questions about long term profitability

so I just learned how to play poker in june of this year. However, I have read every book I could find, watched cardrunners videos, and read every article i could on it (because im obsessed with this game haha) but anyway I blew my whole bankroll of $100 on cake poker--i was still learning at the time so im not worried about it. And now im playing on betonline and i recently almost lost my entire BR playing MTTs and sngs. So my question is if in your opinions it is more profitable to play cash instead? I have heard many different opinions and just wanted some feedback, I recently switched to cash and in one week I tripled the balance in my account so I might stick with it for a while, although I miss the excitement of late stages of tournaments.

Hey! Welcome to cardschat. I started playing at exactly the same time as you and almost lost my entire $100 bankroll too. I've been playing mostly cash but have dabbled in STTs and MTTs. On the whole I've found STTs slightly easier than MTTs but with both there is A LOT of variance. In my limited experience, how well you do can depend a lot on the cards you are dealt.

With cash - although it is more difficult with more post-flop skills needed - you always have the option of folding most hands as the blinds are not increasing. But as you say, that can be the most exciting part of a tournamemt.

So to answer your question, I believe that in the short term cash is more profitable. If you play well, especially post flop, you can have a good winrate. With tournaments it takes a lot of patience and a lot more luck. But if you can stick it out and you get lucky you could make a big cash one of these days that would be much more than anything you'd make on the cash tables.

Wishing you lots of rungood!

New players would probably be best to stick to cash. The most profitable game is the one you're best at.

Just practice and work on your game. Good luck.

Not sure I agree.

They're both different, and it's better to learn just one. Tourneys are easier to learn that cash though, but cash is the nuts

I primarily play cash, using player points for tournaments every once in a while. The payouts for tournaments are nice, but overall I prefer the semi-consistant wins that come with cash games.
I think the best strategy for a new player is to play single table tournaments until you are good at playing tight, and reading hands. (at low buy ins they are actually fairly easy to beat for tight players) After that, I would play cash and buy in for like 1/2 a stack so the play is similar to mid stage tournament play without the pressure to steal every orbit. As you get better at getting value for your good hands and folding early with your bad hands you will find your stack growing and have the opportunity to learn to play full and deep stacks without the huge disadvantage of playing deep vs the more experienced players righht away.

It has to be cash for me too and cahs is the only game I recommend. The variance is just too unreal at tournament poker (not that I would know because I have never given it the chance). Also you can sit there for longer periods at lower levels playing nothing but disciplined poker and make money.
I am not a great poker player but I make consistent money at NL50. If you play full ring and play in the evenings when the games are softer then you should do OK. The Harrington books are good primers but deuces cracked videos is what I really recommend. There are many recreational players at NL10 through NL50 although NL100 is a big step from NL50.



Poker columnist at www.poker.co.uk

yes for mtts your ment to have atleast 40 buy ins for your buy in limit but i always keep 100 buy ins its worked out good for me

Technically....mtts are more profitable.....the variance however makes harder to sustain a bankroll until your next win...cash is more steady but it is a grind I say play cash tables and any profit on the day sign up for a tournament with some of the profits if u win then ur roll gets a big jump of u bust your still up on the day

The important question isn't which is more profitable, but rather which is likely to be more profitable *for you*. Not everyone is equally suited to both temperamentally, preferred or natural style-wise, etc. And not everyone can adapt equally well.

In addition, even if you determine that one is more profitable for you, there's also the matter of the differential and whether it's large enough to make concentrating on your more profitable game "worth it" if it's the one you enjoy less.