Something I don't understand

I have been a member here for a while now, and there is a question burning in the back of my head. I DON'T mean this to be a burn or stab at anyone in anyway either. But, I have wondered why some of the best players on this site play lower stakes???? I have had the opportunity to rail/play with some of them and I know they are winning players, but it seems like they should be way up there by now. Is it the variance, or a comfort thing??? Every time I see tenbob at a ring game he has a mountain of chips, and chuckts is like a SNG specialist. And its not limited to these two, there are plenty of good players on here. So thats my question I guess. Why are these guys still dabbling?? Personally, I'm not a genius online player by any means and moved up rather quickly, however variance has bitten my ass this past month, but much of that was my fault.

I won't speak for the good players at this site, but I play lower stakes for two reasons:

1) I suck at poker

2) My wife controls the money

Simple really.

Ill get back to this thread tomorow when i have time for a longer post on it. You taking about nl$100 when youve seen me ill assume ? Ill play lower stakes with forum members fyi. Good question.

Maybe it's because most of the players here at CC are not as good as you think nor even as good as they think. That isn't a bad thing because we are all here to learn and we all pretty much root for each other.

As for the reason: I think you could be right as far as variance being a big issue. Many players I read about having big wins usually either come crashing back down soon afterwards or withdraw the money to use for expenses. Either way, they are back down to their original bankroll.

Well with me personally, I've never had the need to have a bankroll bigger than ~$1500 or $2000 (which translates into ~50nl and smaller tourneys). Not to mention I'm not the richest man in the world, and any time I'm on an upswing or have more money than I need in my BR, I take out a good chunk.

Regarding results, I've always had discipline problems and the occasional tilt problem which both hold me back from doing above-average. I may be more knowledgeable than I am good at poker.

I've been trying to get enough of a BR to play higher stakes.
Not quite there yet. (read blog)

The cashing out thing is exactly one of the reasons I didn't move up too much after my good mtt cashes. I can't believe I didn't think about it. Recently, I have been on a mission to improve to a comfortable mid-level like 1/2$ or 2/4$, but its strange how hard it is to do when you want to, I find myself getting burnt out sometimes. Not to mention I'm 20. I don't need that much to live.

I don't know whether I'm in the list of good players or not, but I'll flatter myself anyway

I've been playing and winning at MTTs and SnGs since day 1, which is 3 and a half years and I've played a lot (pretty much every day).

Initially I was lucky and eventually I got to the point where I understood how much I didn't understand. I decided early on that this was a ten year operation minimum before I got where I wanted to be and that there was no hurry.

So I moved slowly from the $11 to $22 to $33 buyins and about 18 months ago started to work in the $55s at both the SnGs and MTTs. There's differences between each level but they are subtle and a solid game will I think carry you through at any of them. If you are a winner (over a proper sample) at $10 then I think your game is probably strong enough to win at $33 and maybe $55 (the $55 is the first level where I've felt a genuine difference in the mix of players).

During this time I've kept <$2k online for the most part (cashing out every so often) and not looked to increase stakes higher, I've played the big Sunday tournies through sats quite a few times and they have played soft. There's no doubt for me that I could be long-term profitable at higher stakes. However the variance is a killer whatever level you play and you can always go on a big downturn playing the best poker of your life. I'm pulling back from a $1k downswing at the moment which happned while playing what I feel was the best I've played.

It's not about the money (cause I do alright income wise) but I want to lick this game properly in the long run and I stand by the ten years as the timescale I need to do that, I use the Sunday tournies (via sats) as a shot at the short cut to riches rather than dabbling in $75 and $100 buyins. Eventually I'll move up, but I don't think it will be for a while unless I have some major revelations about the game.

Poker for me is as much about managing money as it is about odds and cards and I think if you try and rush it then it bites you on the arse. Hard.

Smart and obvious good online approach Irexes. Totally agree with your choice of games and strategy for online.

I'm not a pro or anything....I'm just making an educated guess.....

Could it be good bankroll management?

Yes, variance is a bitch. That's part of the reason why the seemingly very good players don't move up. It's also why some other seemingly very good players move up and go broke. I like the 10 year plan Irexes.

BTW, how was the "variance" your fault?

goldog

Yep. It's hard to move up when you keep spending your br, stoopid bills .

I like playing the lower end games, even sometimes those can get expensive and out of hand against some players

I was transitioning my ring game to include a wider range of hands, and experimented with raising with lots of different hands from different positions. I got a really, really solid LAG game going now though, but this past month I paid for the switch.

Well some intersting replies. As far as myself, ive only cashed out once to pay for a ski trip. I currently have around $7K online, and i dont intend to cash out any time soon. Initially online I played limit poker, and played at the $2/$4 level for a few months before getting sick of it. I moved to playing sit and go's and MTTs and the variance in the sit and go's sickened me, so I decided to start playing the no-limit ring games.

But here was the catch, even though I was rolled enough at the time to instantly start playing nl$100 I decided to start at NL$2 and grind up to the next level as if I was only rolled for the level i was playing at. Ive done that successfully over the last 18 months or so, and in the process have built myself up a nice solid game, and im taking shots at nl$200 one session in every 10 at the moment, and intend to move that up to one in every five in the next few weeks.

As far as jumping onto nl$400 I doubt that ill do that yet. Im strongly of the opnion that once i get to a level that i can make some decent money at ill likely remain there for the as long as it takes. Poker for me is a challenge rather than a money making experience, even though the money is the way to keep score. I still have a lot to learn, and just because you see me donking away at 1c/2c limit tables with some other forum members dosnt mean i play there on any regular basis.

(lol at my spelling in this post)

Although I am bankrolled to play $2/$5 limit or $20 MTT, I enjoy playing $0.25/$0.50 limit and freerolls. Money is not the only reason for playing. Helps to be independently wealthy.

I'm reminded how far I have to go every time I play a cardschat event. Saw the $10 buy-in event with $100 added, and the prize pool looked VERY good. The difference between that and a typical tournament was humongous. I can pretty much expect to take a hit every time I play in a cardschat tourney. I'll probably continue to play every once in a while because I think it's worth the losses to see some real competition.

So I'm probably the wrong person to be talking if you're looking for someone really good, but right now I'm in college and have some money from my real summer job. So I can afford to keep my entire BR online, and I'm hoping to be able to move up with proper BR management over the next few years while getting better as I go up and being able to actually play well at the higher levels. I'm at $0.05/$0.10 at ~$250, hoping to reach $500 and start playing $0.10/$0.25 by thanksgiving. Not sure if I'll be able to do that but I should definitely be able to do this by the end of the year at the rate I'm going.

But I also agree, if I can play $1/2 and make $50/hour (not sure how possible this would be or if it's a low estimate, but it's about $100,000 with a 50-week year, 40-hours a week, which is a comfortable living) I wouldn't move up to $2/4 or $3/6 where I may not be able to make as much money, although I may move up once in a while not expecting to profit but for fun. I'll take a steady profit any day over moving up to a place where most people are as good as me.

As a much older man, allot could be said about this paragraph. I'll bite my tongue here. Good luck with your plan.

Oh that's not my plan at all (unless your statement about my plan is in reference to the stuff you didn't quote, about simply building a BR and getting better), but I'd like to hear whatever you have to say. I'd like to hear advice, that's what I come here for. What is the "allot" that could be said about it? Thanks.

^^^$50/hr at 1/2 is very unrealistic and very unsustainable. I think something like 10 or 20/hr is more realistic, and that would be with multitabling.

If I can get to 400max by February or so, that's when I'll consider logging consistent hours to make a living. For now, I'm just looking to score big. (get rich in one donkament = my dream)

Yeah I'm still looking to win one of these damn $3+Rs or a few 180-seaters...

5k payday would be nice though eh

Thanks, I haven't played anything over $0.25/$0.50, and I never made a steady profit at those limits, which is why I included "not sure how possible this would be"

I was just scaling up, I'm averaging about $5/hour at $0.05/$0.10, figured $1/2 is 20 times the limits, that'd be $100/hour. Knew competition would be tougher, didn't know how much tougher.

$10/hour is 20k a year, figured out at 40-hour week and 50-week year that median American wage-earner makes ~$13/hour.

So you're telling me that even the best $1/2 players can barely get over that? I'm sorry but I have no knowledge on online higher limits

I won't share myself with the good players, but I am a winning player. I'm currently rolled for at least 100NL probably 200NL (if it's 20x buyin), however, I'm playing 25NL. Mostly because I value money way to much and I'm liable to tilt when I would lose two or more buyins at 100NL. If I could comfortably play at 50NL, I would be pretty happy with myself.

If you count multi-tabling, etc. then there are 200max players who make a living off poker. That being said, it's probably not the most enjoyable living.

I can only imagine the grinding you have done my friend. Mathematically speaking how long do you think it took on average to move up in limits. I imagine as you increase in levels the amount of time and variance increase as well??? From my personal experience dabbling here and there, its difficult for a solid player to fail at the .05/.10-.25/.5 tables, and from there I noticed the most significant increase in level of play. At the 1/2 up to the 2/4 which is close to the range I have played, I never noticed much difference in the play. Is this with your experience too? Honestly, I never spent too much time there, maybe a month at 1/2 and less than that at 2/4 but .5/1$ and .25/.50 I have had my fair share of.

i think these players are very diciplined, a trait needed to be a long term winner at poker. when they feel comfortable to move up to high limits they will. i am in awe of such players who keep increasing their winnings without losing a majority of it. congrats to all of you.

I was just making an educated guess. If you google '200nl' winrate, you'll probably get some more accurate results. There is a standard maximum long-term winrate for each limit; you should be able to find them for each limit on the bigger poker forums.

But ya, as you move up in limits, in general your winrate should go down due to the toughness, but your $/hr could go up. For ex you could be making only 1BB/100hands at 1000nl, but that would crush a 50BB/100 hands at 200nl. Winrates definitely don't increase linearly.

ok, just did a search and found a guy who was posting a very nice brag on another forum; he'd made a very consistent killing at 200nl but was 'only' sustaining 4.5BB/100hands over 286k hands. All while averaging 9.5 tables.