Choosing Your Specialty: Cash Games or Tournaments?

Hey CC members, this is a question I get asked a lot by new DragTheBar members, "Should I play cash games or tournaments?" Its a good question, but ultimately isn't one that anyone can answer for you. You've got to figure that one out for yourself, but here are some factors I would recommend using as a basis for the decision. Personally, I started playing LHE back in 2004, then switched to NL, then after going pro, I played MTTs almost exclusively for 7 or 8 months, before coming back to NL cash exclusively in 2007. So I can give you a guys a little insight into the pros and cons of cash games versus tournaments, and hopefully help you decide whats right for you.

The first thing to think about, and this is by far the most important, is that whatever game you decide to specialize in, it HAS to be the game you enjoy the most. This is non-negotiable if you want to excel at poker and start making some real money from it. I know that advice may sound overly simplistic, but think about why this is so important. When poker is as fun and interesting, you are much more likely to put the extra work in away from the table, think deeply about the game, and stay focused while playing. These are the things that really separate the players with huge potential from the ones that will struggle to move up the limits. If you aren't having a great time, then you are less likely to go the extra mile away from the tables, and bring your a-game at the tables.

Your personality and tastes will be big factors in what game you enjoy most. The professional poker lifestyle and freedom were very appealing to me, but early in my career after a couple big tournament scores, I started playing MTTs exclusively, 14 hours a day. Its very hard to play MTT sessions that are shorter than 7 hours because you generally need to play a bunch at once, and usually you end up going deep in at least one of them. After several months of that, that schedule started to feel like having a real job again. Now having said that, winning an MTT is quite possibly the most fun and rewarding experience in poker, and for the MTT players, those wins are well worth the tough schedule. MTTs are also full of casual players, so there's a lot of money to be made in them. But they weren't the right fit for me. I needed the flexible environment of cash games to really thrive in poker while keeping an enjoyable lifestyle, and in the first 6 months of playing cash games after I switched, I'd made a lot more money than I had in the prior 6 months playing MTTs.

If you are new to poker or aren't having a great time playing your current game, then I'd suggest trying out some new ones. Start with dropping down in stakes so you can get a feel for people's ranges and opponent types, and not pay a high price while you get some hands under your belt. You should also read the forums where winning players are discussing the game and watch videos on it to see if the thought process and strategies for that game appeal to you and seem interesting and challenging. As an example, my favorite game is heads-up No-Limit cash, because I love the psychological battle and how its an in-your-face personal fight at the table. It also allows for a ton of creativity because the ranges are so wide. Other guys really like Sit & Gos because they offer the flexibility of cash games but still involve the strategy and thought process of tournament poker.

So I'd encourage everyone to try out the different forms of poker to figure out your favorite game and how it fits into your lifestyle. Then dive in and start studying.

Thanks for the thread Hunter - we do get that question a lot in the forum. Hopefully some of the new members who are trying to decide will read this.

Lots of good points here that seem obvious after reading, but i never really thought about before haha

thank you!

I dunno; I enjoy tournaments and I suspect that I play them better than cash games, but I simply can't commit the time required to play tournaments very often. Even my standard cash game session is only an hour, and these days I'm leaning a lot toward Rush Poker, just because there's even less startup time and no lost information, much less orbits in a tournament, for stopping to answer the telephone or door. I guess that does go with what you talk about later, though.

So for me time flexibility becomes the overriding factor. My enjoyment of cash games is probably only slightly less than tournaments so to overcome the difference isn't difficult, but in 4 years of poker, probably 90% has been cash games, but it's not my favorite by a 9-1 ratio; tournaments would probably be my preferred game by at 6-4 ratio or something.

I consider myself a tourney guy. If I can ever crack the ring game I could easily change. Tourney's do eat up time, but so does ring. So often when I think I'm in control of my ring game I still have to sit for an hour before things turn decidedly in one way or the other. It is not a 'sit down and play a couple of orbits to see which way the wind is blowing' thing for me.

Only on rare occasions is the direction shown quickly. Usually in the wrong direction, but I have had my days. So to me a ring game commitment is about equivalent to a STT or a small MTT (no more than 45 seats).

Rush does solve some of those time constraints, but 135 seat Rush tourneys still will take about 90 minutes to win.

The jury is still out (for me) about how time relates to the ring Rush games.

In a perfect world, I would be the HORSE guy. I prefer the mix up of games, but definitely understand I am paying a penalty by not studying one particular variant.

I would say that I am not a fan of cash games. I prefer the tournaments and small sng's. I have played them all and just do not feel comfortable in the cash games.

If I had my druthers, it would be exclusively sng's and an occasional tournament.

I find the quality of the players is better in sng's.

If you did want to specialize in horse, I'm not sure how much of a penalty you'd be paying, assuming you were willing to play any of the horse variants when you found a good game. Yes, a lot of online poker's biggest winners are 1 game specialists, but they also are not able to game select outside of their 1 game. If you are good at all the horse games, then you've got 5 games you can scout out, and O8 and the stud games are not played anywhere close to the level that LHE and NLH are. That level of flexibility gives you a lot more options and has inherent value that specialist players don't have.

I have had 4 or 5 winning sessions in a row at the Horse ring games, (or 7game or 8 game). Since I learned kitchen poker, and dealers choice long long ago, I always feel comfortable in a stud game, and feeling more comfortable in O8. I have learned to avoid what I need to avoid, and smother what I can smother.

I can jump into any tourney from Holdem to S8 and not feel like I'm drowning. But I will generally shy away from PLO or PLO8, they both scare the living daylight out of me.

Perhaps it is that HORSE is a limit game. I know it is highly unlikely that I start a game with a big hand and blow my wad in seconds. Before new players decide on which variant they will study and attack, they should really understand the Limit vs No Limit distinction.

Obviously Hunter must be busto, and he's gunning for the thread contributor of the month award.

Haha, well I can assure you that one of those 2 things is true