My future in poker

[mathare]

The beginning of the end?
I got back on the tables a couple of weekends back for a bit of no-limit hold'em cash action as Excel was winding me up (it kept crashing whenever I tried to edit the VBA in one of my spreadsheets). It was the first time I had played in over a month, since I posted about having issues maintaining my focus on the game. So this time I was much better prepared to play proper poker. Things didn't go so well though and I am now really starting to doubt my ability to play this game.

I started on one $0.10/$0.20 NLHE table, which are my usual tables for no-limit cash games, with a full buy-in of $20. The idea was to really focus on the game and the players. I killed my browser so I didn't have the forum, football scores or the radio to distract me. I didn't have my e-mail up either. The only applications running were Excel (for my betting tracking spreadsheet), the poker room, Poker Office and Winamp as I need some music when I play poker. I had cleared my mind and I was ready to play. The missus was downstairs and was aware that I was settling in for some proper poker (even at these stakes I wanted to take it seriously). In short I was prepared.

I lasted 45 minutes before I got bored and fired up a second table to keep my brain engaged. It goes against a lot of the advice I had been given in the focus thread and goes against what I said I would do but that's the way things go a lot of the time for me. Sorry.

Why did I start the second table? It was days ago now so I can't recall my exact state of mind but one thing I have never been that good at is putting players on hands. I don't have the focus; I seem to need action on a regular basis. I can't play loose, that's just not in my nature, so the only way for me to get action is to play more hands over more tables. Play tight on each table but play more tables so that I am playing more hands. It sort of makes sense to me, in a weird little way, but it's what I do.

The tale of the first table
The first table was going steady. Until I fired up the second table my stack had neither grown nor shrunk by more than $0.70, although I admit it was mostly hovering around or just under $20. But nothing to worry about at all. I had been sat there for 40 hands and lost less than the blinds would have cost me had I folded every hand. On this table things stayed fairly steady for a little while. An orbit after I started the second table I lost $3.50 potentially overplaying my hand. Let's have a quick look at this hand...

I get Ad5d in mid-position and limp. Everyone folds to the big blind who checks. I have history on the BB and know him to be a TAG player. The flop comes Jh 4d Jd giving me a nut flush draw. I bet $0.30 (into a $0.50 pot) and get the call. The turn is 5c to give me more outs as I know have a full house draw to go with the flush draw. The BB bets $1 (into a $1.10 pot) and I figure I have a good enough hand heads-up to call. Have I seen this player call big bets on the river? I don't have great pot odds even though I have plenty of outs but it is close. But unless this guy will call a decent river bet if I make my hand I don't have anywhere like the implied odds I'd like.

Still, I call and see a river of 2h which doesn't complete any draws. The TAG BB bets $2 (into a $3.10 pot) and I call (why?). He turns over 6c Js for a flopped set and I lose the hand. The bet-sizing was pretty standard throughout but some of my calls are questionable. Live and learn I guess.

A couple of orbits later and I lose $4.60 in another pot I probably had no reason to be in. I get Jh9h one off the button and limp after an early position limper (the TAG BB from the hand above). The small blind completes and the BB checks. Four of us see the flop is 6s 5c Js and I have position on them all. It's checked round to me and with a pretty weak top pair I don't want to let any draws get there for free so I bet the pot. The BB calls, everyone else folds. The turn is 9d giving me top two pair. It's checked to me so I bet $2 into the $2.40 pot and get a call. The river is bad, 8s completing many draws on that board. The BB bets $1.60 (into $6.40). There are straights and flushes possible so I just call to see if my two pair have held up. If the BB was on a draw he paid over the odds to get there. But get there he did as he tables 5s9s for a flush. Oh well. I bet out to protect my hand and limit the draws but he got lucky I guess. That's poker.

It's another 30 or so hands before much of any interest happens again on this table. I call a raise to 3.5xBB in late position with KsQs, flop two pair and turn a full house. I don't maximise my winnings by any means but I make a little under $5 on the hand to put me back about level on where I started. I lose $1.50 later overplaying a pair of 4s but other than that nothing significant happens on this table. All very steady and I end that table down $2.59.

Second time lucky?
What of the second table I fired up to keep me interested?

This table saw more action, that's for sure. I bobbled along just under my intial $20 buy-in for a while, won a small pot with QQ and then stole a few blinds to pick my stack up above where it started before dropping $4.75
playing like an idiot. I get KQo in the BB and call a mid-late raise to 3xBB. Not quite sure why as I don't know what I was hoping to flop here, in hindsight. An Ace on the flop is going to make it awkward for me. If I hit my K or Q I could be dominated and I am out of position. Not too smart a play now I think about it. The flop comes K-9-6 rainbow and I bet out for $1 into the $1.30 pot. My opponent raises me to $2.15 and I call. Why? That says to me he has me beaten. Shame I didn't see that at the time. I call and we see a blank turn (4c). It goes check-check to the river which is a 9 giving me two pair with a Q kicker. I lead out - why? He'll fold hands that I beat and call/raise with hands that beat me. That was a time to check surely. He calls and shows AK to out-kick me. Ho hum.

From there it steadily goes from bad to worse. I run QQ into KK and lose $5.41 and lose odd dollars here and there in pots I probably shouldn't have been in.

How's it going?
The above is not a one-off my any means. According to my spreadsheet I have played 16 NLHE cash sessions since I switched from tourney poker and in those sessions I have booked 6 wins and 10 losses for a total loss of $37.99. I have played nearly 1700 hands in that period and PO reckons my BB/100 hands is around -5.6. Apparently good cash game figures are 7-10xBB/100 hands. Oh.

Have I enjoyed my NLHE cash game sessions? Err, no, not really if I am honest about it. So why have I played them? There is a feeling within me, based on what the poker media pump out perhaps, that you can't call yourself a man as a poker player unless you can profit from NLHE cash games. Most of the literature out there is on no-limit hold'em and tends to focus on either MTTs or cash games. I know I can't play MTTs as I can't maintain the focus, don't have the stamina and can't spare the free time to play them. STTs are kinda shunned in a lot of the books/magazines I read. There are plenty of STT guides out there - follow one of those and it's job done. The real skill lies in dominating cash games. That's often how I feel the poker world is portrayed. No-limit STTs are OK but a bit of a cop out and limit poker is for girls. Real men play PLO and NLHE cash games.

Maybe I'm not a real man...

Where do I go from here?

Am I serious about poker? I read a lot about the game in books and magazines. When I go back over key hands (mine or others) I think I apply pretty rational thinking to the problem and focus on most of the things that matter most. But as I work full-time I actually tend to play poker as a bit of a release, a bit of casual fun but also a way to apply the skills and knowledge I do have to make a bit of cash on the side. I can't dedicate much time to actually playing poker - maybe one or two evenings a week for a couple of hours each and perhaps a few hours over the weekend too. So what I need to do is find a game that suits me in terms of free time and mental approach to the game...

The no-limit hold'em cash game sessions I have endured (not enjoyed) have made me realise one thing about myself - I don't have the patience I thought I did. As you can see from my earlier tales I tend to get a litte bored quite quickly, despite my best efforts, so I play more tables to keep my brain focused on poker. That means I'm not fully focused on each game and it shows in my results I feel. I thought the static blind levels would help me, allowing me to play a solid tight game rather than being forced into action by rising blinds but that's not the case it seems. I seem to be craving action, not getting it on a regular enough basis so trying to force it. That in turn is getting me caught in some situations where I don't know what to do and I lose money. I could play at higher stakes to try and focus my mind by playing with what is essentially scared money but I don't think that's a good idea. I am a steady loser at low limits so I'd rather not put more cash at risk unless I can be confident that I would do better, and I just don't have that confidence at present.

I'm not doing well on the cash tables so it seems that NLHE cash games are not the place to get my poker fix. So what are my other options? I think it basically boils down to:

• Multi-table tourneys (NLHE)
• Sit-n-gos (NLHE)
• Limit hold'em cash games

I keep hearing there is easy money to be made from Omaha, especially the hi/lo games as there are a lot of fish, primarily because there isn't that much written about the game. Fine, but am I going to be one of the sharks or the fish? I suspect the latter so I see no real reason to play a game I am almost certainly an underdog at, and one I lack confidence in playing. So forgetting about that I think above are my real options. As I said previously MTTs are out due to the time commitment required, and I am not looking for a low SR/high ROI poker game. I would prefer to see steadier bankroll growth than that offered by MTTs. That leaves SnGs and limit hold'em cash games then...

[mathare]

Limit hold'em cash games

Overview
I have played 244 limit hold'em sessions over the years booking wins in 141 of those sessions for a total profit of over $275. Not a staggering profit but the majority of the play has been at the $0.50-$1 level. I don't have them all recorded in Poker Office but for the sessions I do have in there it shows a loss of $5.27 over 4528 hands, basically breakeven. Apparently a decent win rate is around 2xBB/100 hands or $4 per 100 hands at the level I usually play. Assuming an average of 60 hands per hour that's not a great hourly rate, but much better than losing I suppose.

Improvements
Can I find enough holes in my game that I can plug that could turn my breakeven game into a winning game so I could build a bankroll, increase the stakes and make a better hourly rate from limit hold'em cash games? In terms of position I seem to be losing heavily from the big blind. I read somewhere that you're not supposed to show a profit
from the blinds but I don't think you should be showing the losses I am showing either. I lose an average of $0.34 per hand from the BB but lose only $0.05 per hand from the SB. So on that basis alone it looks like I am playing better out of the SB than the BB. I am seeing over 50% of flops from the BB so maybe I need to review which hands I am playing out of position here. I also need to look at how I am playing hands like medium suited Aces (A8s is my biggest losing hand on a $/hand basis), suited connectors and small pairs. JTs, 87s, QJs, 55 and 44 all feature in my top ten biggest losers on a $/hand basis. Poker Office also seems to suggest that I am overvaluing overcards on the flop as well as losing money by betting out when I have nothing on the flop. I may also be overvaluing low/medium pocket pairs. So there are definitely improvements I can make to my game that ought to turn the figures round and see my make some sort of profit. I feel I know a lot more about the game than I did when I used to play limit hold'em (up to and including 2007 - I have hardly played it all in 2008) so that ought to help too.

Getting into the game
Were I to start playing limit hold'em cash games again where should I start? I used to play at the $0.50-$1 level and would buy-in for $25. Is this the right level? I'll be honest and say I doubt it. I think I would be better off playing at the $1-$2 level so that the cash involved means at least a little bit. I know that $2 still isn't much and that buying in for $50 (which is what I would probably buy in for as that seems to be the average sort of stack size at these tables based on a quick survey I have just done in the Bet365 lobby) is only the equivalent of £35 so it's not a massive sum of cash and thus won't make me focus that intensely on the game but at least it's a sum I am comfortable risking so I am not sitting down with scared money to start with. I'd be inside my comfort zone but not so far inside as to get complacent, hopefully. So that seems like a good place to get started again while I pick up the nuances of limit poker once more. I don't seem to have multi-tabled limit cash games much in the past, according to my spreadsheet, so that's something I could look at. Start with one table while I get used to the game again and then throw more tables into the mix. As limit is that much more straight-forward than no limit I expect I could more easily multi-table the game and thus build up a better hourly rate that way.

Money management
Suppose I was to go down this route - what sort of bankroll would I need? Mason Malmuth recommends a bankroll of around 300 times the big bet, so $600 for the limits I am planning to play. However, I am not the sort of person to take huge amounts of notice of recommended bank figures. It's not that I don't believe in bankrolls and money management, more that I operate in a different way to that suggested by most gambling professionals. The wisdom from almost every pro gambler is to set up a bankroll and treat that money as spent. You've spent it on the bankroll for the chosen system/game and bought yourself an opportunity to win/earn more money with it. That's fair enough but I prefer to use nominal banks instead. With my planned buy-in of $50 I would be putting 1/12th of my bankroll on the line while the rest just sits there in the poker room account doing nothing. Even if I play four tables at once I would only have a third of my bankroll in action while $400 sits there doing nothing. So why have it in my poker account? I have mentally budgeted $600 for my poker activities but do I need all that $600 available
at one time? It doesn't look like it so why not only have a percentage of it actually in my poker account at any one time and leave the rest in my real bank account earning interest? So I could have maybe $200 in the poker room but still play at stakes as though I had a $600 bankroll as I can access the other $400 in a second if I need it,
but in the meantime it is earning a small amount of interest in my bank account rather than earning the poker room operator the same interest. Surely that's the smart way of doing it. I have enough money that I can spare that extra $400 at any time - it's not mortgage money or needed to put food on the table. It's disposable income so I
may as well make it work for me the best I can. Of course I would step up or down the limits in line with my full bankroll. If I make $500 to $600 giving me a bankroll of $1100 to $1200 I would take a shot at $2-$4 whereas losing $300 would see me drop back to $0.50-$1. In actual fact if I got my bankroll over $1000 I am likely to start taking
shots at $2-$4 games mixed in with the normal $1-$2.

Downsides
What are the downsides of limit cash games? I guess boredom will always be a factor. Limit games are less action-packed than no-limit games by the very nature of the betting. There is no bet sizing to worry about, just whether to bet/raise, call/check or fold. But a regular profit ought to help combat that boredom. If I can see regular returns and my bankroll increasing I shouldn't be so worried about getting bored. And as I said earlier I should be able to add more tables to the mix more easily than in no-limit games so I should have a decent amount of action going across several tables. The risk and variance of limit cash games are lower so hopefully I can build a solid approach to poker again and develop the focus I found I was lacking before. Maybe. With all cash games I struggle with an exit strategy. When do I stop playing? With a tournament you stop when you win or are eliminated - the session has a natural end point. But cash games don't. Do I play looking to win a certain amount of money in a session or play for a set amount of time? Do I just play until I feel I am no longer playing my best? At present I
don't know the answers to these questions but I hope experience will tell in time when I should quit a session. What I do know though is that the end point for a cash game session has to be one I am comfortable with else I'll feed myself the old "one more hand" excuse and be there beyond the point I should have left.

Another potential downside to limit cash games is their availability. I am most at home on full tables, so 9 or 10 players, rather than the 6-max games. I find it too hard to properly adjust my starting hand requirements to 6-max tables so prefer full ring games. At the time of writing (mid-afternoon on a Sunday just after christmas) Bet365 have just five 10-seater $1/$2 cash game tables running, and remember that Bet365 is on the iPoker network that includes a good number of poker rooms. In fact there are nearly 24000 players on the site at the time of writing and under 50 of them are playing the games I want to play. Ladbrokes have 2600 players connected and precisely none of them are seated at $1/$2 limit tables, and that includes 6-max and 10-seater tables. Poker Stars currently have 20 tables at my chosen limit but compared to the number of no-limit tables they have open at the same stakes it's much smaller so there is less choice. Maybe that's a good thing and it means I can build up a better picture of my opponents as I will meet the same players more often but it also means certain players would be harder to avoid. Also I may spend a fair portion of the time I have available for poker trying to find a game thus 'wasting' time.

[mathare]

Sit-n-gos (NLHE)

Overview
Sit-n-gos, SnGs, STTs - call them what you will. They have certainly taken a firm grip on a lot of players and are seen as a good way to build a bankroll at a fairly low risk. Overall I have played 304 of them and cashed in 139 of those (45.72% ITM) for a profit of just over $90. That's not a very big profit but the vast majority of those 304 tournaments (195 of them in fact) were at the $5 level and my in the money (ITM) strike rate is 48.20% so just above average. So I can make a profit at these tournaments but is it a decent profit? My overall ROI is 6.89% which increases to 9.30% for the $5 tourneys. A ROI of 10% is considered pretty decent so I figure I am well on my way here and were I to steadily up the stakes I could build a reasonable bankroll through STTs.

Improvements
Again I am going to turn to Poker Office (where I have around 170 tourneys at the $5 level recorded) to try and identify holes in my game that I could potentially plug to help improve my profits. It's a little harder to examine tourneys than cash games due to the changing blinds - one bad hand at the end of a tourney can lose many times the blinds at the start of the tourney. That said Poker Office seems to suggest I am profitable playing out of all positions except the BB (which is kind of expected) and the button (which is not what I expected). It seems I am losing on the button mainly when we are three-handed as I am profiting from that position when there are at least four of us in the game. I am in the money at that stage but maybe need to become more aggressive - that's something I can fix for sure. In terms of starting hands nothing really stands out from the crowd as being much worse than anything else, not that I really have a large enough sample to draw any meaningful conclusions anyway. The big mistakes I seem to be making are betting out with gutshot straight draws on the flop and calling with a medium/low pocket pair but it's rather hard to be really sure where the holes are in my game as the figures Poker Office displays are in tournament chips rather than big blinds, which would be much more useful in this analysis. So I know my game isn't perfect and can be improved but I am still registering a respectable ROI which gives me confidence.

Types of STT
The figures I have looked at so far are for STTs as a whole but in reality there are a number of different sub-types of STT and I should look at each in turn as they require slightly different strategies and offer different rewards. There are standard payout STTs where the top 3 finishers get paid out 50/30/20% of the prize pool (assuming a 10-seater table) and equal payout/10 pays 5/double money tables where the top 5 finishers all get 20%
of the prize pool. For each of those payout structures there are normal speed and turbo games. I'm going to forget about 6-max games here as they are not my sort of game. As I said earlier I find it hard to adjust my starting hand requirements when we start with 6 players, yet I find the adjustments natural as players are eliminated from a full 10-seater table. Weird perhaps, but that's just the way I am with the game. I am also going to forget about the ladders/steps tourneys where the winners of each STT get a ticket to the next level so it's possible to effectively parlay $5 into $500 through a series of 4 or 5 STTs. They are not my sort of tourney as they fall into the high variance category - a low SR but high ROI form of poker.

I have played a few tourneys in each of the above categories so how have I done in each? Does one stand out from the rest? If so, that's where I ought to be focusing my attentions surely. I will look solely at the $5 tourneys I have recorded in my spreadsheet as that's the level at which I have most data and most experience. The lower stakes events were larger earlier in my career and so not that representative of my current skill level so I don't see the value of including them in the analysis.

Normal STTs
I have played 39 normal STTs at the $5 level and cashed in 14 of them for an ITM percentage of 35.89%, which is pretty low, and way below my average of 45.72%. That said 6 of those 14 in the money finishes were wins so I have made a profit of $40.50 with a ROI of 18.88%. My average finishing position is 4th, so just outside the money. I haven't much recent experience of these tourneys though with just one played in the last 14 months.

Turbo STTs
I have recorded 24 turbo STTs in my spreadsheet and cashed in just 7 of them, or 29.16% ITM. Again this is way below my average ITM percentage. Of those seven cashes three of them were wins but even so I made a loss of $7. My ROI is -5.30%. On average I finished in 5th position so significantly outside the money. These are the tourneys I have most recent experience of although it looks like they are likely my least profitable STTs.

Normal 10 pays 5
My spreadsheet has records for 25 of the normal speed 10 pays 5 equal payout events and of those I have cashed in 16 for an in the money strike rate of 64%. Anything greater than 55% and I am making money after counting for the house fee. In fact I have made a profit of $22.50 from these tourneys giving me a ROI of 16.36%. My average finishing position is 5th but this is not so meaningful as 1st to 5th all pay the same. The important thing is I can make money on these events. I played these tourneys during the first six months of 2008 with the majority being played at the start of the year.

Turbo 10 pays 5
This is the tournament type I have the biggest sample for having played 90 of these events in the period June to September 2008. I cashed in 53 of the 90 events for an ITM percentage of 58.89% so just above the necessary breakeven figure. With that in mind I doubt I made a significant profit. In fact I made $35 profit having invested $495 including house fees for a ROI of 7.07%. Again my average finishing position is 5th, but once more it's not that meaningful a statistic as 1st through 5th all pay the same.

Which should I play?
So what does that tell me? It indicates that I ought to stay away from the turbo tournaments if I want to maintain a decent ROI as it's much higher in the normal speed events than the turbos. I estimate it takes an average of an hour to complete a normal speed STT and around 40 minutes for a turbo event. So I could finish three turbos in the time it takes to run two normal STTs. So what are my hourly rates? I'm making around 17.5% on my investments in normal speed events so at the $5+$0.50 level that's around $0.96 per hour. For the turbo events if we assume I am returning around 5% of my investment I make around $0.28 in 40 minutes so that's equivalent to $0.42 per hour or less than half of what I make on the normal speed events. Yep, I should be avoiding the turbo events and sticking the standard events. But what payout structure suits me best? I don't have a very large sample for either normal STTs or the 10 pays 5 events but my ROI is greater in the former and they are more readily available than the equal payout versions. My spreadsheet seems to indicate that both take about the same time to complete (which is not what I expected but I seem to recall the bubble phase lasting quite a while in the 10 pays 5 tourneys which could account for their duration) so I should go with whichever provides the greatest profit and ROI - normal STTs. Fair enough, that makes sense.

Getting into the game
Suppose I decide that the future of my poker playing lies at the STT tables - where do I start? Most of my experience is at the $5 level so that would seem a natural point at which to resume play but is it the right level for me? Suppose I can maintain a decent ROI - let's say it levels out to 15% - and that it takes an hour to complete each tourney. That gives me an hourly rate of $0.83 which is far from impressive. I could multi-table the events, staggering the events by two or three levels. If I can then have two or three tables on the go at any one time I may be able to get my hourly rate up around $2. This is significantly below the hourly rate for the limit cash games I was looking at, assuming I can get up towards the 2xBB/100 hands win rate in the limit cash games, but the wins come at a lower risk too so there is a trade off.

Are the games available at the level I want to play? What about the next level up? Bet365 has over 27000 players logged on at the time of writing but very few normal 10-seater STTs available. There are a few jackpot games, turbos and super turbos but that is not what interests me. Ladbrokes has around 3200 players online and there are two normal 10-seater STTs running at the $5 level with one more registering. Not very promising so far. Poker Stars with it's massive player base has just two such events registering at the time of writing, yet they have over ten of the 10 pays 5 events waiting for players. Maybe I was wrong about the greater availability of normal STTs.

Things change a little at the next level up with Poker Stars having three of four of the normal STTs and 10 pays 5 events registering while Ladbrokes have nothing currently available and Bet365 have maybe two tables max waiting for players. Where are all the games?!? Party Poker seems to have plenty of games underway but not that many available for registration at present. There seem to be a few going at Full Tilt but I don't have an account there. Hmmm, this could be a problem.

Are $5 events going to keep me interested? I'll be honest and say I don't know at this stage. I need to pick up the peculiarities of STT poker once more so maybe it's best I do it at a level I know I can beat, build up a bit of
profit and then take on the bigger events. I think that makes sense. The rising blinds ought to bring about the action I crave without the need to play at stakes I may find uncomfortable.

Money management
What size bankroll would I need were I to go down the STT route? Advice seems to be slightly divided on this one with some advocating 10 buy-ins, others saying 50 buy-ins. I must admit I always thought somewhere in the 30-50 buy-in range was safe enough and I certainly wouldn't want to have just 10 buy-ins available to me. So I am looking at a bankroll of around $275 to give me 50 lots of $5+$0.50. As I said earlier when discussing limit cash games I wouldn't have the full bankroll in the poker room at any one time though. I'd probably have about $100 in the poker room with the rest in my normal bank account. See above for the rationale behind this. If I can build my bankroll to about $450 ($175 profit) I would be tempted to take shots at the $10+$1 games. In actual fact I may do it slightly before then, perhaps around $400 mixing a few $10 tourneys in with the normal $5 events. I wouldn't step back down in stakes - if I can't cut it at the $5 level I deserve to be shot, or at least have my hands cut off so I couldn't play poker any more.

Downsides
The first downside is surely the fact that the games don't seem to be as widely available as I thought they were. The only other downside I can think of is my lack of recent experience in this arena. Other than that I can't think of much. The games have a natural end point so I don't have that "one more hand" temptation. I understand the strategy of the games well enough and the rising blinds and reducing number of players means the action I want is readily available so I don't have to try to force it as I have been in NLHE cash games. I am on familiar ground too so I feel at home, more relaxed and able to play something much more akin to my 'A' game. If I can find the games I should have a low risk way of building a bankroll and making some profit from the poker knowledge and skills I have. The games are of fixed length too (more or less) so I know that each game will take about an hour. I don't like to play for much less than that, even cash games, so that's good. I should be able to scratch my poker itch this way and not feel I haven't had my fill at the end of it.

[mathare]

Conclusions
So what conclusions can be drawn from what has been said so far? I need to get away from NLHE cash games as I am doing poorly and I risk knackering my entire poker game if I continue to chip away at my confidence and bankroll my playing them. I am not the patient player I thought I was. I can play no-limit hold'em but in tournament form rather than cash games. If I want to play a cash game it will have to be limit hold'em. But I'm fine with that. At least I know my own strengths and weaknesses and understand them, that in itself is a great position to be in.

So which is it to be - limit cash games or no-limit hold'em STTs? Why does it have to be just one of them? The way I see it is it ought to depend on my mood, how much time I have available, what I am trying to achieve etc. I believe both forms of poker are profitable for me and I would maintain a separate bankroll for cash games and tourneys so why choose one form of poker to the exclusion of all others? Some days I will be better off trying to build my poker bankroll with some NLHE STT action whereas on others I would be better off playing limit cash games.

I know that as long as I don't mix them and feel I am in the right mindset for the game I am about to play I should do OK. I have a plan for getting started in each form of the game as well as suitable bankrolls in mind and a plan for going up in stakes. But is that enough? I have identified downsides for each of the games I plan to play so what can I do to address them?

It's been a while since I played limit cash games so what should I do before I get back on those tables? I have books on the subject so why not read them? I should re-read "Winning Low Limit Hold'em" by Lee Jones, "Small Stakes Hold'em" by Miller, Sklansky and Malmuth and Jennifer Harman's chapter in "Super System 2", or at least re-familiarise myself with those books. I need to refresh my memory of starting hands and what is playable from various positions. Then it's a case of putting it all into practice and building up my confidence in the game again.

Similarly for STTs I should re-read strategies for beating the games. I know I have several books that include useful material on this, such as "Killer Poker Online 2" by John Vorhaus amongst others. There are also several strategy sites on the internet I should read/re-read to make sure my brain is fully tuned into the nuances of the game. As with the limit cash games I need to practice. I need to get used to rising blinds again and remember how to change gears, when to play tight and when to loosen up and by how much. I need to recall push-fold strategies and get into the tournament mindset once more.

I remain confident that I can switch between the two forms of the game competently. After all, some evenings I feel like playing a steady game for a few hours whereas others I want a quick action fix. When I find myself in the former mood I need to fire up limit cash tables and in the latter case I want a no-limit STT.

There is just one final thing I need to sort out and that's where you guys come in... where should I play?

[mathare]

Which poker room?
There are dozens, if not hundreds, of poker rooms out there so which one should I be playing at? Should I be playing cash games at one site and STTs at another or is there one site that would be good for both forms of the game?

I have poker accounts with Ladbrokes, Party Poker/Empire Poker, PKR, Bet365/CD Poker/Blue Square/Paddy Power/Titan Poker/ Victor Chandler (all iPoker), Betfair and William Hill plus Betdaq and Poker Stars although I have never played at either of these sites. I also have sportsbook accounts with SportingOdds, Boyle Sports, Skybet, Stan James and Totesport so if they offer poker I can probably use my sportsbook account for that too. As you can see I have most bases covered.

What am I looking for from a poker room?

• Good game availability at my chosen stakes (see above)
• A good reputation, i.e. a known name in the industry
• Good banking - I don't want to have to pay to deposit by Visa debit card nor pay any fees or build up loyalty points to withdraw money from my account
• Poker Office compatibility

And I think that's about it. I don't think that's asking too much is it?

What I don't know much about is the value of rakeback and loyalty/player point schemes, especially for the level I will be playing at. I doubt I'll be averaging 10 hours a week, half that is perhaps more realistic. At $1/$2 limit cash games and $5+$0.50 STTs am I going to be earning enough in terms of loyalty points to make them worth factoring into the choice of site? What about rakeback - would I qualify at those levels?

I don't really want to open any new accounts unless I have to. I understand I need to for rakeback which is why I am asking if it is worth it. I guess long-term I don't see myself playing for particularly high stakes. I want to rise up the levels, obviously, but I will do so steadily. Will any of the sites offer any rewards to me at this stage though or am I just wasting my time even thinking about them? Are all sites on the same network equal (or roughly equal)? Is Paddy Power's loyalty scheme as good as Bet365's, for example? I tried to compare them a while back but got so confused that I gave up even trying. If anyone has any thoughts on this I'd really like to hear them.

And that's about it from me really. You know my intentions, how I plan to take my poker playing forward but I don't know where to do it right now and would welcome any advice you guys can offer. So over to you...

[jasonpariah]

If you post your stats from Poker Office for your play at the various levels(cash games),I will be happy to review them and try and give you some advice as to where you are most likely going wrong(I play for a living).

If you like I can also post details of the optimum way to play fixed limit 5 card draw(I have been earning a good second income from this for a few years now).

If your interested in the help I will go through your overall post in detail also if you so wish(Its a long thread and I have to be honest with you,I dont want to waste time if your happy to play "your way".No offence meant,its just time "IS" money).

Let me no if you want the feedback,as I will be happy to help.I can also get you a rakeback account at a percentage not openly advertised(although this will have to be dscussed in PM,this offer though does not cater for anyone who resides in the USA).All of which can add a lot to your overall win rate.

[mathare]

If you post your stats from Poker Office for your play at the various levels(cash games),I will be happy to review them and try and give you some advice as to where you are most likely going wrong(I play for a living).

What stats would be useful for me to post? I see no point posting my NLHE cash game stats as I really don't see a future for me there; I don't feel the same confidence playing at those tables as I do elsewhere if nothing else. Maybe one for the future. And as for my limit cash game stats - I don't think there is much point posting those either as I don't feel they represent my current knowledge/skill level that well. I'd like to play 5-10,000 hands knowing what I know now before really looking for much help on that front.

What do you play, if you play for a living, out of interest?

If you like I can also post details of the optimum way to play fixed limit 5 card draw(I have been earning a good second income from this for a few years now).

How readily available is the game though? I rarely see it advertised which makes me think that there are few players and so those that do play are likely to be quite decent. It's a good offer but one I will probably decline.

If your interested in the help I will go through your overall post in detail also if you so wish(Its a long thread and I have to be honest with you,I dont want to waste time if your happy to play "your way".No offence meant,its just time "IS" money).

I have pretty much set my mind on playing STTs and limit cash games as the mood takes me. I know myself pretty well now and know how moods take me and which games suit which mood. That said, any advice on which site to play at, general mindset or money management would be welcome. As I get more play under my belt I am sure to post some hands for analysis but for now I think I just need to get back on the tables and get used to playing the right games again.

I can also get you a rakeback account at a percentage not openly advertised(although this will have to be dscussed in PM,this offer though does not cater for anyone who resides in the USA).All of which can add a lot to your overall win rate.

Would it make much difference at the levels I am talking about playing though? 5 hours a week of $1/$2 limit isn't much play really, even if I am multi-tabling. We're talking about 15 to 20 hours of play across several tables really, so about $40 in rake each week if I play at that level for that long (based on my PO stats and a bit of guesstimation). I don't really know much about rakeback and the minimum play requirements to qualify for it...

[jasonpariah]

Stats wise if your able to go into poker office(I use poker tacker myself),you should be able to see all your stats from each position at the table.
Just from VP$IP,PFR alone in each position I will be able to tell a lot.Obviously the number of hands(as you pointed out),would be important as well.The more blocks of a thousand in each position will also allow me to be more accurate with my assesment.I spend most of my time analyising other players stats as I play,I can show you how to put people on a range of hands,using nothing more than your hud stats and a program(free) called Poker stove.Any and all stats over and above what I have mentioned again allows for greater accuracy,in assesment.


I generally play $100/$200 6 max NLHE,and as a rule I never play less than 4 tables at these levels.I also play upto $10/$20 fixed limit 5 card draw(I personally play in 5CD NL and PL games as well,but this is not something I advise others to try with out a high level of experience,certainly more than what I would offer in my fixed limit system).

5 card draw is readily available at Pokerstars and the Ongame network.

As to playing STTs goes if its OK I can post a couple of links to a site that will make sure you are starting off in the right direction as to play and bankroll management.

OK rakeback now this gets in to theory here but heres an example at the stakes you mention;

One table only;
Fixed limit $1/2
Time five hours.
Rakeback 20%(We can do better than this at almost "any" affiliate)
DAY=$4
WEEK=$26
MNTH=$113
YEAR=$1,355

As you see at "weak rates(20%)",it soon adds up.

The site I would direct you to does have a minimum withdrawal of $20 on withdrawals but other than that no requirements for levels,amounts etc.Some sites expect you to rake at least $25 in your first month but after that it is as you please.

[Mavrick]

Have you tried 'tournament indicator' yet mat? Poker office for me was far too much info and quickly got boring. I used it for a couple of weeks and then ditched it; I suppose if you're into all the stats then it might not be boring but, you say you have trouble putting people on hands and I find the simple 'character' display that describes the type of player that your opponents are that TI uses makes having a stab at what hands they probably have relatively straight forward.

Apart from that display I only really pay attention to the 'win odds, pot odds and outs' and this makes the game far more enjoyable for me then plodding through pages of stats which are pretty useless unless you actually make money already and are really looking to iron out your weaknesses.

Only works on tournies and not cash tables.

[Win2Win]

I've just read Mat's new book on poker!

I haven't touched one cash game all year, as I make more on the No Limit STT's (rather than STD's ), and usually ended up on tables full of jammy Vegy's () on cash games. That'll probably happen in Vegas as well! :splapme

Apart from that I don't have time for anything longer than an STT, and generally work between Partypoker (lots of tables), and BET365.

Obama is supposed to be reversing the poker law that was sneaked in the US undemocratically, but that will probably take over a year, so some time yet before the morning tables are full of late night drunken Yanks who think they are Jesus! :)

I also feel under less pressure on STT's than if I'm playing a cash game for some reason, and with an STT I know when the end is, so can plan a strategy that I know works long term for profit.

Partypoker deals in $$$ so you need to take into account the currency rate.

[jasonpariah]

you say you have trouble putting people on hands and I find the simple 'character' display that describes the type of player that your opponents are that TI uses makes having a stab at what hands they probably have relatively straight forward.

Its actually very easy to put someone on a range of hands using the hud in tracking software and a free tool called Poker stove.Just enter the VP$IP percentage into Poker stove and it will list the hands they are playing.Enter the PFR percentage and you can see the hands they are raising.

Stats are boring I agree but that being said after just a couple of hundred hands they start to get accurate enough for ranges.

Also like it or not your opponents are using this software so if your not you are at a disadvantage,and even more important is if you are a winning player than you are leaving money on the table.

[jasonpariah]

I should add however that I never play for "fun",poker is one of the most boring games I know LOL.

Where else does a person with no formal qualifications earn £25K+ a year,probably works out to more than that if you factor in the no deductions as well.£25K was my worst year in the last few.

[mathare]

Have you tried 'tournament indicator' yet mat? Poker office for me was far too much info and quickly got boring. I used it for a couple of weeks and then ditched it; I suppose if you're into all the stats then it might not be boring but, you say you have trouble putting people on hands and I find the simple 'character' display that describes the type of player that your opponents are that TI uses makes having a stab at what hands they probably have relatively straight forward.

Never even heard of it, to be honest. But I do like Poker Office and all the stats, it's ery much my sort of thing. I use the HUD to display things like VPIP and PFR percentages so I can get a reasonable line on players pre-flop and then rely on my own skills from thereon in. But away from the tables I like to study my own play by position, starting hand etc so I find PO really useful. When I say I find it hard to put a player on a hand it's more a focus thing that not having the skills or info available

[mathare]

I also feel under less pressure on STT's than if I'm playing a cash game for some reason, and with an STT I know when the end is, so can plan a strategy that I know works long term for profit.

I know exactly what you mean - this is one of the key things for me actually. I have a good idea before I sit down to play how long I could reasonably play for and from that I can work out whether I am better off playing cash games (limit) or NLHE STTs.

Partypoker deals in $$$ so you need to take into account the currency rate.

I hate Party Poker, to be honest with you. I've had some bad banking experiences with them so wouldn't use them again.

[Mavrick]

I do miss the HUD but, find that having the stats at the bottom page makes me rememeber the players mores. That being said I would rather have it and I'm sure it will be a feature added soon.

You can download a 48 hour trial of TI for free and then do a bit of "juggling" with the licensing thingy and it will unlock. (not that advise that sort of thing)

[mathare]

I have done a bit of research myself into rakeback and I have pretty much decided it's not worth it at this stage of my poker career. Yes, I'm effectively turning down free cash but not very much. Suppose I do play 5 hours a week at the $1/$2 fixed limit tables. According to the rakeback calculators I'd be missing out on less than $20 a month, so roughly $1 per hour on a 30% rakeback deal. Free cash is still free cash - I know that - but the main reason for me not going for rakeback at the moment is it means opening a new account and I am running out of poker rooms I trust. There's still Full Tilt and a couple of others but if I don't play often enough (which is possible based on my past history at the tables) I could drop off their rakeback deal, and then when I am playing at higher stakes I am missing out on an increasing amount of rakeback. So it's sacrifice a little now to be able to take advantage of more rakeback later on down the line. Also I shouldn't be playing much poker as I ought to be dedicating my PC time to other projects I have been meaning to develop for a few years now. So my play should be at tables of the poker rooms from which I already have accounts.

Ladbrokes seems to have a much smaller player population than the others. Are they on a smaller network or even independent? The reviews I have read of Ladbrokes poker seem to agree with my idea of player numbers - a few thousand players at peak times. This obviously limits the number of games available. I played most of my STTs at Ladbrokes and don't recall having to wait around for long so it seems Laddies is better for tourneys than cash games.

My records show I have played fixed limit cash games all over the place, including Ladbrokes (but not for over 18 months), William Hill, Empire Poker (on the Party Poker network) and a few of the iPoker clients. I still haven't worked out whether all the iPoker clients are equal in terms of player rewards - maybe I just need to pick a site and go with it. After all, with my irregular play I won't be building up anything significant in terms of loyalty points with any poker site so I don't expect anything back from them.

There seemed to be a suitable number of tables for my fixed limit cash games on the iPoker network when I checked recently so I think I will just stick with Bet365 for that and Ladbrokes for the STTs. I am comfortable with the software for both of those poker rooms and know they work well with Poker Office too.

Talking of Poker Office I am thinking of starting a new database for this year's play. A fresh new start with a new approach to the way I play the game. Actually, that's a thought... I feel a new thread coming on...

[mathare]

Just been looking quickly at my rake figures in Poker Office.

In 62hrs 32mins of $0.50/$1 limit hold'em cash games I paid $105.22 in rake, which is the equivalent of $1.68 or rake per hour. Calculating rakeback at 30% I'd be looking at an hourly rakeback rate of $0.50 so that fits in with my rough calculations above of $1 per hour on the 30% rakeback deals at the $1/$2 tables. That validates the rakeback calculations using my own real data so I am happy with the conclusions drawn above now.

[John]

I spent the best part of an hour and a half reading this a couple of days after you posted it - have you reached a decision yet Mat? I would say plump for STTs - they're a steady way to make profit if you're good at them, and you've already shown that you can. Maybe you could try playing at the $16 level and see how you get on? Lower levels seem like a donkfest.

Cash games are the way to make big money, but at present it sounds like you want to have a bit of a break away from cash games and reassess things.

[mathare]

I spent the best part of an hour and a half reading this a couple of days after you posted it - have you reached a decision yet Mat?

Yep, I figured I would play NLHE STTs and limit hold'em cash games depending on the mood I am in at the time and the amount of time I have available. I know I can profit at both games and sometimes I feel more geared up for a cash game than an STT so I don't want to limit my options too much.

[mathare]

Things have started well enough with my new poker plan although I have yet to actually play a hand as I have been working on other projects (thanks to the RP). But what I have done is groundwork. I've re-read some of my limit poker books and some general poker advice texts to get my head back into the game and into the proper mindset. I'm quite pleased I haven't just rushed back to the tables but have geared myself up properly too. I feel much more relaxed about getting back into the game now although it could be a couple of weeks yet till I actually sit down to play poker.