BelgoSuisse
Legend
Silver Level
lol...
1. sharkscope Boku87 on pokerstars. He mass multitables turbo SnGs.
2. reread what you just wrote.
lol...
1. sharkscope Boku87 on pokerstars. He mass multitables turbo SnGs.
2. reread what you just wrote.
T
TracesOfAces
Rising Star
Bronze Level
"lol...
1. sharkscope Boku87 on pokerstars. He mass multitables turbo SnGs.
2. reread what you just wrote."
---
Well great for him: he does well at turbos! Does that change my point one bit? No! I change nothing in my response. Surely you're smart enough to know that if enough people play them then by the law of averages someone has to win more of them than another given person! Besides, we're not talking about whether turbos are good for "Boku87" or other *particular* individuals!! We're talking about advice for beginners.
Furthermore, advising beginners to play turbos first is akin to teaching babies to run before they can walk.
And also, why is it that many professional poker writing experts, also advise beginners to stay far away from turbos?
Here is but one verbatim example from 'Texas Holdem Poker Win Online' by Paul Mendelson (a Poker & Bridge expert):
"Some sites offer 'Turbo' events, where the blinds rise every minute, or three minutes, or five minutes. These are, in effect,speeded up events and, as a result, they are far more of a gamble than a regular Sit & Go. If you must play them - presumably because you are impatient or in need of a brief thrill - then aggression, from the start is essential. Ultimately these quickie events come down to a crap-shoot. There's a lot of luck in poker but this format relies on it too much..."
- @ p. 62
I fully agree with him, and absolutely disagree with the OP's advice & yours, that beginners should try to master Turbos before they can play regular poker. Spend your time learning the skill of normal poker and try mastering that first, is wise advice to beginners.
1. sharkscope Boku87 on pokerstars. He mass multitables turbo SnGs.
2. reread what you just wrote."
---
Well great for him: he does well at turbos! Does that change my point one bit? No! I change nothing in my response. Surely you're smart enough to know that if enough people play them then by the law of averages someone has to win more of them than another given person! Besides, we're not talking about whether turbos are good for "Boku87" or other *particular* individuals!! We're talking about advice for beginners.
Furthermore, advising beginners to play turbos first is akin to teaching babies to run before they can walk.
And also, why is it that many professional poker writing experts, also advise beginners to stay far away from turbos?
Here is but one verbatim example from 'Texas Holdem Poker Win Online' by Paul Mendelson (a Poker & Bridge expert):
"Some sites offer 'Turbo' events, where the blinds rise every minute, or three minutes, or five minutes. These are, in effect,speeded up events and, as a result, they are far more of a gamble than a regular Sit & Go. If you must play them - presumably because you are impatient or in need of a brief thrill - then aggression, from the start is essential. Ultimately these quickie events come down to a crap-shoot. There's a lot of luck in poker but this format relies on it too much..."
- @ p. 62
I fully agree with him, and absolutely disagree with the OP's advice & yours, that beginners should try to master Turbos before they can play regular poker. Spend your time learning the skill of normal poker and try mastering that first, is wise advice to beginners.
Last edited:
H
Heatherbrianne1
Enthusiast
Silver Level
BelgoSuisse
Legend
Silver Level
I'm sorry but that's just not true. Turbo sng's is the simplest form of poker to learn and if you learn to pushbot correctly, you should crush the micro limits. There will be some variance, but not really more than in other forms of poker.
sngs is a very good way to start playing poker because it's much simpler than cash games.
W
WurlyQ
Visionary
Silver Level
If you're going to throw statistics into this, you should also consider the likelihood that he achieved the results that he did. I can assure you that his results are beyond improbable if in fact he is really a breakeven player.
So if people need to walk before they run, what's the skill that needs to be learned to play a game that's not a turbo SnG before you play turbo SnGs? While I do not believe ICM push/fold is a very useful skill to have long term, it is the easiest to learn and very nearly the sole skill required to beat turbo SnGs.
If taking a bunch of marginal +EV decisions all the time is a crap-shoot then maybe it is. In this case, you can also call the highest level of cash games, even bigger crapshoots because I bet they push like 51/49 edges all the time (slight exaggeration). They both push edges that aren't quite as big as some other games but pushing edges is what poker is all about (granted the skills required to push these edges is totally different between these games). If you know what you are doing in turbo SnGs (or even super turbos), the skill edge you have on the competition at the micro stakes is BIG.
I'm starting to understand why you make some of the statements that you do after reading some of these crapshoot/lottery/luckfest comments. You give more generalized and easily interpreted statements that help guide people towards reality whereas I just point out facts that are confusing and let people misinterpret them. I think I turn into an egocentric condescending critic when respond to some of these posts because I get frustrated by people not reading the previous answers and the lack of thought and reason that goes into them... (to no one in particular and just sometimes) I really need to stop posting on here
On a side note, I'm beginning to believe that if you want to improve long term, you should begin in cash games as long as you can take the bankroll hit because ICM push/fold is not applicable in ring, and because ICM push/fold is so much easier to master than all the intricacies of ring, you will not have much of an edge as you move up to the higher limits. I've read how many high stakes ring players regret starting out in SnGs as they say it slowed down their progress as poker players and it definitely makes sense.
That being said, turbo SnGs are a great way to start off a bankroll and/or if your goal in poker is to just make like 10 grand or so in a reasonable amount of time.
c9h13no3
Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Yeah, ideally you'd study a lot, play very little, and learn cash games first. But in my experience, new players play a ton, study less, and have huge leaks in cash games.
I figured it'd be much safer for a player to read "If you have 10 big blinds or less, your decision should be push all in preflop, or fold", than to have to absorb all the intricacies that come with playing cash games. Sure SnG's are more complicated than that, but if you remember that simple rule, you can pretty much crush micro SnG's. Its not that easy with cash. Hand values change with stack sizes, pot size management & implied odds come into play, and there's just more potential for someone to spew like a fire hose.
W
WurlyQ
Visionary
Silver Level
I'm not criticizing your method in any way as it applies to the vast majority of people out there (and I'll add that I have respect for your viewpoints). I'm just offering a different perspective for people who are starting out but have serious long term plans about the game. It took me 6 months to realize I wasn't playing the right game (most profitable in my mind). Sure, it got my bankroll going as I started with nothing but I really wish I had made the transition to NL cash earlier. The first two months allowed me to learn the basics of poker and bankrolled me for 25NL which is when I should have made the transition.
However, I couldn't resist immediate profits and spent the next 4 months wandering between games (a month of FL, a month of DoNs, a month of super turbos, a month of 18mans) and making small profits in games that are easier to learn (maybe not so much FL as I did gain some valuable skills there that I'm certainly applying to NL but I moved away from that game because its dying and even the low/midstakes are full of difficult to exploit regs).
I've spent the last month doing a lot of studying of NL ring (I'll admit that I still play SnGs cause I suck at life and can't completely get away from immediate profits) and feel that I've been opened up to a whole new world. I feel that I am learning things that will give me a greater edge. I believe poker is about developing edges against other people and the greater your poker skills, the larger your edge and the higher you will be able to play resulting in greater profits (and as an added benefit, the higher your edge, the lower your variance).
I'm fully bankrolled for 100NL now but I'm only playing 10NL because I don't feel I have the skills nor confidence necessary to play the higher limits. I just wish I had made this transition 5 months ago when my bankroll was smaller but could still safely play cash with reasonable bankroll management. I won't claim that I would be beating 100 NL now but I am almost certain that I would have superior poker skills than I do now. I probably lost you 15 paragraphs ago but I couldn't think of a better way than to tell my life story to back up the purpose of my previous response.
Last edited:
OzExorcist
Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
Erm... no. You're contradicting yourself here.
If turbos truly were just "luckfests" then in the long run everybody would be losing to the rake, just like they lose to the house edge at roulette or slot machines.
This obviously isn't the case, because we know there are players who do very well playing turbos over large samples. Belgo has highlighted just one example. These players and their results simply couldn't exist if turbos were just skill-free "luckfests".
Maybe you don't like the brand of poker you need to play to profit at turbos. Maybe you don't like the increase in variance that they bring. That's fine. But you're patently incorrect in claiming that they're just crapshoots, because the evidence dictates otherwise.
Arjonius
Legend
Silver Level
I always suggest people stop playing the big open freerolls with small prize pools as soon as they feel they're no longer absolute newbies. Even if you crush them, you'll only make pennies per hour, and it's not very hard to make more from buyins, although you do have to get used to the fact you can lose money, not just break even or win. MTTs are the hardest in this regard. Depending on the sizes of the ones you enter, it's not unusual to have streaks of 10 and more where you don't cash. But a couple of decent results will pay for a lot of non-cashes.
If you'd prefer less variance, SNGs and ring games are probably better choices. The latter will require more adjustments from MTTs, which you presumably started off playing.
If you'd prefer less variance, SNGs and ring games are probably better choices. The latter will require more adjustments from MTTs, which you presumably started off playing.
BuggyX
Rock Star
Silver Level
K
KDS63
Rock Star
Silver Level
Good set of rules. Only thing I'd contest is the turbo vs. non-turbo (and I know you made clear it was not a hard-and-fast rule). The play in a turbo can sometimes be similar to that in a freeroll because some folks feel unduly pressured by the speed at which the blinds escalate. So the caveat there is to not let your experience in a turbo game be your only guide to how you play in regular games.
dmorris68
Legend
Loyaler
I'm with Oz and Belgo on the turbo's being profitable if you play them right. I tend to favor them for the faster play, but that doesn't mean I'm donking them -- in fact as far as SnG's go they're my most profitable. Remember that good players will profit over donks in the long term, so you want a healthy supply of donks, assuming the stakes are worth the effort -- and Turbo's are an excellent way to reach the "long term" (i.e. not time but number of hands played) faster.
I'm particularly fond of Turbo KO SnG's, and tend to do pretty well in them.
Trying to say they're the same as freerolls or penny stakes in terms of being strictly luckfests is just patently wrong.
I'm particularly fond of Turbo KO SnG's, and tend to do pretty well in them.
Trying to say they're the same as freerolls or penny stakes in terms of being strictly luckfests is just patently wrong.
Panamajoe
Legend
Silver Level
I just signed up too. I wonder if there is a forum where people using the check your bets website discuss its use.
C9 I really appreciated your succint bankroll management tips, thank you.
Goodwooter
Rock Star
Silver Level
solid post...though i disagree entirely with rule 4...especially for beginners...the blinds move up at such a rate that it eventually forces beginners into a coin flip if they are not catching cards...beginners have trouble stealing pots they are behind in...beginners also dont have an understanding of how many bbs they have left so as the blinds eat away at their stacks, they tend to feel pressured into making poor decisions...all in all a great post, just wanted to make this point
cheer and gl
wooter
cheer and gl
wooter
R
rhulp1
Visionary
Silver Level
I liked the article,
I play mostly mtt's freerolls since 2009 and my net gain is a little over $1000 on different sites. I would like to play cash games and i have but lost a few 100 dollars so i stopped and i ordered some cash game books (vol 1,2 form harrington) to learn more and then play again at low levels.
Personally i dont like sng/mtt turbo's because i have the feeling you are "forced" to much to go allinn with lets say Ax or Kx and when someone calls its most of the time a coinflip.
Next to cash games ill keep cont. MTT freerolls and low buyin MTT (1-3 dollar tourn.) to continue bankroll growth.
I play mostly mtt's freerolls since 2009 and my net gain is a little over $1000 on different sites. I would like to play cash games and i have but lost a few 100 dollars so i stopped and i ordered some cash game books (vol 1,2 form harrington) to learn more and then play again at low levels.
Personally i dont like sng/mtt turbo's because i have the feeling you are "forced" to much to go allinn with lets say Ax or Kx and when someone calls its most of the time a coinflip.
Next to cash games ill keep cont. MTT freerolls and low buyin MTT (1-3 dollar tourn.) to continue bankroll growth.
c9h13no3
Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Coinflipping isn't bad. The experts just take coinflips when their pot odds & fold equity is good. Beginners take coinflips when their pot odds & equity are bad. Most regular speed sit & go's are determined by "coinflipping" high blind play as well. Its just that regular speed sit & go's require beginners to play postflop (which they suck at).
Postflop play is complicated. There are a zillion more combinations of situations to consider. Preflop play is easy, and your starting hand value is almost always the same.
Its easy for beginners to count the number of big blinds in their stack, look at their hand, and figure out if its good enough to shove all in. Its complicated for them to decide if a c-bet is profitable on a 235 two tone flop against a loose-passive.
The people who are saying regular speed sit & go's are easier are saying that because they probably don't have any clue how to profitably play Sit & Go's. Lets just say I sharkscoped some of you nay-sayers, and the results aren't exactly encouraging.
doops
Visionary
Silver Level
Ahhh, this sounds familiar to me. I think I am doing the same as you, but I am, perhaps, more stuck. I'm not sure I want to play at higher levels, not sure I can be comfortable with the swings esp. in NL. I'm not sure I want to come unstuck.
However, these are not beginner's problems, are they? Beginners just need to learn the basics, how to not spew their tiny bankroll, how to play-- first tight, then adding position and player-plays, the loosening up to take advantage of other's leaks. Learning to use aggression cleverly. It's not a short road, learning poker. And, as one learns, it is a rocky trip. This is a good thread and has much that a smart beginner can use to begin to get a handle on playing the game.
But you, WurlyQ, bring up an interesting point which is, in part, about a player's risk-taking tendencies. It's not too hard, emotionally, for most of us, to blow off a $100 bankroll, or deal with variances playing at the BRM-appropriate levels. It becomes trickier when the bankroll can represent something real and substantial to you -- say, a new CD player, a new car, a house. The money, at higher levels, is, for many, uncomfortable to play with, as we really do not want to risk that much. I've been wondering how Chris Ferguson, in his $0 to $10K challenge, got from the $1000 range to $10K. And I think this may be it, the reason I am having problems moving up, becoming a higher stakes player. Risking the appropriate amount to get ahead is not a problem for him, partly because the amounts are insignificant to him and partly because he is a better player. I am resistant to it. I don't feel comfortable playing at higher levels, even though I have the bankroll for it. Losing 2-10% of my bankroll at lower levels in a couple of days, then winning it back in another few, then up again, down again, is excruciating but comfortable enough when the real money involved is not a painful amount. Once one moves to higher levels, the real amount is-- too real. I don't know, though, if moving up earlier is the answer.
I'm reading The Poker Mindset by Ian Taylor and Matt Hilger, which discussing the necessity of becoming both risk-neutral and desensitizing oneself to money as part of becoming an excellent player. (There are other key points in the book, and it comes at poker playing from the mental angle. It's not about how to play KK, it's about how to control you, so you don't get in the way of becoming a winning player. I am wondering if I can get much further... )
Playing poker seems simple at the beginning, doesn't it?