This is a discussion on No Matter What: The Unique Pleasure of the Cash Game Player within the online poker forums, in the General Poker section; Chris Webby - The Stickup (feat. Skrizzly Adams) - YouTube
For the tournament reg there's always an issue of 'depending how fast blinds increase, this dumb
No Matter What: The Unique Pleasure of the Cash Game Player
Chris Webby - The Stickup (feat. Skrizzly Adams)...
For the tournament reg there's always an issue of 'depending how fast blinds increase, this dumb risk becomes one I may just have to take'.
With cash games, assuming you are playing with a genuine RNG if online or a true pro dealer who knows how to shuffle and isn't dodgy dealing, you are playing a FAIR GAME where BAD BEATS are negated in long run by the majority scenarios causing you to prosper.
The only time that anything can come away from a 'no matter what' basis in cash games is when both you and another are pushing quite a bit past the maximum buy-in for the table meaning you are dealing with a situation where you can't just 'bounce back' from this loss. Sometimes if the other big stack isn't playing nice/fair and realizes you cower to the allins or near-allin shoves, that is the only non no-matter-what time in a cash game where you may want to ignore card probability and start considering raw stack sizes in terms of leaving the table.
In all other scenarios, cash games involve analysis of pot odds, hand odds, playstyles and self-image (apparent playstyle of the self to others) which have the convenience of being 'no matter what this is optimal' type reasoning. The no matter what comes down to the fact that, if you have good bankroll management you can afford at least 20 hits to your max buyin when you're at a table meaning you can come right back in to make back what you lost, especially if the table is quite loose (which is why you had to become willing to bet more).
In tournaments, you don't know if that's going to be the best hand you'll get for the rest of the game or even if it isn't the best, if it's the necessary all-in/bluff to make right then and there so as not to choke with the increasing blinds. This makes unfair extreme of variance that you CANNOT DENY IS TRUE. Even if you say tournament players are as smart or smarter than cash game players, it simply has no real BASIS for judging or making optimal plays it is UNAVOIDABLE LUCK.
If two Phil Iveys sit at a cash game table, they will play around each other barely ever engaging outside of nuts on near-nuts type conflict. In other words they would prey on others and BOTH end up top of the food chain after many hands evening out the variance.
If two Dan Negreanus play a tournament, one can get second other can get 14th like that's almost too close to even hope for to be honest even out of 200. It would be more likely one gets 6th other gets 30th which I believe means he will barely cash. Why such difference in outcome? You think if they played 3 it will 'even out'? No, there's just too many coinflips, it won't even out. For same amount of time they play tournament, if you play cash game it will definitely even out a lot more and by even out I mean go UP for good player not just "break even".
This comes down to that there are many situations in tournament poker where the optimal play depends on so many unknown things like how scared you think other players feel in that very moment (but you know the only way to really abuse that fear is to bet a lot as if you bet less they may not really fear your bet). In cash games you don't need to abuse scaredy-cat players unless they are the only ones in the hand with you, instead you just work around them as they will let you cheaply see flops if and when they dont have some AQ-type hand.
In tournament poker you not only have to engage nits/scaredycat players which will of course be patiently waiting for you to bluff into them, or overbet at least, into their masked three of a kind and boom you are knocked out because of this underbetting sneaky nit who would not be able to trap you in the same way in a cash game as you can always fold to their trap-reraise without any fear of being left with 'too little' blackmailing you into taking the leap of faith.
You can say what you want, this is the simple damn truth and you know it.
21st September 2017, 6:33 AM
Liked the read! Definitely agree to your statements here. You explained the risk of tournie play quite well, but forgot the reward of it! As stated, tournies are just too gambly at times and a profitable play can lead to a bust of no return. Ex: flush draw on the turn calling your shove with a set then sucking out on the river, making tournies more riskier than cash games. So why bother playing tournies? Huge pay days! Its a high risk high reward world compared to the ever so consistent cash games, no negativity intended.