Options
Anyone play Texas Hold Em poker?
slvnumber2
Posts: 270 ✭
in Sports Talk
I have just started playing at some local games the past few months and this game is addicting as heck. The money for the top few spots is not bad, and it does not cost more than a round of golf to play so it is a good deal entertainment value wise - of course a round of golf lasts 4+ hours and in poker you can be going home in 15 minutes.
I have done pretty decent so far, but I would like to learn to play much better and I have already read Brunson's book as well as a couple of others. My question is outside of online poker what has helped you the most in improving your play if you play? I seem to do ok early on, and have had a few top 3 finishes, but it seems as if I get down to the last table or last 5 people and I am always short stacked. I have been able to fight back a few times, but most of the time the blinds eat my lunch and I am not able to do much at the end. Also, the last couple of times I have played I have not gotten very many hands to play - no pocket pairs of any value, very few connected suited cards, and very few pairs of painted cards - KQ, JQ....
If you read the poker books they tell you to throw away any early hand that is not paired above 10's or AK or AQ suited. If you go by that logic you would hardly play any hands. It seems that I hardly get any hands worth playing, and when I do I usually do fairly well with them - just need more of them. Any advice would be appreciated.
I have done pretty decent so far, but I would like to learn to play much better and I have already read Brunson's book as well as a couple of others. My question is outside of online poker what has helped you the most in improving your play if you play? I seem to do ok early on, and have had a few top 3 finishes, but it seems as if I get down to the last table or last 5 people and I am always short stacked. I have been able to fight back a few times, but most of the time the blinds eat my lunch and I am not able to do much at the end. Also, the last couple of times I have played I have not gotten very many hands to play - no pocket pairs of any value, very few connected suited cards, and very few pairs of painted cards - KQ, JQ....
If you read the poker books they tell you to throw away any early hand that is not paired above 10's or AK or AQ suited. If you go by that logic you would hardly play any hands. It seems that I hardly get any hands worth playing, and when I do I usually do fairly well with them - just need more of them. Any advice would be appreciated.
"Why is it that Superman could stop a bullet with his chest, yet he ducked when somebody threw a chair at him?"
"
" Go ahead and get your fancy barely visible cell phones that get the internet, play DVD's, and can speak 5 languages. As for me and my Atari cell phone it works, it weighs 7 pounds, it is 14 inches long, and it looks like I could call in an airstrike from a remote desert it is so large!"
"
" Go ahead and get your fancy barely visible cell phones that get the internet, play DVD's, and can speak 5 languages. As for me and my Atari cell phone it works, it weighs 7 pounds, it is 14 inches long, and it looks like I could call in an airstrike from a remote desert it is so large!"
0
Comments
necessarily work for you or your style pending that you have one. It's true that you should
follow the basic concept of playing high cards, suited connectors and pocket pairs; but best 2 cards
prior to flop doesn't mean it's a guaranteed winner. Sometimes you have to play the player and not
the cards. There are so many factors involved. I've been playing for 11 years and probably consider
myself a little above amateur level. I don't bluff a lot. Most of the time when I'm in, I usually have something.
My success has been based generally on patience. I know a lot of people want to be involved in every hand,
but you can't do that. I muck hand after hand. I may play 1 or 2 hand out of every 10 that is dealt. When
I'm not in the hand, I'll sit and watch carefully...at the players. See how they react, movement, etc.
Online poker is great for practice. I only play for play money from online since you can't really see the player,
and it's hard to pick up things from an actual live game. Again, it's great for practice. I play on pokerstars.com
I like them the best. Partypoker.com is okay, but there are a bunch of idiots on there. I like pokerstars cos you
can also choose you own pics....from the web, or wherever and have that as being you at the table. I have a picture
of Barney from The Simpsons (his mugshot), and my name is *Drunkdriver heh.
1st place got 435$
The Fallacy of Online Poker Gambling
Online poker is rapidly becoming one of the most popular gambling games at gambling websites on the internet. The main reason for this popularity is the belief that it is a game of skill in which money could be won. This belief is a fallacy. Skillful play will never help gamblers to win money at online poker because winning money at online poker is impossible.
Online poker is a game of skill only to the extent that skillful play would allow gamblers to lose their money slower. Money could temporarily be won in the short-run. In the long-run though, the gambling “house” which operates the gambling website, will permanently win all the money from all of the players. With a fast played game such as poker, the short-run quickly becomes the long-run when playing enough hands. Each hand played whether winning or losing any particular hand, slowly disintegrates the bankroll of every gambler. There is not anything that gamblers can do to save their bankrolls except to never play online poker.
The top poker players in the world do not play poker at gambling websites. Some top poker players may say they do only because of getting paid for endorsements. These top poker players know they can beat the other players, but that they cannot beat the house. There is not anybody on the face of this earth who can make money playing online poker. Even the world’s best poker player will never be good enough to overcome the “rake” which is the house cut from each pot.
“It takes a minute to learn and a lifetime to master” is a phrase used by some gambling website promoters to describe the poker game of Texas Holdem. This phrase is true when playing against other poker players if there is not any rake. But this phrase is false for online poker because of the rake involved. Gambling house promoters know this phrase is false for their poker. Yet they keep parroting this phrase to fool you into thinking that even though you keep losing money at their website, that one day you could “master” Texas Holdem and then start making money. This phrase for online Texas Holdem should be corrected to truthfully state, “It takes a minute to learn and a lifetime to lose money.”
Here is an example of how the gambling house will always win all the money from all of the players. Five players sit-in on an online poker game each with a $20 bankroll for a total at the website table of $100. Let’s say the average pot is $10 and the rake is 5% or 50 cents per hand. Let’s say 200 hands are played which does not take that long. After 200 hands, that 50 cents rake per hand totals $100 which is the entire amount that all of the players started with at the website table. Of course not all of the players go broke at the exact same time and fresh money can come into the game. But sooner or later each gambler will eventually lose their $20 bankroll every time without exception. If bringing in $20 more, that will also eventually be lost. Every amount brought in will eventually be lost through continued play. Those are the facts in a nutshell. Any honest mathematician, statistician, or numbers expert who understands the game of poker, would not dispute the example in this paragraph.
Now knowing that money cannot be won playing online poker, here are three more nails in the online poker coffin so that this complete waste of your money, time and life can be buried:
1. How do you know the other online poker players are real? You could be the only real player at the website table with the rest being software program players which would be programmed so that you could not possibly win even in the short-run.
2. How do you know the cards are a randomly dealt deck? You would eventually lose your money anyway even with a randomly dealt deck. However some gambling houses do not want to wait that long to fleece you out of your money. The cards could be rigged in any which way to assure that you will lose quicker. They can easily rig any hand. For instance you could have four kings on the flop but a software program player gets a fourth ace at the river to beat you.
3. How do you know a gambling website can be trusted with your bank account and credit card information? Without your knowledge, they can easily clean out your bank account and max out your credit card anytime they wanted. After they do this, even if locating them in their country of origin and getting them hauled into court, they could just falsify some computer records and claim that you gambled away the money. It is highly unlikely that a judge from their country is going to rule in your favor.
There are a good number of dishonest gambling websites out there just waiting to steal money from you. But even if you did happen to find the most honest, forthright, respectable gambling house that exists, it still is a money fleecing business which would be most happy to financially destroy you. Do not give them the pleasure no matter how nice their website appears to be. Do not give them the pleasure no matter how friendly their promoters seem to be. Do not give them the pleasure for any reason.
These gambling houses along with their slick marketing campaigns are very clever at trying to influence you into gambling. Do not believe any advertising or information from gambling websites or other sources which state or imply that money can be made playing online poker. Do not let them fool you but if they have, then permanently delete their money fleecing software from your computer.
You have a choice to follow the guidance of this article or play online poker. Playing online poker will cost you money and quite possibly a lot of money. You may get addicted to it even if believing that could not happen. It very well can happen. Unfortunately, getting addicted to online poker has happened to many people. But even if never technically getting addicted to online poker, isn’t it foolish to play a game in which losing your money is a certainty? Losing money is not only true for online poker, but for all other gambling games on the internet. There are not and never will be any exceptions. You are absolutely, positively, guaranteed to lose your money. Those are the facts. Do not allow gambling promoters or anyone else to convince you otherwise.
Please make the right choice, the smart choice and the necessary choice to never play the money losing game of online poker or any other online gambling game. Keep your money in your bank account where it belongs. Your money does not belong in the bank account of a gambling house.
The Fallacy of Online Poker Gambling
Online poker is rapidly becoming one of the most popular gambling games at gambling websites on the internet. The main reason for this popularity is the belief that it is a game of skill in which money could be won. This belief is a fallacy. Skillful play will never help gamblers to win money at online poker because winning money at online poker is impossible.
Online poker is a game of skill only to the extent that skillful play would allow gamblers to lose their money slower. Money could temporarily be won in the short-run. In the long-run though, the gambling “house” which operates the gambling website, will permanently win all the money from all of the players. With a fast played game such as poker, the short-run quickly becomes the long-run when playing enough hands. Each hand played whether winning or losing any particular hand, slowly disintegrates the bankroll of every gambler. There is not anything that gamblers can do to save their bankrolls except to never play online poker.
The top poker players in the world do not play poker at gambling websites. Some top poker players may say they do only because of getting paid for endorsements. These top poker players know they can beat the other players, but that they cannot beat the house. There is not anybody on the face of this earth who can make money playing online poker. Even the world’s best poker player will never be good enough to overcome the “rake” which is the house cut from each pot.
“It takes a minute to learn and a lifetime to master” is a phrase used by some gambling website promoters to describe the poker game of Texas Holdem. This phrase is true when playing against other poker players if there is not any rake. But this phrase is false for online poker because of the rake involved. Gambling house promoters know this phrase is false for their poker. Yet they keep parroting this phrase to fool you into thinking that even though you keep losing money at their website, that one day you could “master” Texas Holdem and then start making money. This phrase for online Texas Holdem should be corrected to truthfully state, “It takes a minute to learn and a lifetime to lose money.”
Here is an example of how the gambling house will always win all the money from all of the players. Five players sit-in on an online poker game each with a $20 bankroll for a total at the website table of $100. Let’s say the average pot is $10 and the rake is 5% or 50 cents per hand. Let’s say 200 hands are played which does not take that long. After 200 hands, that 50 cents rake per hand totals $100 which is the entire amount that all of the players started with at the website table. Of course not all of the players go broke at the exact same time and fresh money can come into the game. But sooner or later each gambler will eventually lose their $20 bankroll every time without exception. If bringing in $20 more, that will also eventually be lost. Every amount brought in will eventually be lost through continued play. Those are the facts in a nutshell. Any honest mathematician, statistician, or numbers expert who understands the game of poker, would not dispute the example in this paragraph.
Now knowing that money cannot be won playing online poker, here are three more nails in the online poker coffin so that this complete waste of your money, time and life can be buried:
1. How do you know the other online poker players are real? You could be the only real player at the website table with the rest being software program players which would be programmed so that you could not possibly win even in the short-run.
2. How do you know the cards are a randomly dealt deck? You would eventually lose your money anyway even with a randomly dealt deck. However some gambling houses do not want to wait that long to fleece you out of your money. The cards could be rigged in any which way to assure that you will lose quicker. They can easily rig any hand. For instance you could have four kings on the flop but a software program player gets a fourth ace at the river to beat you.
3. How do you know a gambling website can be trusted with your bank account and credit card information? Without your knowledge, they can easily clean out your bank account and max out your credit card anytime they wanted. After they do this, even if locating them in their country of origin and getting them hauled into court, they could just falsify some computer records and claim that you gambled away the money. It is highly unlikely that a judge from their country is going to rule in your favor.
There are a good number of dishonest gambling websites out there just waiting to steal money from you. But even if you did happen to find the most honest, forthright, respectable gambling house that exists, it still is a money fleecing business which would be most happy to financially destroy you. Do not give them the pleasure no matter how nice their website appears to be. Do not give them the pleasure no matter how friendly their promoters seem to be. Do not give them the pleasure for any reason.
These gambling houses along with their slick marketing campaigns are very clever at trying to influence you into gambling. Do not believe any advertising or information from gambling websites or other sources which state or imply that money can be made playing online poker. Do not let them fool you but if they have, then permanently delete their money fleecing software from your computer.
You have a choice to follow the guidance of this article or play online poker. Playing online poker will cost you money and quite possibly a lot of money. You may get addicted to it even if believing that could not happen. It very well can happen. Unfortunately, getting addicted to online poker has happened to many people. But even if never technically getting addicted to online poker, isn’t it foolish to play a game in which losing your money is a certainty? Losing money is not only true for online poker, but for all other gambling games on the internet. There are not and never will be any exceptions. You are absolutely, positively, guaranteed to lose your money. Those are the facts. Do not allow gambling promoters or anyone else to convince you otherwise.
Please make the right choice, the smart choice and the necessary choice to never play the money losing game of online poker or any other online gambling game. Keep your money in your bank account where it belongs. Your money does not belong in the bank account of a gambling house.
icle tells you all you need to know about playing online poker:
I personally watched a buddy of mine win thousands three weeks ago on Partypoker.com
great article! but whenb i play in the tournaments at pokerroom.com there is no rake. you pay 5.50$ 50 cents goes to the house. but if 400 people play top 60 players get paid. so if your good you can always place in the money, to win well that is just lucky! i got lucky the other night.
i dont play anything besides the tourny bc your article holds to be true.
As a few people in here know, I am an ex-gambler. But I have never rooted against a gambler in my life and I never will. But I do know gamblers. Not speaking to or for any particular gamblers at all, and sometimes I used to do this also so I am not being hypocritical...A gambler on a Monday will lose $2,000 then on Wednesday win $1,500 then on Friday lose $2,000. Then when he sees his buddies over the weekend he'll brag that he won $1,500 on Wednesday - which is technically true. But he'll "forget" to say that for the week he actually lost in total $2,500. Of course sometimes a gambler will just admit that he lost the $2,500 but there is that hope, especially with online poker, that the money can be won back and more money made - it simply ain't ever going to happen.
If not believing the article, go to your high school or college mathematics teacher or professor - most of them have played poker privately and understand the game - they'll tell you that the paragraph in the article regarding the five players all eventually losing their bankroll is absolutely correct.
In private, neighborhood games, the best players do win money. In online poker playing against a rake, everyone eventually, sooner or later, loses all their money. These are the facts no matter how gambling promoters or anyone else wants to spin it.
1st place got 435$ >>>
Kuhlmann - Take that money and run!
I think the books are good to learn basic concepts such as hand values, how to call/raise/bet, but a lot of it is instinct and reading people. I think that tight aggressive is the best way to play, and the key thing is once you win a few hands with this style people will get out of the way because they think that every time you are in a pot you have something. Then you can slow play people and trap them with good hands and let them wonder what the heck you are doing. I had a guy last night get mad because I had two small pairs, and checked to him and after taking the pot he is commented "why did you not bet that pair?" I think the person who loses the pot is not in a very good position to be giving advice, and I could tell he was frustrated by it. That just means when I get a bad hand he will not know it and be afraid to play against it. Of course he is a calling station so I know where he stands.
"
" Go ahead and get your fancy barely visible cell phones that get the internet, play DVD's, and can speak 5 languages. As for me and my Atari cell phone it works, it weighs 7 pounds, it is 14 inches long, and it looks like I could call in an airstrike from a remote desert it is so large!"
Enjoy this other article my friends here at CU. It is hoped these articles help keep you away from the money losing game of online poker.
LAS VEGAS -- Barry Greenstein is cranky.
As he stands inside the Bellagio, where he regularly plays in the biggest cash game in the world, Greenstein and I are discussing who exactly should be called a great poker player and who shouldn't.
No. Wait. Greenstein is not exactly discussing. More like lecturing. In that contemptuous way of his. Lovably contemptuous. But contemptuous just the same.
Now, I could explain here that Greenstein's crankiness stems from the media making stars of players who win tournaments on television, declaring them "great" players, when actually many of those tournament players are not winning players who show a profit playing poker, which is why they hawk books and DVDs, and besides, tournaments aren't nearly the challenge or barometer that cash games are, and so, the bigger the cash game, the better the player who can beat it until a player gets to the biggest cash game around, which just happens to be - ta-da! - the one Greenstein plays in.
But my writing the previous paragraph risks the wrath of Greenstein's precision, so I'll let him explain.
"There are five top players: There's Doyle Brunson, there's Chip Reese, there's Chau Giang, there's Phil Ivey, there's myself," Greenstein says. "Those are the five people who beat the biggest game. There isn't any tournament player you're going to put in our game who's going to beat it. They'd be drawing dead. They'd be the live ones. We'd play 'til they're broke. But they already are broke, for the most part. The public says, 'Oh he's a great player.' He's a live one in our game.
"You could make millions of dollars if you could beat our game. Do you really think these people would worry about making a few hundred-thousand (dollars) selling DVDs and videos if you could make millions playing poker? It's pretty obvious, isn't it?
"What tournaments are all about is beating bad players. Building up big chips in tournaments is a skill. I don't want to say they don't have certain skills. But playing good players, they'd have their heads handed to them at the highest levels.
"That isn't to say that they aren't smart enough individuals to become top players. The way you get good is by playing against the best players. You've now got to make adjustments to the adjustments they've made against you.
"The reason these other guys play in tournaments for the most part is because they are broke, because other people put them in a tournament and they've made a name for themselves. But they're not as good as many professionals out there."
When told of some of Greenstein's contention the best poker players are playing poker and not selling pokerphernalia -- Greenstein, by the way, is coming out with a book called "Ace on the River - An Advanced Poker Guide" -- renowned pro Howard Lederer raised his eyebrows and showed part of his famous weapons-grade stare, then somewhat backed up Greenstein's point.
"I had success in those biggest side games for 10 years," Lederer says. "I think I've gotten a lot of satisfaction and expanded my horizons a little bit and made a conscious decision.
"One thing I did decide, though, is I have too much respect for Barry Greenstein as a poker player and those other guys who play in the biggest games. I don't feel like I can put in a full day of business and come to Bellagio and play in a side game right now. I'm not the poker player they are right now. That's just the mental preparation thing. It's not that I don't have it in me. I just choose not to have it in me where it's all poker."
So, indeed, there is truth in Greenstein's argument. Still sounds cranky.
"The crankiness is that for years I'd just bite my tongue when the media would talk about losing players being top players in the game," Greenstein said, preferring not to name names. "I'd say, 'OK, they don't know the difference.' And everything I'd read or see on the news is, from where I sit, false.
" 'Great' is given to people who aren't even winning poker players. So, if someone's not a winning player, and I'm being told that's a 'great' player, they're being put up as top professionals and 'This is how they act.' Then they act like goofballs, and I say, 'That's because they're not (top professionals). You've got the wrong people.'
"I'm almost defending the working poker players around the country and even around the world who make a living playing poker. There are many people who do that, but it's very expensive to go around and play in these tournaments and often not the right way to make their living. They live with their families, they play in the local clubs.
"On some levels, I'm arrogant. That level is, there are cash game players - and not only that but I play in the biggest cash game; what we call the first tier - and a lot of people don't appreciate what the level of differences are between us and people playing in tournaments."
Greenstein began playing tournaments the past 18 months and has one of the better records, winning a World Series of Poker bracelet, finishing second in another WSOP tournament, capturing a World Poker Tour event and earning a bracelet in a Bellagio tournament.
What's more, to underscore the value of tournament winnings compared to his cash game accomplishments, Greenstein gives all his tournament winnings to charity, most notably Children's Inc., which is why Greenstein is often referred to as the "Robin Hood of poker."
"My crankiness is not for myself, because I have been given - whether I've deserved it or not - almost the best persona of any player in poker history," Greenstein says. "I'm defending other poker professionals."
You can doubt Greenstein's contentions about how cash game players compare to tournament players. And he will be happy to welcome you to his game. Bring money.
Steve Rosenbloom is a contributor to ESPN.com and writes a syndicated poker column for the Chicago Tribune.
I do think there are ways to "beat the house" though and that's by comps! Between Party Poker and True Poker, I've deposited $50 and cashed that out within 2 days. Since then I've gotten about $50 3 times in real money to play with (there is a min hands req though before cashout), a free hat, mousepad, and best of all 2 years of Maxim and 1 year of Stuff magazines
Brian
Just thought I'd pass this along. If there are any fellow board members out who might have been thinking of trying there luck, send me a PM with your email address, and I'll forward you a link to a website that will give you $50 for free at your choice of one of the major online poker sites. I thought it might be to good to be true but I've tried it already and its not a scam. The only real catches are, besides being old enough, you cannot have had an account of any type at the site you choose and there is a minumum hand requirement before cashing out. Other than that there is no other better way to start playing online for real.
<< <i>Nothing like reviving an old thread.
Just thought I'd pass this along. If there are any fellow board members out who might have been thinking of trying there luck, send me a PM with your email address, and I'll forward you a link to a website that will give you $50 for free at your choice of one of the major online poker sites. I thought it might be to good to be true but I've tried it already and its not a scam. The only real catches are, besides being old enough, you cannot have had an account of any type at the site you choose and there is a minumum hand requirement before cashing out. Other than that there is no other better way to start playing online for real. >>
You're doing it all wrong - Ya gotta become "friends" with your potential prey, oh sorry I meant to say potential "customers"...become good internet buddies with them...send 'em free baseball cards or gifts to show your friendship...butter 'em up a little bit...and then just at the right time...introduce them to the fact that you are a member of a gambling website affiliate commission program and that you want them to be a sucker, oh sorry I meant to say "customer", and that you will share all your knowledge and secrets of winning money playing online poker. Am I right or am I right? LOL
I could go on and on but most people now are wise to hucksters on the internet pushing their online poker signup programs to try to entice and lure naive people into playing the sucker's game of online poker, so that the hucksters can profit and make a commission percentage off the rake of their customers. Most of the forum members here are wise to this scam, so you'd be best to peddle your con game elsewhere.
Also interesting that from what I've found, and I've chatted privately and publicly with a number of gambling website affiliate members...and everyone I've chatted with was an addicted gambler just like their customers, and they always wound up gambling back the earned commission money to that poker website or another poker website, or on other forms of gambling such as sports betting. The only real sharks in online poker are the poker website owners...all the players and the affiliate website members who gamble are the fish.
The above article of mine has stood the test of time and proven to be absolutely true, which I of course knew it was, but it will be interesting to see how online poker plays out in the US in the coming months. Again...I would no longer state that online poker couldn't be beat because unraked poker is a game of pure skill, one of the most pure skill games out there, but I would still warn people about the dangers of gambling addiction because, just a guess right now, that approximately less than 10% of those playing unraked internet poker will be winners, but over 90% will be losers, and some losing a lot more money and time than they can afford which is symptomatic of gambling addiction.
<< <i>If you are serious about improving our game, get Dan Harrington's first two books of his series of 3. By far the best books on Holdem I've ever read. >>
You're right about improving - as long as the poker is rake free, the most skilled players will win money in the long-run.
I know this as well...if I sat across from Dan Harrington at a poker table, he would clean me out in just a matter of time - I've seen him play on TV and that SOB can flat out play poker. Even a guy like Matusow, who clearly can't compete with the top players and he acts like a dope when they beat him as if he was just unlucky when the fact is they are simply better than him, but in a private game, he would still crush probably 99%+ of the poker players out there.
Interesting though that the thread was revived because I do believe it's possible that online poker could be legalized in the US this year or in 2010, and I think that some major internet type companies will offer it rake free. Then I will no longer state that online poker can't be beat because then it could be beat - the players with the most skill will win money, and some could win a lot of money...but nobody, nobody, can beat the long term accumulative effects of the rake...and that is a fact...and not even debatable at this point in time.
Also interesting that from what I've found, and I've chatted privately and publicly with a number of gambling website affiliate members...and everyone I've chatted with was an addicted gambler just like their customers, and they always wound up gambling back the earned commission money to that poker website or another poker website, or on other forms of gambling such as sports betting. The only real sharks in online poker are the poker website owners...all the players and the affiliate website members who gamble are the fish.
The above article of mine has stood the test of time and proven to be absolutely true, which I of course knew it was, but it will be interesting to see how online poker plays out in the US in the coming months. Again...I would no longer state that online poker couldn't be beat because unraked poker is a game of pure skill, one of the most pure skill games out there, but I would still warn people about the dangers of gambling addiction because, just a guess right now, that approximately less than 10% of those playing unraked internet poker will be winners, but over 90% will be losers, and some losing a lot more money and time than they can afford which is symptomatic of gambling addiction.
Oh my God - Stevek this is how you feel about online poker? Gotta be news to everyone who reads these boards....
good luck
collecting RAW Topps baseball cards 1952 Highs to 1972. looking for collector grade (somewhere between psa 4-7 condition). let me know what you have, I'll take it, I want to finish sets, I must have something you can use for trade.
looking for Topps 71-72 hi's-62-53-54-55-59, I have these sets started
That being said the game itself is a combination fun, stress, foolishness and extreme aggrevation. I couldnt care less what any book tells you how to play or any "proffesional" says either, the game is 90% luck- meaning you need to catch cards to win BOTTOM LINE. I have said numerous times that the most dangerous person at the table is someone who doesnt really know how to play the game, you can play Aces all day and still get smashed by some moron who plays to the river for a gut shot straight or catches with crap cards like stupid suited connectors or just catches a card to add to his low pair or some foolishness. I still play and have won money and loss money but it is not even close to being as fun as it was 5 years ago when it became popular.
Im going fishin instead!
I found it much easier to win in Vegas at dealer tables. Many of the players are new, think they know the game without studying it and gaining most of their knowledge from watching TV, which is all tournament and a different animal from a sit and go.
It's much easier on us old ppls bodies than a round of golf or tennis.
<< <i>Interesting though that the thread was revived because I do believe it's possible that online poker could be legalized in the US this year or in 2010, and I think that some major internet type companies will offer it rake free. Then I will no longer state that online poker can't be beat because then it could be beat - the players with the most skill will win money, and some could win a lot of money...but nobody, nobody, can beat the long term accumulative effects of the rake...and that is a fact...and not even debatable at this point in time.
Also interesting that from what I've found, and I've chatted privately and publicly with a number of gambling website affiliate members...and everyone I've chatted with was an addicted gambler just like their customers, and they always wound up gambling back the earned commission money to that poker website or another poker website, or on other forms of gambling such as sports betting. The only real sharks in online poker are the poker website owners...all the players and the affiliate website members who gamble are the fish.
The above article of mine has stood the test of time and proven to be absolutely true, which I of course knew it was, but it will be interesting to see how online poker plays out in the US in the coming months. Again...I would no longer state that online poker couldn't be beat because unraked poker is a game of pure skill, one of the most pure skill games out there, but I would still warn people about the dangers of gambling addiction because, just a guess right now, that approximately less than 10% of those playing unraked internet poker will be winners, but over 90% will be losers, and some losing a lot more money and time than they can afford which is symptomatic of gambling addiction.
Oh my God - Stevek this is how you feel about online poker? Gotta be news to everyone who reads these boards.... >>
I didn't bump the old thread, somebody else did and I responded to it.
Also I brought up a number of new points for possible discussion.
And if anyone brings up online poker or gambling, then I'll respond again if I feel like it, and if you don't like that...well too bad, so sad.
<< <i>Ah yes Texas Hold'em. I only play in casinos or club/home games now, I will NOT play online, it works for some people but Im all set with that crap.
That being said the game itself is a combination fun, stress, foolishness and extreme aggrevation. I couldnt care less what any book tells you how to play or any "proffesional" says either, the game is 90% luck- meaning you need to catch cards to win BOTTOM LINE. I have said numerous times that the most dangerous person at the table is someone who doesnt really know how to play the game, you can play Aces all day and still get smashed by some moron who plays to the river for a gut shot straight or catches with crap cards like stupid suited connectors or just catches a card to add to his low pair or some foolishness. I still play and have won money and loss money but it is not even close to being as fun as it was 5 years ago when it became popular. >>
I mainly play at the casino down the road or in home games, but do play online on and off. Our site has a league starting tonight online, so I'll play that once a week and that's about it until the league ends. There's actually a guy that frequents the casino near me that won a WS bracelet this year, so it's fun to go watch him in TC sometimes. He plays for a lot more money than I am comfortable with. Phil Laak just hosted a tourney up here a couple months ago, so that was kinda fun. My wife got a pic with him and an autograph. We also met Darren McCarty (Red Wings) up here during training camp. I got to sit next to him for an hour at a $1/2 NL ,BS'ing about the team while my wife was taking his winnings
I've had a decent amount of success online, but I mainly play small-ball tourneys. On Poker Stars for instance, I've bought into roughtly 25 of the $4/180 (person). I've won a few ($220 each) and placed nearly 50% of the time. So for $100 worth of buy-in's, I've probably won $900+. I played in one of the $12/180 and won ($600+). So I tried a $20/180 and lost on the first hand - lol (full house to quads). I signed up on Doyles Room because they allow players to play the $30 bounty tourney for free the first time. I came in around 17th out of like 500 and won a little over $100, then cashed out a week later becuase I hated the layout. I was winning lots of sit-n-go's on Absolute (very small buy-ins) when I first started playing online, but then heard about their trouble and ran. Anywho, the point is that you can win online if you choose games that suit your style. Sure, there's plenty of horrible players at lower-limit games so you just have to be a little more patient IMO.
90% luck... nah. Sure you need to catch cards to win a tourney, but you don't need to catch cards to win hands. There is a difference. You can bluff people out of hands without catching anything, but that will catch up with you eventually while playing in a tourney. If you play solid hands and smart position, while knowing the players around you and the math, the "luck percentage" drops quite a bit. I hate the ATC guys at the table most of the time, but they're nice when you catch a big hand. Sure, they'll suckout sometimes, but more often will be paying you off.
<< <i>The big losers are always the ones that come in thinking its a table of fish and get aggressive and try to push the table around. I've only had a few Saturdays with these type of players that I didn't finish up.
I found it much easier to win in Vegas at dealer tables. Many of the players are new, think they know the game without studying it and gaining most of their knowledge from watching TV, which is all tournament and a different animal from a sit and go. >>
That's what poker has come to in most areas. I used to live in mid-Michigan and play near CMU. Tons of college kids there and way too much aggression preflop. At a $1/2 NL table, it was common to be facing a $15/$20 raise preflop from a guy in the small blind. You could not sit for $100 and see more than 3 hands before you went broke unless you won a hand or two. Pots regularly got to $400/500. It was great if you were catching cards, but easy to go broke if you didn't.
I live near Traverse City now. Rich community full of old folks with fancy houses on Lake Michigan. The casino up here is more laid back. At the $1/2 NL table here, you can usually limp into half the pots per round. The pots grow eventually, but usually most of the betting doesn't happen until the turn. It's a better game all around.
<< <i>Ah yes Texas Hold'em. I only play in casinos or club/home games now, I will NOT play online, it works for some people but Im all set with that crap.
That being said the game itself is a combination fun, stress, foolishness and extreme aggrevation. I couldnt care less what any book tells you how to play or any "proffesional" says either, the game is 90% luck- meaning you need to catch cards to win BOTTOM LINE. I have said numerous times that the most dangerous person at the table is someone who doesnt really know how to play the game, you can play Aces all day and still get smashed by some moron who plays to the river for a gut shot straight or catches with crap cards like stupid suited connectors or just catches a card to add to his low pair or some foolishness. I still play and have won money and loss money but it is not even close to being as fun as it was 5 years ago when it became popular. >>
Actually most "real" pros will say that poker is around 98% luck and it could be higher than that in a game such as holdem, which is why real pros never play raked poker - they already know the long term accumulative effects of the rake will grind them all out.
You may see "pros" playing at PS, FT and elsewhere on the net...but these guys receive 100% rakeback, plus they get paid an hourly fee, plus they are receiving endorsement money from the gambling website. So when I stated in my article, "The top poker players in the world do not play poker at gambling websites" I was referring to the actual way poker is played there that the pros who play there aren't playing the same game there that everyone else plays - they are playing with a positive expectation whereby all the other players, in reality, are playing with a negative expectation.
And I know the "big game" gets raked...but the massive dollar amount played lessens the effect of the rake to a large degree. However, rakes in games of 10/20 or less, the games that most online players play, are obvious bankroll killers even in the short-run. Anyone doing the math of even a seemingly "small" $3 rake per game can add up the rake and plainly see how nobody, including a reincarnation of Stu Ungar, can beat that game. Ahh but it's a tough addiction, and the addiction doesn't want to believe otherwise, even sometimes after you're dead broke and in debt.
One last point because I don't want to say too much and give jlbsquared a heart attack (LOL)...but the RNG is so obviously rigged at most of these poker websites that it's not even funny. At a "legit" site it may not be rigged to benefit any player or any house bot...but for sure say on certain nights of the week all they gotta do is click the mouse and tell the "RNG" to deal out slightly more face cards and aces that night, to stimulate action and generate more rake...which of course increases their profits. Also if anyone believes that house bots don't win many of those bigger money tournaments on most of these websites, then you may as well read "Alice in Wonderland" and believe it's a true story - it's just too easy to program a few house bots so that they when they are in the hand, could win every hand, and of course they'll fold many hands to make it look good, and even lose some smaller pots at the river, but every hand they play to the river when they are all-in they will win...I mean really...a high school educated programmer could make this easy, simple to do program considering how sophisticated these software programs are today.
Bottom line - The evidence is overwhelming and crystal clear, that an individual poker player playing online poker by the rules, has absolutely no chance, zero, of making money playing online poker in the long-run, and except at the "legit" websites, doesn't even have any chance of winning a tournament. Online poker is a sucker's game - Case closed.
<< <i>Dirt I play at New Buffalo but have been to the Traverse City casino. New Buff is much nicer. >>
Have you been to TC in the last 6 months? They built a whole new casino and got out of the old "pole barn" up there. Glass everything, waterfall on the wall, wide open floor, more tables, etc... The poker room is now much larger and the walls are glass. Kinda cool. Never been to New Buffalo before though, so I can't compare the two.
2008
I played in Macau (China) in an APPT event ("Asia Pacific Poker Tour) ...
I played 3 events at the WSOP in Vegas!
I'm still a donkey!
rd
Quicksilver Messenger Service - Smokestack Lightning (Live) 1968
Quicksilver Messenger Service - The Hat (Live) 1971
<< <i>2008
I played in Macau (China) in an APPT event ("Asia Pacific Poker Tour) ...
I played 3 events at the WSOP in Vegas!
I'm still a donkey!
rd >>
What 3 events? What places did you get?
<< <i>2008
I played in Macau (China) in an APPT event ("Asia Pacific Poker Tour) ...
I played 3 events at the WSOP in Vegas!
I'm still a donkey!
rd >>
But all ya need is a hot streak like Moneymaker or Jamie Gold and then you're the next world famous pro.
<< <i>
<< <i>Dirt I play at New Buffalo but have been to the Traverse City casino. New Buff is much nicer. >>
Have you been to TC in the last 6 months? They built a whole new casino and got out of the old "pole barn" up there. Glass everything, waterfall on the wall, wide open floor, more tables, etc... The poker room is now much larger and the walls are glass. Kinda cool. Never been to New Buffalo before though, so I can't compare the two. >>
No I haven't its been 4 or 5 years ago, glad to hear it, looked like a metal pole building.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Dirt I play at New Buffalo but have been to the Traverse City casino. New Buff is much nicer. >>
Have you been to TC in the last 6 months? They built a whole new casino and got out of the old "pole barn" up there. Glass everything, waterfall on the wall, wide open floor, more tables, etc... The poker room is now much larger and the walls are glass. Kinda cool. Never been to New Buffalo before though, so I can't compare the two. >>
No I haven't its been 4 or 5 years ago, glad to hear it, looked like a metal pole building. >>
Yup, that was it... Funny that a rich area like TC had one of the crappiest looking casinos in the state. They also have 3 floors (the casino is only on the first floor) with bars on each, so the ceiling is like 30-40 feet high. They've added a few restaurants, bigger parking, etc...
Where is the New Buff casino at? I think my brother-in-law and his wife have gone there, but I never have.
<< <i>But all ya need is a hot streak like Moneymaker or Jamie Gold and then you're the next world famous pro.
Well it does pretty much guarantee you wont have to use your own money to buy into a tourney for quite some time. Heck, you don't even have to use your winnings. Sponsors will usually pick up the tab on almost every tourney they show up to, especially anything that's going to be on television. The one thing I believe many people have a hard time understanding or don't even realize at all is that many of these pros don't buy-in to the majority (if any) of the tournaments they play. Sponsors buy-in for them. If the pros lose, they're out nothing. So they basically freeroll all the time. So it's easier to make money when you aren't putting any in. Further, many of these sponsors (typically Full Tilt, PokerStars, Absolute, etc...) will chose to sponsor a player as they go further in a tournament because they'll likely get more air time. Funny when you see a guy for the first two days of the WS with no sponsor-wear, but he becomes the chip leader and all of a sudden he has a PokerStars logo on his shirt and hat.
<< <i>
<< <i>2008
I played in Macao (China) in an APPT event ("Asia Pacific Poker Tour) ...played 3 events at the WSOP in Vegas! I'm still a donkey!
rd >>
What 3 events? What places did you get? >>
I won a seat, plus spending money into the main event! Took the cash instead! ($12,500) played one official $1500 event, plus two satellites, oh yeah, plus a $600 charity tourney by Johnny Chan. (so actually, I play 4 tourneys in Vegas) (.. plus I Rolled a little dice at the Rio, between, tourneys!
The best I did was, like level 13 at 4 am in the morning, in a satellite, I missed by 10 places damn!, a $10,000 ticket into the main event (I would have to play, as the Rio, would not give you the cash!).
I decided, not to play the main event, and just "freerolled" in Vegas. I would have played, if it "hit one og those satellites". Out of the $12,500, I came home with about half (shame on me!)...
rd
"I'm all-in!"
Quicksilver Messenger Service - Smokestack Lightning (Live) 1968
Quicksilver Messenger Service - The Hat (Live) 1971
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>2008
I played in Macao (China) in an APPT event ("Asia Pacific Poker Tour) ...played 3 events at the WSOP in Vegas! I'm still a donkey!
rd >>
What 3 events? What places did you get? >>
I won a seat, plus spending money into the main event! Took the cash instead! ($12,500) played one official $1500 event, plus two satellites, oh yeah, plus a $600 charity tourney by Johnny Chan. (so actually, I play 4 tourneys in Vegas) (.. plus I Rolled a little dice at the Rio, between, tourneys!
The best I did was, like level 13 at 4 am in the morning, in a satellite, I missed by 10 places damn!, a $10,000 ticket into the main event (I would have to play, as the Rio, would not give you the cash!).
I decided, not to play the main event, and just "freerolled" in Vegas. I would have played, if it "hit one og those satellites". Out of the $12,500, I came home with about half (shame on me!)...
rd
"I'm all-in!"
<<< Seven out, pay the do's, take the dont's!" >>>
I can tell you haven't played much craps - When it's "seven out" it's take the do's (pass line loses) and pay the don't (don't pass line wins)
But I wanted to comment about Doyle - it amazes me how well he plays for his age and he's got so much money, I imagine really focusing on a "Poker After Dark" buy-in of $20,000 which is peanuts to him, has to be difficult, but yet he still plays pretty well. I can only imagine how good he was when he was younger and hungry to win.
<< <i>
<< <i>But all ya need is a hot streak like Moneymaker or Jamie Gold and then you're the next world famous pro.
Well it does pretty much guarantee you wont have to use your own money to buy into a tourney for quite some time. Heck, you don't even have to use your winnings. Sponsors will usually pick up the tab on almost every tourney they show up to, especially anything that's going to be on television. The one thing I believe many people have a hard time understanding or don't even realize at all is that many of these pros don't buy-in to the majority (if any) of the tournaments they play. Sponsors buy-in for them. If the pros lose, they're out nothing. So they basically freeroll all the time. So it's easier to make money when you aren't putting any in. Further, many of these sponsors (typically Full Tilt, PokerStars, Absolute, etc...) will chose to sponsor a player as they go further in a tournament because they'll likely get more air time. Funny when you see a guy for the first two days of the WS with no sponsor-wear, but he becomes the chip leader and all of a sudden he has a PokerStars logo on his shirt and hat. >>
Yes, you got it right for sure. Interesting...I hadn't thought about players getting sponsored midway through the tournament - smart business move by the poker websites grabbing the next hot poker player with a big stack before the other sites do...for exposure during the tourney and if the player does well, endorsements, etc., after the tourney. Believe me - i understand the attraction and the addiction to the game...even for a perennial loser player with decent fundamental poker skills, there's always that little chance, hope, of being the next Moneymaker.
I'm leaving now to play a small NL tourney (South FLA) Pompano Race Track (The Isle).
$120 buy in!
Bye bye!
rd
Quicksilver Messenger Service - Smokestack Lightning (Live) 1968
Quicksilver Messenger Service - The Hat (Live) 1971
Update: I cashed! (6-way chop! $ 887 each)
rd
Quicksilver Messenger Service - Smokestack Lightning (Live) 1968
Quicksilver Messenger Service - The Hat (Live) 1971
<< <i>nice little score. >>
Thanks!
got lucky!
rd
Quicksilver Messenger Service - Smokestack Lightning (Live) 1968
Quicksilver Messenger Service - The Hat (Live) 1971
<< <i>
<< <i>nice little score. >>
Thanks!
got lucky!
rd >>
The old saying is it's "better to be lucky than good"
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>nice little score. >>
Thanks!
got lucky!
rd >>
The old saying is it's "better to be lucky than good"
Perhaps posting in the forum here brought ya some good luck - I'm "sure" that posting here brought out my Phillies championship and I'm hoping it brings out an Eagles Super Bowl victory as well...not that I'm superstitious or anything like that. LOL
<< <i>Perhaps posting in the forum here brought ya some good luck - I'm "sure" that posting here brought out my Phillies championship and I'm hoping it brings out an Eagles Super Bowl victory as well...not that I'm superstitious or anything like that. LOL >>
Steve, the Eagles against the Cards?
That's like an "all-in" bet "pre-flop", with pocket AA's!
rd
Quicksilver Messenger Service - Smokestack Lightning (Live) 1968
Quicksilver Messenger Service - The Hat (Live) 1971
For 1/2NL, Poker Stars charges 5% rake for pots up to $60, and nothing for amounts over that. There are tens of thousands of winning live and internet poker players that are good enough to overcome those odds, and have been doing it for 5 or 6 years now.
And I disagree about the game being 90% or 98% luck. There's obviously no way to measure it, but I'd put luck somewhere in the ~80% range. Between playing correct starting hands in position, reading people and betting patterns, and post-flop play, there is enough skill involved to accuount for more than 2% or 10% of anyone's result.
WSOP tidbits!
Quicksilver Messenger Service - Smokestack Lightning (Live) 1968
Quicksilver Messenger Service - The Hat (Live) 1971
<< <i>stevek - I understand your mathematical premise very well about not being able to beat the rake (if the same 10 guys played at the same table ad infinitum, the money would eventually be gone). But I liken that statement to those made by the baseball sabrematicians about using your closer in the best situation possible late in the game, not just in the 9th inning. It makes all the sense in the world on paper and in the world of mathematics, but in real world, it doesn't make sense.
For 1/2NL, Poker Stars charges 5% rake for pots up to $60, and nothing for amounts over that. There are tens of thousands of winning live and internet poker players that are good enough to overcome those odds, and have been doing it for 5 or 6 years now.
And I disagree about the game being 90% or 98% luck. There's obviously no way to measure it, but I'd put luck somewhere in the ~80% range. Between playing correct starting hands in position, reading people and betting patterns, and post-flop play, there is enough skill involved to accuount for more than 2% or 10% of anyone's result. >>
It depends on the number of trials. In the short run, luck is the dominant factor. That's why guys like Robert Varkony, or Jerry Yang, can win the WSOP. In the long run, luck ceases to be a concern. What most people don't understand, however, is how long the 'short run' can be. It's very possible for a winning player to have a 300K hand break-even streak, which is something that strikes most new players as unbelievable. But I've personally had streaks of 50K hands where I'm no richer at the end than I was at the beginning, and I know other very compenent players who have streaks that have gone even longer. In high variance games, like Lowball and 7-Stud, these streaks can be even longer (by poker standards Texas Hold 'em (and certainly Omaha 8) is a pretty low-variance game, which is why the games can dry up so fast if there isn't a steady influx of new donators being introduced to the game).
<< <i>stevek's reaction to jdip9's post.
Nam - looking for customers? Maybe you can come up with a better signup bonus than the other guy here. LOL
<< <i>stevek - I understand your mathematical premise very well about not being able to beat the rake (if the same 10 guys played at the same table ad infinitum, the money would eventually be gone). But I liken that statement to those made by the baseball sabrematicians about using your closer in the best situation possible late in the game, not just in the 9th inning. It makes all the sense in the world on paper and in the world of mathematics, but in real world, it doesn't make sense.
For 1/2NL, Poker Stars charges 5% rake for pots up to $60, and nothing for amounts over that. There are tens of thousands of winning live and internet poker players that are good enough to overcome those odds, and have been doing it for 5 or 6 years now.
And I disagree about the game being 90% or 98% luck. There's obviously no way to measure it, but I'd put luck somewhere in the ~80% range. Between playing correct starting hands in position, reading people and betting patterns, and post-flop play, there is enough skill involved to accuount for more than 2% or 10% of anyone's result. >>
Post a link to one, just one, website whereby over a course of some years anyone has proven to beat the game of raked online poker...just one...and please no hand history sites...anyone can have numerous hand history sites and only post the winning ones...proof would simply be an audited tax return by a reputable accounting firm with a letter signed by the accountant that the income came from playing online poker - very simple and easy to do yet not one time has it ever been done, and there's little need to wonder why.
An author of a popular best selling poker book approached me about this subject and I challenged him publicly in another forum to simply provide one example of audited documented proof as I requested. I'm still waiting. LOL
To put in in simple terms, the rake accumulates, hand after hand, day after day, year after year, and becomes a huge amount of money dwarfing most bankrolls by a large amount which is exactly why online poker players, all of them, eventually go broke - some can beat the other players, but none can beat the rake. There's variance in poker but the rake never varies...it accumulates like teaspoons of water and eventually becomes a raging flood washing away your bankroll. Those are the facts, cut and dried, and really quite obvious, although again...I'm happy to look at any PROOF to the contrary....no hearsay, no random posts from poker forums about gamblers bragging about their wins, no anything else other than the stone cold easy to do proof that I requested. And if you've got a better way of proving it, then I'd be happy to listen to that idea, but I don't know of a better way than the one I requested. So...no excuses, no reasons why any proof can't be done...just provide the proof or once again, this case is closed.