to get you in a lot more tough positions than open-raising this hand from the button. In 6-max tournamet play, I will open with almost any Ace from almost any position, and again if I get reraised then I know I'm laying it down without much effect on my overall position in the tournament. But at the 6-max cash tables, I don't like to raise utg or utg+1 with A2, A3 and even on up to A5 or A6. Again, whenever someone reraises me here, I basically have to lay it down because I'm not going up against a higher Ace for a big pot when there is my actual cash on the line. So I'll always still play my A9s and ATs from early position at the cash tables, but my starting hand standards are tighter somewhat, much as they are with respect to non-Ace starting hands as described in the previous paragraph, for overcard-type of hands in the cash games than they are in the same 6-max format tournaments.

Despite all of the above differences which are all variations on the theme of playing a big tighter preflop with high cards in cash games, my starting hand requirements are paradoxically looser at the cash tables with certain other hands that have the ability to either hit big or let me out cheap, or when it comes to almost any cards with potential if it appears that a big pot may be developing. So, for example, I will call almost any standard preflop raise with almost any pocket pair in the cash games. Yes, even the shitty pairs like 22-66, hands that I am almost certainly laying down to a raise preflop in a tournament because they are so likely to be losers once the cards come out. But the chances of hitting my flop at the cash tables, which would mean flopping a set and a great opportunity to stack my opponent(s) for all of their actual cash money at the table, makes it worth my while to see as many flops as possible with as many pocket pairs as possible. Many better cash players than I have written about how much of their cash play revolves around set mining, and in my experience this is exactly correct, even in 6-max play at the $200 level. So in a tournament I may try to open-limp with a hand like pocket 5s in middle position, but in a cash game I want to be more aggressive with what is likely the best hand right now, so if the action has not been opened to me yet, I am likely to raise with those 5s to try to take the small pot down right then, and to provide some camouflage for my stronger hands that I also will be raising this same (pot-sized) amount. And what's more, if the action is raised before me in a tournament and I look down in middle position to find pocket 5s, I am likely folding, whereas in a cash game I am much more likely to call that $7 raise and try to hit a monstrous flop.

Similarly, once there is 3- or certainly 4-way action before the flop ahead of me in a cash game, I am likely to call with almost any two cards with any real potential at all. Would I call a $7 raise preflop with 4 players already in for $8 with a hand like 94o in a cash game? Maybe not. But maybe, I think it might depend on how I was playing at the time. But I would certainly call that same $7 cash-game raise with 4 players already in for $8 apiece if I held, say, J9o, and probably with almost any two connectors, even if not soooted. It just pays to try to hit a miracle flop and stack somebody for $200 cold. hard. cash. Again, in a tournament if a guy raises and three players call that raise and it's back to me in the small blind with 65o, I am generally folding that hand there, even with 4-way action guaranteed already to see the flop. But when it's actual cash money in play, almost any hand with any potential at all becomes playable in my eyes if it's not too expensive to see the flop and you are sure of some solid, multi-way action.

I'm sure there are lot of other differences in the play of actual hands between cash and tournament play, but these are my initial impressions after playing about 50,000 hours of 6-max tournaments, and maybe 50 hours of 6-max cash games at the $100 and $200 level. If anyone else has any additional observations, I'd love to hear them. Or of course if you think my observations are not entirely accurate, let me know that as well.

Otherwise, don't forget the Wheatie tonight at 8:30pm ET on pokerstars (password is "monkey" as always), and probably the WWdN 2nd Chance at 10:30pm ET as well tonight. I may or may not play in those tournaments, although final tabling both of them last week ought to have me more excited to play there, but either way I will definitely be on at some point this evening, probably looking at another crack or two into the FTOPS events I am not yet registered for. Remember, FTOPS Event #1 starts 10 days from now, a week from this coming Friday night, so get crackin on winning those seats!

Labels: , ,

Monday, March 05, 2007

Cash vs. Tournament Skill (Continued)

Wow. What a slew of comments on my question from yesterday of the amount of skill required in cash games vs. tournaments. In general, let me start off my own discussion of this question, originally posited by Wes in a comment to my post earlier this week, by saying that I am clearly in the camp that believes that neither form of poker requires "more" skill than the other. Rather, I view the different skills required in each kind of poker as more or less balancing each other out. I think there are a few good arguments on either side of the equation, but IMO most of the arguments people make on this point are not valid ones, and that's what I want to discuss briefly today. As this is still a vacation post I'm not going to go into nearly the detail I would like on most of these points, but generally speaking here are my thoughts on some of the most common arguments I hear in favor of either side of the cash / tournament equation.

First and foremost, I have to chuckle whenever I hear people make the argument that was made several times in yesterday's comments, that the escalating blinds and antes make tournament poker far easier in level of skill than cash games. I laugh at this because, from a purely logical perspective, I think that agrument cuts at least as well in favor of tournaments requiring more skill than it does cash games. Generally speaking, cash games require a consistent set of poker skills, hand in and hand out, without regard to the blinds forcing you to push with 92o. Very true. Nonetheless, if you think about it logically, tournaments require mostly the same set of consistent poker skills, plus they also require you to excel at short stack tournament play , big stack tournament play, and low-M tournament play. So, while I acknowledge that the argument is not quite a simple as I've just laid it out to be, as a general statement I think the blinds-and-antes thing is at least as strongly in favor of tournaments requiring an additional set of skills over and above cash game poker, as it is the other way around. In general I find that argument to be grossly misused by cash game guys in support of their own brand of poker being more of a "skill game".

Secondly, a number of the tournament guys in the comments mentioned that they find cash games much more challenging, and that thus they probably require more skills. While I am in the same boat as far as the perceived level of challenge involved in my donkeyrific cash game play (believe you me), that argument does not hold water from a basic logic perspective. Imagine if you've been playing and studying chess since you were 15 years old, but now you sit down to play checkers for one of the first times in your life and get crushed by your 12-year old brother. Does this mean that checkers requires more skill than chess? No. In fact that's a preposterous conclusion to draw, and yet that's exactly what some of the tournament-focused guys out there do when they say that they do worse in cash games than in tournaments (like I certainly do). Cash games clearly require a different set of skills than tournaments do, but to suggest that, just because you're good at tournaments but have trouble changing gears for cash games, cash games must require more skill, I think it's fair to say that that argument factually is flawed.

And this brings me to another point I saw a few times in the comments and want to refute here. One or two of the bloggers argued that cash needs more skill because you're playing with real money, and that there is a big difference between betting T$ 1000 and betting a thousand dollars of your actual cash on an actual hand. No doubt those two assertions are true abotu cash games vs. poker tournaments, but what is not at all accurate is that what follows logically from this is that cash therefore requires more skill. In fact, I'm not sure what more there even is to say about that argument, other than merely to point out that, purely logically speaking, there is simply no logical link between the whole "real money" point and the level of skill required to play the game. In other words, to use another analogy like the checkers-chess analogy above, if you were playing tournament no-limit holdem for a set buyin amount, and the guy next to you was playing our old kids-game War for actual cash, does that mean that the War game requires more skill than tournament nlh? I'll let you guys answer that one on your own. Suffice it to say, this argument just does not pass even the most basic logic test. And the exact same can be said about an argument that cash requires more skill just because the best cash gamers can make more money on average than the best tournament players can on average. While this may well be true (not sure how you go about proving an assertion like that either, but let's assume it's true because it really doesn't matter for purposes of this discussion), it simply has no factual relevance towards proving or even suggesting that cash requires more skill. Go back and read that War analogy if you don't see why.

Another point made multiple times in the comments yesterday was several people saying that it's easier for a cash game guy to learn to excel in tournaments than it is for a tournament guy to excel in cash games. More than a few people made this point yesterday and have made it several times in the past, and to this point all I can say is "prove it". This is an assertion which, if true, would at least go part of the way towards suggesting that cash game skill is greater than tournament skill. And yet strangely, nobody who makes this claim can actually prove it. It's just a generalization that some people say, and they'll throw in some examples of individuals in the world of poker for whom it is clearly true in practice, but that is a long, long way from an actual proof of anything. All I can say is this, which is a repeat of a point I made in Tuesday's post: there are plenty of poker players -- professionals on tv and poker bloggers alike -- who seem to be much, much better at cash games than at tournaments. And of course there are plenty of players for whom the reverse is true as well. So while this might be a good logical argument in favor of cash game skill if actually true, I just don't see how anyone can actually accept as true the basic premise of this argument in order to make the logical leap on the skill discussion.

Before I run back to the family let me just say that the argument in favor of cash game skill that moves me the most is the point about "more streets = more skill". Felicia has long made this argument, and I think there is some good logic to it. Not flawless, in that I could probably think of many games with more opportunities for betting but which do not carry the same level of skill as no-limit holdem, but I think there is something to the point nonetheless. Now, of course there are in fact the same four streets of betting in nlh whether you are playing cash or playing a poker tournament, but it is probably true that in at least most of the tournaments we tournament guys play in online, there is less turn and river play than in many cash games. To the extent this is true, I think this argument goes some of the way towards the cash vs. tournament skill debate. But my point here is, that argument is really more of a statement just that a game with more streets requires more skill, and not so much that cash games in general require more skill than tournaments. And as a few of the commenters yesterday suggest, in the case of comparing the skill required for a truly deep stacks tournament and a not-so-deep stacks cash game, this line begins to blur quite a bit.

So in all, for me, this is not an easy question to answer, and I am wholly not moved by most of the arguments made in favor of mroe skill required in cash games. I still maintain that it is a very different set of skills needed to excel in both, and I think some of the additional skills required in tournament poker tend to be discounted, if not completely overlooked, by cash game guys when they consider the relative skill requirements of each form of poker. If anyone has additional thoughts on this, or on the analogies or arguments I've made in today's post, I'd love to hear them as always.

I'm going to try to get a post up on Thursday, but that is a travel day for the Hammer Family so I'm not 100% sure I will have the time for a proper post before our flight leaves to return back to the icy Northeast. That said I will definitely be back in my usual timeslot on Friday with another fun poker post for you all, and if I'm really lucky I will get to play in Al's Riverchasers tournament at 9pm ET on Thursday night to get back into the swings of things poker-wise after some much-needed and much-appreciated time off.

Labels:

MATH Update, and Cash vs. Tournament Skill

OK so as I mentioned yesterday, the Hammer Family is on vacation this week in beautiful, sunny Florida, and as such I am not playing any poker during this time off. I have to say, as I always say in these situations, as much as I love getting my poker on most nights, taking a few nights away can be a really glorious thing, especially after a particularly bullshitty spate of bad beats such as I have been taking recently. Over the past few days, on at least three separate occasions I've had monkeyclowns call my pot-sized bet on the turn with nothing but a flush draw, and then hit the flush on the river. I've had Aces, Kings and Queens cracked far more often than they've won, and I've been losing with regularity with my two overs to my short stacked opponent's desperate two-unders pushes. Anyways, all this is just a long way of saying that I am loving the short break from online poker this week, and while I look forward to getting back to the grind, this time away is truly coming at a great time.

Unfortunately, my break also meant just the second Mondays at the Hoy tournament of the year without yours truly last night, which hurts doubly because I have the top spot on the 2007 MATH leaderboard to protect. Fortunately, it appears that my top honors and the concurrent bragging rights will persist for one more week, as last night saw only one player already on the 2007 leaderboard putting up another cash, and that player was bayne_s, who ended in 3rd place for $72. Second place was WPBT POY race progenitor Byron, for $108, and winning the event on Monday night was first-time bartonfa for the $180 first prize. I would love to post the details of how mr. bartonfa took down the 18-person tournament in his first ever appearance in the MATH, but since I wasn't there I just can't say. Maybe some of the other fine bloggers who participated on Monday night can let us know of any of the standout plays, but otherwise let me just say congratulations to our three cashers (including to bayne for advancing to 3rd place on the 2007 board), and I'll see you next week to further defend my record reign atop the Hoy leaderboard. Here are the updated MATH standings after this week's Hoy-less tournament:

1. Hoyazo $472
2. Fuel55 $458
3. Bayne_s $342
4. VinNay $310
5. Wigginx $288
6. Manik79 $252
7. bartonfa $180
8. Smokkee $162
9. Chad $120
9. Zeem $120
11. Ganton516 $114
12. Byron $108
12. Omega_man_99 $108
14. NewinNov $90
15. Columbo $80
15. PhinCity $80
15. jeciimd $80
18. l.e.s.ter000 $72
19. Julius Goat $60

Today, I have just one other quick question to ask of you all, and it is in response to a comment left by Wes to my post from yesterday. Wes made the statement in a comment that "cash game is of more skill than tournaments", and it was made in a very matter-of-fact way, as if it is obviously true. Now, let me start by saying that, although I am a tournament player almost exclusively (when it comes to nlh anyways), I take absolutely zero offense to this statement, and I am not raising it today because it bothers me and I want to shoot it down. Rather, I am interested in hearing from all of you whether or not you agree with the statement, purely for interest's sake. In other words, in my head tournament poker requires its own set of skills and talents that simply do not come up in a cash game context, and surely the opposite is also true about cash games, and I know of a great many players -- professionals and bloggers alike -- who are good in either type of poker but not in the other. But is it true generally speaking in your view that cash poker is more of a skill game than tournament poker? I was surprised by the matter of fact nature with which Wes made the comment, and I'd love to hear everyone else's thoughts on whether you agree or disagree with the sentiment. So let me know your thoughts -- although I'm not playing any online poker this week, I am reading blogs with abandon so I'll be checking in to hear what you all have to say.

Suppoed to be sunny and 78 today where I'm at. Life is good.

Labels: ,