FFR poker league -dead-

[ddrmaniacaaa]

Originally Posted by Go_Oilers_Go

What would be a good starting deposit for me? I'm just planning on starting cash games.

If you want to practice good bankroll management, you should never sit down with more than 5% of your total bankroll. the 1cent 2cent NLHE table has a maximum buy in of $5, meaning your initial deposit would be $100, and the limits go up from there.

If you are a luckbox (or a lumpbox ) you will want to make a deposit of $1000 and go big or go home.

[Reach]

Originally Posted by Go_Oilers_Go

What would be a good starting deposit for me? I'm just planning on starting cash games.

To add to what DDR said;

I recommend making your initial deposit fairly small, to limit your losses if you do bust your roll. At that point you should probably re-evaluate your game before re-depositing. $100 is fine for a starting, or even less (say, 50). I wouldn't recommend depositing more than $100 though.

Bank roll management doesn't actually matter much starting off. It becomes more important when you're trying to move up in stakes. However, DDR is right; a general rule of thumb in cash games is you should be buying in for no more than 5% of your roll. I recommend running around 2% and dropping as you start moving up.


Buying in for 5% is generally too high for anything outside of the micro stakes, and I don't recommend it unless you're prepared to go busto, re-buy and drop your stakes. 10+ buy in downswings happen fairly regularly in cash games. That would mean losing more than half of your roll at 5%, often in a single session, forcing you to drop your stakes. Personally, I've lost more than 10 buy ins in a single session, which is why I usually won't play at more than 1% of my roll anymore (And I only play NLHE; if you play omaha, you can expect 30+ BI downswings).

Failure to drop stakes when you're losing would result in going bust eventually. This is actually really, really important to note; it doesn't actually matter how good you are - if you're buying in for too much (Over 5% of your roll), and stick to a certain stake, you will bust if you play enough hands. This is a mathematical absolute. This has claimed many a players bank rolls over the years.



TLDR; make a fairly small deposit, and start small. Concentrate on learning the game initially. Risking too much won't pay off in the long run.

[lumphoboextreme]

Originally Posted by ddrmaniacaaa

go big or go home.

this

[awein999]

lol go big and lose right away if you don't know what you are doing. Learn to play or go home.

I also suggest if you are just starting start micro and see how you do. And judge from there.

[Reach]

Originally Posted by awein999

lol go big and lose right away if you don't know what you are doing. Learn to play or go home.

I also suggest if you are just starting start micro and see how you do. And judge from there.

The problem with the go big or go home tactic is that, even if you know what you're doing, if you don't run well you'll bust anyway. The entire point of BRM is to prepare for downswings, so you might as well start at the micros, especially in cash games.


If anyone really wants to go big or go home, try tourneys. At least there you stand to gain a lot. Playing too high in a cash game won't get you anywhere.

[A2_Sauce]

if anyone wants to play me hu for fun for any reasonable amount, pm me

[lumphoboextreme]

Originally Posted by Reach

The problem with the go big or go home tactic is that, even if you know what you're doing, if you don't run well you'll bust anyway. The entire point of BRM is to prepare for downswings, so you might as well start at the micros, especially in cash games.


If anyone really wants to go big or go home, try tourneys. At least there you stand to gain a lot. Playing too high in a cash game won't get you anywhere.

lol i've busto'd countless times but my account is still up well over 10,000$ in total. i never keep enough in my account at a time to tilt off a ton so my go big or go home method works fairly well

[A2_Sauce]

Originally Posted by Reach

Playing too high in a cash game won't get you anywhere.

what?

[Go_Oilers_Go]

Just to clarify: I know how to play poker - I've played online and in the casino. I was just more or less curious as to what approach I should take to playing with real money online, as I have never done that before.

[awein999]

I like the thought of starting from freerolls and then making a lot of money without putting a penny in. I started this online a couple weeks ago (I've played a bunch live however) and I'm excited to see how much I make. It teaches bankroll management quite well. And it's extremely fun because it's like a challenge and you earn every penny you have.

What I've done was I got a ticket from a freeroll then cashed in round 2 and then I focused on the 25 cent 90 person tourneys and owned. And I moved up to 1.40 90 person knockouts and got bb'd hard in a handful of tourneys in a row so I had to drop down to 25 cents again. I've gone through huge bad chance sprees in live play in the past and every time I got emotional and furious and I thought it wasn't fair. This time though I simply moved on to the next tournament not even slightly bothered because I know in my heart I've played the way I wanted to and I had the advantage. my play wasn't effected at all by it, it was an amazing feeling. I've been doing 2 or 3 at once and I'm back up to the 1.40 and 2.20 90 person sit n go range.

I'm excited to partake in the 11 dollar deep stack in 9 days next Saturday. (I'm guessing I'll have 50+ dollars in my bankroll by then)

I feel that through this process I build the strongest possible base and understanding of poker going through all the levels in a meticulous manner. I will start playing cash game once my bankroll exceeds 100 dollars.

This is my idea of fun.

[Go_Oilers_Go]

Sounds like a game plan. I'll try to start small seeing as how I don't have a lot of money to throw around at online poker right now. Thanks.

[Reincarnate]

Large gains in a short period of time are merely favorable variance swings. BRM is a way to help you absorb really negative variance hits, which are statistically INEVITABLE (it doesn't matter HOW well you play). Going big or going home is pretty risky by definition and I don't see the point in doing it.

[Reach]

Originally Posted by A2_Sauce

what?

What rubix said; despite not playing much poker yet he's exactly right.

Large gains in a short period of time are merely favorable variance swings. BRM is a way to help you absorb really negative variance hits, which are statistically INEVITABLE (it doesn't matter HOW well you play). Going big or going home is pretty risky by definition and I don't see the point in doing it.

Cash games are swingy and there isn't nearly enough to gain. You can double up. Big deal.

In order to be profitable in cash games you need to do well in the long run, i.e. across 50,000+ hands. There's no point in playing above your limit in a cash game, because you'll lose your money eventually when you run bad. If you play long enough, you'll run bad for WEEKS.


In tourneys you can gain many times whatever the buy in is if you run well. Hence they're a good place to 'go big or go home', since you either lose the buy in to the tourney or you win a significant amount of money. They also require less skill than cash games.

lol i've busto'd countless times but my account is still up well over 10,000$ in total. i never keep enough in my account at a time to tilt off a ton so my go big or go home method works fairly well

You don't play cash games though, so your approach can work. Well, you haven't played very many hands, and aren't you down in cash games?

Go big or go home only works in tourneys or SnGs and stuff like what you play.

Also, it's good that you limit the amount on your account so you don't tilt off. I don't keep my roll online either, and have earned similarly, though over a much longer period of time.

Have you ever ran really bad though? You haven't been playing that long at your stake by the looks of it; what if you run really bad and bust the roll you have online? What do you re-buy with? Small and try to build up again, or big to continue your stakes? If you re-buy big, what do you do when you continue to run bad and are losing your roll again?

Go big or go home is very appealing when you're winning, as you are, but not when you're losing.


There are almost no cash game players that have been successful in the long run that have applied the 'go big or go home' method to BRM. Even people that were pretty retarded like ashman or jungleman have been significantly more careful after nearly busting at several points (Ashman did bust but was fortunate enough to god mode for a couple of months on a comeback).


Anyone that hasn't smartened up is busto. There are countless, countless cash game players that ran up many 10s of grand on a hot streak only to go busto because of no BRM.

[A2_Sauce]

Originally Posted by Reach

Cash games are swingy and there isn't nearly enough to gain. You can double up. Big deal.

In order to be profitable in cash games you need to do well in the long run, i.e. across 50,000+ hands. There's no point in playing above your limit in a cash game, because you'll lose your money eventually when you run bad. If you play long enough, you'll run bad for WEEKS.

I think you highly underestimate just how profitable cash games can be. The variance is so low compared to tournaments. Sure if you're not a great player, then sng's or tournaments are probably better for you because of its systematic style, and if you're a losing player well you will lose your money slower. But if you're a great player, there's no reason not to be only doing cash games, you get a much higher hourly and learn a lot more. i mean if you're interested in icm and bubble theory shit then by all means go play tourneys but god damn, tourneys are just absolutely retarded. Maybe if you mass-table sunday tourneys and you have a great roi over a large sample. but seriously, 100r on stars is really drying up and sustainable roi's are getting lower in that tourney. games are getting tougher, including the cash games but you can ALWAYS table and seat select in cash games.

[Reach]

Originally Posted by A2_Sauce

I think you highly underestimate just how profitable cash games can be. The variance is so low compared to tournaments. Sure if you're not a great player, then sng's or tournaments are probably better for you because of its systematic style, and if you're a losing player well you will lose your money slower. But if you're a great player, there's no reason not to be only doing cash games, you get a much higher hourly and learn a lot more. i mean if you're interested in icm and bubble theory shit then by all means go play tourneys but god damn, tourneys are just absolutely retarded. Maybe if you mass-table sunday tourneys and you have a great roi over a large sample. but seriously, 100r on stars is really drying up and sustainable roi's are getting lower in that tourney. games are getting tougher, including the cash games but you can ALWAYS table and seat select in cash games.

I think you misunderstand what I meant. I agree with you.

I only play cash games. I realize they're highly profitable. The variance is low compared to tournaments for sure, but that doesn't mean it's so low that you don't need strict BRM, which was my only point.

I do agree; tournaments are retarded and rely heavily on luck. As discussed earlier in this thread, I haven't had any luck in SnGs lately because everyone is really good.

However, my main argument was that if you're going to apply lumpho's 'Go big or go bust' theory of BRM, you should only be playing tournaments or SnGs because buying in for too much in a cash game will leave you busto really, really fast. It's highly unlikely you'll go on a heater large enough to make a ton of money off cash games really quickly, and even if you do you have to be careful as hell.

Lets face it. I don't play too high (I usually sit 0.1, 0.25). I have a pretty big edge on most of the people I play, but that doesn't prevent me from dropping a lot of money pretty quickly if I hit bad cards. My only point was that, if you're a winning player, you shouldn't buy in for too much. Just take your time and grind up.



I've been running pretty hot lately. I haven't been playing much at all, but I'm running like 3x over expected in the last 10k hands. Pretty hilarious hand last night:

Button I'm dealt 44, about 120 bb deep. Nit raises UTG, some guy I have no data on calls and I call. They actually have me covered here.

Flop 844 rainbow. Checked around. I check.
Turn 844A. Nit bets half, guy calls, I call. (I'm guessing they both hit the ace at this point, woo).
River 844A2. Nit bets half again, guy raises 3x (!). Re raise again given I think guy will call. Surprisingly Nit shoves (!!), guy calls all in (!!!).

They turn over AA and 88. Greatest shit ever.

[awein999]

Originally Posted by Reach

I think you misunderstand what I meant. I agree with you.

I only play cash games. I realize they're highly profitable. The variance is low compared to tournaments for sure, but that doesn't mean it's so low that you don't need strict BRM, which was my only point.

I do agree; tournaments are retarded and rely heavily on luck. As discussed earlier in this thread, I haven't had any luck in SnGs lately because everyone is really good.

However, my main argument was that if you're going to apply lumpho's 'Go big or go bust' theory of BRM, you should only be playing tournaments or SnGs because buying in for too much in a cash game will leave you busto really, really fast. It's highly unlikely you'll go on a heater large enough to make a ton of money off cash games really quickly, and even if you do you have to be careful as hell.

Lets face it. I don't play too high (I usually sit 0.1, 0.25). I have a pretty big edge on most of the people I play, but that doesn't prevent me from dropping a lot of money pretty quickly if I hit bad cards. My only point was that, if you're a winning player, you shouldn't buy in for too much. Just take your time and grind up.



I've been running pretty hot lately. I haven't been playing much at all, but I'm running like 3x over expected in the last 10k hands. Pretty hilarious hand last night:

Button I'm dealt 44, about 120 bb deep. Nit raises UTG, some guy I have no data on calls and I call. They actually have me covered here.

Flop 844 rainbow. Checked around. I check.
Turn 844A. Nit bets half, guy calls, I call. (I'm guessing they both hit the ace at this point, woo).
River 844A2. Nit bets half again, guy raises 3x (!). Re raise again given I think guy will call. Surprisingly Nit shoves (!!), guy calls all in (!!!).

They turn over AA and 88. Greatest shit ever.

That's some mega cooler sickness O_O

[TC_Halogen]

OW, holy crap

Good stuff, Reach, hahaha

[awein999]

Did the Nit have AA and the other guy have 88?

edit:
I don't think all tournaments are standard basic skill using. Deep stacks and non turbo sit n gos usually don't come down to primitive ss poker.

I agree the massive tourneys are a bit of a joke pay out structure and all that. Especially the turbos come down to luck and basic strategy. Bunch of obvious flips and waiting. BOOOOORING

[Reach]

Originally Posted by awein999

Did the Nit have AA and the other guy have 88?

edit:
I don't think all tournaments are standard basic skill using. Deep stacks and non turbo sit n gos usually don't come down to primitive ss poker.

I agree the massive tourneys are a bit of a joke pay out structure and all that. Especially the turbos come down to luck and basic strategy. Bunch of obvious flips and waiting. BOOOOORING

Oh, Mr. Nit (VPIP and PFR were like less than 10%, Cbet ~30%.) had AA, guy had 88. Hadn't been able to get anything out of the rock all session, though he wasn't really making any money either.

Not all tournaments are standard flips, but when I say they don't require much 'skill' I'm mostly referring to the general fact that, unlike in a cash game, good tourney results depend on picking on fish and avoiding sharks.

Once you get out of the micros, there aren't a ton of fish in the cash game circle, so you have to out play strong players rather than go fish hunting. If the players aren't tag, they're lag, or complete rocks you can't get anything out of. You'll get the occasional spewer, but someone will bust him quickly and he'll leave

[awein999]

Playing these micro stakes has taught me that I don't need to try to outplay people if they suck already.

I love the challenge of playing a good player more than simple winning poker against someone who sucks. It's better poker, I might actually learn something, and I love the game. If I run into someone who actually has half a sense and half a brain then it's a little more interesting because I actually have to think a little bit about how I want to be perceived, how I can achieve that, how I can trick and manipulate, and most importantly broaden my hand range so it's harder for my opponent to know what I have. My goal is to make myself seem like I could be bluffing or floating at any time I'm putting chips in because then my opponent just doesn't know what I'm doing.
Again this is when I'm playing someone who doesn't suck.

Edit: this is all directed to texas hold'em no limit strategy.