Difference in skill between points and real money

Hey everyone,

I started my account with Lock Poker, a real money poker site. However, I won't play until I know I am ready. So I've been playing pokerstars with player points and reading Klansky every day preparing myself. My routine is to pretty much win a sit-n-go on Pokerstars with player points every day and so far, today and yesterday I won a 6 man sit-n-go and today I won a 10 man sit-n-go on my first try. Of course with a large sit-n-go, you'll have your 2 idiots going all in on the first hand but once it narrows down to 6 or less players I really have to watch every player's movement.

TLDR: I was wondering: is there a much greater skill increase once you start playing with real money?

Yes. The difference is huge.

All of the sudden you have Fold equity!

If you'd said you win the freerolls at least once a day, then that would be impressive, many people don't even bother with playing points because they feel it isn't real.

WVHillbilly said:

Yes. The difference is huge.

Click to expand...

Understated, but true.

So I bit the bullet and entered my first $1.50+.10, 9-man Turbo NLH sit-n-go. The only difference in terms of rules was the blinds increased every 5 minutes as opposed to 10, which was what I was used to. And you know what, I'll say you're definitely right about real money competition compared to play points. There were probably maybe 3 occurrences of someone limping in without getting raised. Everyone is a threat, even the guy with 385 chips left. Long story short, I did win the $6.75 grand prize, which, after having payed $1.60 for the entry, can get me maybe one slice of good New York pizza and a drink . But honestly, when it came down to the last 4 of us, I won this sit-n-go using the same strategy developed in the free games. Just straightforward picking my battles and going for it only when I was at least 90% sure they had only one high card against my premium. Didn't get amazingly lucky and bluffed like twice (and successfully). I still think the free games are good practice when it's down to the last few players but early on is very much unrealistic.

I don't think there is a huge diffrence from play chip sng's compared to $1 sngs. I think its a easy transition. But, cash is a little harder when starting out. I think Merge would be a better place to start if playing sng's. alot fishier imo.

Nice start, congrats & continued good luck to you.

There's definitely a difference between play chips and cash, but I think the magnitude differs for different people. As a simple example, the transition will be harder for someone who plays bingo than for someone who has tried to start building his game even at play chips.

XNOt yes i believe the skills or better, probally same players however players tighten up (play better cards) with real money. I've also learned the higher the stakes players play straight up they are not going all in with 9-7 off suit less donking going on. good luck

Some players don't feel the need to take these play money games seriously. The step up is going to be massive you may be in for a shock

as i always see the step is a big one, i play most times free sitngoes to improve my play and also my bankrollmanagment, doubled up my bankroll within a week playing only 0,5% as buy inn. for sitngoes with money you need to stay clear and wait for the right hands even the blinds are rising quiet fast

I think some funstep3 on merge actually are tougher than a 1 sngs on merge. People seemed to get bound and determined to win that dollar when push comes to shove.
Otherwise, I've always found money more difficult than points and points more difficult than play money.

Id say it depends on what you're playing. In a freeroll or playmoney people play different cause they don't care. Watch how many people go all in on the first hand of many freerolls or mtts with garbage. A singles is to me a different venue. The more you play the more you'll see the difference in skill and style. Also the difference in buy-in will dictate the level of play.