opinions please

since the beginning of june i re read phil gordons little green book. i re read phil gordons little blue book. and im currently 2/3 of the way finished with harrington on holdem Vol. 1

as of July i look to deposit $150 on pokerstars with the hopes of having that up to 1K by christmas.

i know this goal is possible. but i was wondering from the "professionals" on this site...what's the best way to get their. i like cash tables, i can triple even quadruple my buy in...but the longer i stay....the smaller my stack gets lol

maybe you should "start over" at another table after you double up?
-its possible you play looser when you get ahead .... or you tighten up too much trying to protect your stack.

-another factor is how you view yourself with a big stack...do you feel like you need to be the sheriff...do you get an inflated ego?

-and when you are a big stack its possible the other players treat you differently so your normal game doesnt work as well...they may give you more respect and not give you chips..

- so you have 2 options - switch tables after doubling or change your game with a big stack.

o yes i like to have the big stack lol...love it.

thanks for the advice

well in my opinion the books you are reading are good books, I would also read doyle brunsons book, the first one, but DO NOT give them idiots any money, you are better off going for live play, you see online poker is bull shit when it comes to odds, in laymans terms the more skilled player you are the more you will lose, I was trained by a semi pro, 40 plus years in the field, and the one thing I have learned, is I always lose online but rarely if ever lose live, there is a reason for this logic, its called greed also known as "RAKE", dont be fooled your better off saving your money, cause the odds just dont match with online poker, and please everyone save the bull S--t arguement about well you see more hands online or your not that good, or you need to read more books, I would by that BS if I lost in live play, personally I think playing online hinders ones skills as a real good poker player. Im getting pissed off writing this cause I could go on, but bottom line, save your money for live play, do free rolls and have fun. That is just my opinion.

how long you play cash games?
i have those books to they are good books only the books deals more about multi tourn instead of cash games so watch out cash games are diff than mtt's

i think 1k can be poss (i try that by only playing freeroll mtts so far i have around 700 dollars).

well me personally i enjoy online poker and i happen to be dam good at it. seems to be profitable for me and would still be had i not moved up in limits and let variance kill me.

online is different than live but i didn make this thread to argue or hear about who thinks its rigged. i wanted opinions on what people think i should do with the money that i WILL BE depositing. also online poker is just too dam conveniant.

do you mean how often to i stay at one table? or do you mean how often have i played online cash games?

i can sit at one table anywhere from ten min to 4 hours.

Honestly you must not be that good if you always lose online, I know what you mean but still, if you were as good as it seems you think you are, you would win in the long run. More skills=more likely to lose online? OHHHHHHH thats why Phil Ivey sucks online... AM I RITE? I dont mean to flame you, but your paragraph you so madly typed after a bad run online is asking for it.

One of the problems with amateurs that play cash games is they cut and run when they double up and keep playing when they are losing, trying to make up their money. When you have big stack you more than likely have a great table image and you should exploit that, and if you are losing you should cut your losses and find a better table. You shouldn't have to play any differently with a big stack than before, but people will be more likely to respect your bets. Also, in cash games don't try to steal blinds as much because the rake is in effect. The more pots you win, the more you are paying for your seat, whereas in some live cash games, there is a collection, which means you don't have to pay more to see more flops. Go for big pots with premium hands and avoid small pots, because you will be spending more money in the long run. That's just my opinion, and I picked up this advice from Daniel Negreanu's Hold 'em Wisdom for All Players.

i like cash tables, i can triple even quadruple my buy in...but the longer i stay....the smaller my stack gets lol

Perhaps a leak there? The longer you stay, the smaller your stack gets.... why stay long? THere's alot to playing the NLHE Cash Game, ie. adjustments that need to be made due to stack sizes on your table being one. If you follow threads posted & commented on by others who play LowLimit Cash tables, study the game, etc.,.. then why not go from $150 - $1,000?
I've never set goals to reach as far as $$'s goes (in an online acc't.), instead I just focus on trying to improve upon my game. I'm a tourney-style player though,... I don't like the cash tables that much (I've played them a bunch & studied quite a bit on it... but it just doesn't interest me that much at this point... therefore I'm not willing to put in the time I'd assume necessary to be regularly winning player, grinding one's way up thru the limits).
Maybe pick up a book that's more related to playing cash tables. The books you've mentioned here are all good books, but mostly based on tourney-style play. If 6-Max is your game, try checking out RyanFee's 6-maxNL Guide (free online). It's an excellent read! (at the time I read it, it let me know how little I really knew).

where can i read this RyanFee 6maxNL guide?

He has his own website here: http://ryanfee.com/. Just enter your name and email and the guide will be sent to you in pdf.

very nice.

thanks alot man

tbh prob the easiest way is sngs with such a small roll, but i def prefer cash to sngs in general.

i can beat the micro sngs at a double digit roi so if you can multitable them pretty well you can get to 1k in like no time.