How I Will Master Poker

I

ifoldquads

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Total posts
9
Chips
0
Hey everyone, just a quick note before my wall of text: if anyone has any suggestions for
improvements in what I'm planning, or if I've missed anything I should consider,
please let me know. I'm more than willing to learn from anyone, and I will consider
everyone's advice carefully.

Also, don't hold back on suggestions and criticisms when I post hand analysis, or whatever.
I can take the heat, and I'm willing and able to work through the most difficult material, so
lay it on.


WHY I'M PLAYING POKER

So, I'm getting pretty serious about studying poker in depth. I view it as a strategy
game, and a very practical one at that. I made a quick list of why poker may be the best
strategy game for most people (and at the very least, for myself):

1) unlike chess, it's possible to find games appropriate for your level of ability
without having to drive to the nearest city and pay membership dues to a chess club, or
play against a handicapped computer opponent

2) you can become proficient and even masterful at the game by concerted self-study,
unlike chess which requires paying for training to get really good at the game

3) when you win a game of chess, you earn bragging rights. when you win a game of poker,
you win cash (you only win money in chess if your name is Kasparov, Carlsen, or Anand,
etc.)

4) chess takes way too much time and effort for what you get out of it

5) unlike real-time strategy games (eg Starcraft II) doesn't require physical training
separate from mental training (I play a musical instrument and compose, both which take
substantial time. I'm not going to practice quickly pressing hot-keys and learning
precision mouse movement, only to then work on the mental part of the game when there are
other things I value more which require time and physical effort)

In short, poker represents a serious intellectual challenge and provides greater value
for the time and effort spent learning compared to other strategy games. So I've decided
that I'm going to spend most of my gaming time on poker, and I am therefore making up a
study plan for myself to follow.


WHICH GAMES I'M GOING TO PLAY

While I eventually intend to learn most forms of poker, for now, I'm going to only allow
myself to play Limit Holdem and Limit Omaha Hi/Lo. There are several reasons for this:

1) no-limit and pot-limit games are by nature, as I understand it so far, going to have a
much greater degree of variance, and they obviously have variable bet-sizes, making it
difficult to determine whether or not one is playing mathematically correct.

2) Winning $1000 at limit holdem may take many hands and many correct decisions, whereas
$1000 may be won in one hand of no-limit on a lucky draw that one was incorrect to
pursue. I would rather train on a game that requires me to repeatedly make correct
decisions so that progress over time is somewhat more measurable.

3) limit games play out more mechanically and more straight-forward, whereas no-
limit/pot-limit games rely a little bit more on correct reads and setting traps for
opponents. I want to train good habits and gain experience sitting at the table just
playing fundamentally sound poker before trying to place an extra burden on myself to
constantly be making difficult decisions and tricky plays to keep from going bust or
busting someone else on a single hand. (ie, eliminate extra difficulties and extra
variables)

4) losing a big pot in a no-limit/pot-limit game is to me more emotionally draining
compared to limit games. Both get on my nerves, but I would prefer to gradually put
myself into more stressful situations at the table as I learn to deal with the emotions
of the game and remain disciplined. My training as a performer should help in this
regard significantly.


WHERE I'M GOING TO PLAY

Here's the unfortunate bit. I live in Massachusetts, so I currently do not have any real
money online games available to me. The nearest brick and mortar game is Foxwoods, but
that's about 3.5 - 4 hrs away, and is currently a bit impractical for me to do. So
unfortunately, my initial training is going to be limited to play money tables, which
will be at Pokerstars (in the last month or so grinding low-limit games, I've increased
my initial bankroll to 60k).

This won't be the case forever. Massachusetts has approved of building I believe three
casinos, but where and when TBD. And there is a state legislator who is working to get
real money online poker approved as well, with Everest Poker poised to be the first
available (hopefully sometime in 2013, keep fingers crossed). So as I see it, I have
about a year to seriously study and be ready for when the game is made available to me to
play for real.


WHAT AND HOW I'M GOING TO STUDY

Books:

I've read some beginners stuff, such as Phil Hellmuth's book (all of his books are the
same book, from what I've been told, so I guess the title doesn't matter). Nothing too
in-depth, but a decent starting point. I also have a copy of Super System 2, which I
have read once or twice.

I have four books coming in the mail soon. They are:

--The Mathematics of Poker, by Chen and Ankenman (looks like a good, in-depth book about
thinking about non-game specific poker issues)
--The Theory of Poker, by Sklansky (shouldn't need my explanation, lol)
--Pot-limit Omaha Poker: The Big Play Strategy, by Hwang (thought it important to
understand Omaha strategy in general, also contains a section on hi/lo)
--No-limit Holdem: Theory and Practice, by Sklansky (will read it through, although I'll
study it more in-depth later, as my priority is on limit games for now)

I will read each of them once through, to get a general sense of them, and then I'll
formulate a concrete study plan for each book. (The no-limit book won't be an initial
priority, as noted, so that will come much later).

I'm considering getting Sklansky's books on limit holdem, so if anyone has any comments
on them or other recommendations for limit holdem, please let me know, I'd appreciate it.
Also, if anyone has any recommendations for omaha hi/lo, that would be great; there were one
or two on Amazon, but I've never really heard anyone mention any of those books anywhere,
so I'm still on the fence about spending anything until I can find some opinions.



Hand Study:

This part is going to be a bit tricky: since I can't play real money on Pokerstars, there
isn't any available hand history for me to request. I'm thinking what I'll do is video-
capture some of my sessions, then choose any hands that stand out to study (with some
preference to show-downs since I can also analyze my opponent's play). I'm going to be
extremely detailed in my hand analysis. I will explain my own thinking process and
actions for each action at the table, as well as those of my opponents. Each action will
be mathematically and psychologically scrutinized. I am literally going to write essays
on my hands.

Of course, I will post my hands and my analysis for review on the forum.



Practice:

I'm initially going to play full ring games only (9 chairs at Pokerstars). No
tournaments, no 6max, and no heads-up. Additionally, my hand selection is going to be
limited. A few reasons for this:

1) to learn patience and discipline

2) to minimize variables, and to learn to play a consistent strategy.

Consider this. If the limits are 10/20 (ie, blinds are 5/10), then the cost of 100 hands
dealt (not including bets placed) are as follows for each type of game:

full ring: BB 11x, SB 11x ---> $110 + $55 = $165 (approx)
6max: BB 16x, SB 16X ---> $160 + $80 = $240 (approx)
heads-up: BB 50x, SB 50X ---> $500 + $250 = $750 (approx)

A full ring game is the least expensive game per 100 dealt hands, so a tighter style of
play is more correct for such a game, relative to the other game types, and this fits
well with trying to learn patience in hand selection (clearly, heads-up does not advocate
careful hand selection). It also will help to reduce bankroll fluctuations so that I can
more accurately gauge my progress.

Eventually, I will branch out to 6max and heads-up, but I want to make sure my decision
making is strong before doing that, so it isn't going to be until a large numbers of
hands are played and studied before I start playing games which require a looser style of
play.

The limit level I'm currently playing is 10/20 (for both holdem and omaha hi/lo), and I'm
going to play at that level for a while before trying anything else (larger bank roll,
hand analysis, etc).

As for playing at a single table or playing multiple tables, I'm a bit torn. There's one
part of me that thinks the patience/discipline part of the training will best be served
by a single table, but the other part that knows I need to see and play a lot of hands
(and since my hand selection is going to be selective, the number of playable hands is
already going to be limited). I'm currently leaning towards playing multiple tables, and
then getting really in-depth with the hands during the analysis phase. (I'm currently
finding that the five-table limit imposed on play money is more than manageable so far; I
don't think my play suffers at all; honestly, I could probably play twice that number
comfortably, but my above points/dilemma remain. Additionally, when multi-tabling, I
only play one game type--ie, only holdem, or only omaha hi/lo).
 
Last edited:
Debi

Debi

Forum Admin
Administrator
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Total posts
74,641
Awards
20
Chips
1,331
Too long to read - but skip the part about learning on play money tables - can't be done.
 
I

ifoldquads

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Total posts
9
Chips
0
I agree that presents significant challenges. Winning or losing isn't going to be quite as important, but feeling what it's like to play multiple tables and how to handle that physically I think is important, as well as psychologically dealing with the time it takes to receive a hand worth playing, and learning to emotionally deal with people making more miracle draws on you than they should. And one can still analyze whether or not one made proper decisions at the table, whether or not someone draws on you with a hand they shouldn't be playing. I think if someone sits down with the understanding of what a play money table is or isn't, there's still some benefit to be gained versus not playing at all.

But that said, the vast majority of my emphasis is going to be on the study side, since play money is play money after all. Based on where I live, I just don't have other options right now.

edit: any potential suggestions? I don't live with or know anyone who plays, so I don't really have many options for live games.
 
Last edited:
AlfieAA

AlfieAA

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 17, 2012
Total posts
10,689
Awards
4
Chips
0
If you want to master poker then I would only be playing 1 table....you talk about having patience yet you want to multi table...lol slightly contradictory
 
I

ifoldquads

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Total posts
9
Chips
0
If you want to master poker then I would only be playing 1 table....you talk about having patience yet you want to multi table...lol slightly contradictory

Lol, understand the comment perfectly.

I'll elaborate on that. I eventually would like to mutli-table with real money, as I anticipate that online poker may be available to me in 1-2 years time, so I want to get used to the sensation of having to track multiple tables and be able to handle the amount of information coming in. Obviously, the best decision-making will occur at single tables, and in hand analysis.

So I guess my question should be then, at what point in my studies should I start doing multi-tabling, with the sole intent of getting used to how it feels? This has me curious, because I'm certain the psychological pressure of doing this with real money must be stronger, so will I be able to handle the amount of information coming in mixed with that pressure? I'm trying to figure out how to approach this element of online poker. Maybe it's something I shouldn't attempt at all until real money is possible, I don't know. Just trying to figure out a somewhat optimal study timeline for all facets of the game.

Basically, I'm trying to come up with a timeline for study. So maybe based on input, this or that might be something I only attempt 6-months, 8-months, X-months from when I begin serious study.

As an example, when practicing the piano, you will determine which fingers will play which note every time, and then practice that slowly. However, you occasionally have to play it fast. It may be that your target speed won't allow the fingering you've chosen to work, so you'll have to adjust that fingering. You have to do this early and often enough so that you can correct the fingering before it is committed to muscle memory and upsets your efforts to chose a better fingering down the line. However, you can't do this too often, because playing too fast during practice too often will lead to sloppiness. I'm trying to find the equivalent to multi-tabling in poker.
 
Last edited:
Dreams of Tragedy

Dreams of Tragedy

dreamsoftragedy.com
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 30, 2009
Total posts
1,573
Chips
0
it a game that can not be master!!!
 
AlfieAA

AlfieAA

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 17, 2012
Total posts
10,689
Awards
4
Chips
0
I'm assuming you are under 18 and that's why you can't play for real money....when you start playing for real money it is usually on 1 table at the lowest limit available for the game you decide to choose, then you build up your bankroll slowly before progressing to 2 tables...then I imagine once you have built up your BR even more, then you can add a third table and so on..........you shouldn't feel any 'pressure' when multi tabling as you would have worked your way up and had previous experience of adding the 2nd table etc....so it will be natural....if you were to jump in from the very start with multi tabling then you would feel pressure, as it is completely new..
 
D

ddeely1

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Total posts
128
Chips
0
Good luck with your ambitious study guide plans. My main advice to you is that play money is a way different animal than actual cash. You can play for real money on Merge Network (carbon, sportsbook, aced, pdc, hero etc). They have stakes as low as .02/.04. If you get too confident at play money you might assume you're going to do very well playing for money, which is not the case.
 
D

ddeely1

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Total posts
128
Chips
0
if you were to jump in from the very start with multi tabling then you would feel pressure, as it is completely new
This is reasonable advice, but I would try 2-tabling sooner than not. Many people told me not to multitable when I was first learning and it was one of my regrets how long it took me to be able to play the amount of tables I do today because I moved up stakes much quicker than I moved up # of tables. So I was trying to learn to multi table at higher stakes when I had never multitabled low stakes. I now can play 16-20 tables, but generally play around 8-12.
 
AlfieAA

AlfieAA

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 17, 2012
Total posts
10,689
Awards
4
Chips
0
I plan on getting out of 2nl on 1 table......lol jokes, will need to get atleast $40 before I can do 2 tables I would think...gives me 20bi ....16-20 tables is impressive ddeely, does it not leave you boss eyed?
 
C

Caesura

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Total posts
221
Chips
0
I played play money for several years before playing for real money and I had to relearn everything when I made the transition. It's likely you will pick up bad habits with play money such as chasing to the river and playing marginal hands because that is what everyone else will be doing and you wont win much otherwise.

You can learn BRM and multi-tabling skills though but the quicker you get into real money the better. Stop smoking, drink less and think of the money you lose as tuition fees.
 
JCgrind

JCgrind

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 28, 2012
Total posts
2,490
Chips
0
i dont get how you can learn anything playing a playmoney limit game....

9 people seeing showdown every hand... coooooooooool
 
The Messiah

The Messiah

Visionary
Platinum Level
Joined
Mar 10, 2012
Total posts
888
Chips
0
Whats you definition of 'Master'?
 
Arjonius

Arjonius

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Total posts
3,167
Chips
0
For all but a tiny number of elite players, it's not so much about mastering the game as it is about consistently playing better than your opponents. Note that "playing better" does not require mastery. You can play poorly and still win against opponents who are worse.

Limit suits some people's personalities better than others. I suggest you try big bet games as well to see what's a better fit for you. And look at both the pros and cons of each; what you've stated seems weighted toward pro-limit.
 
Debi

Debi

Forum Admin
Administrator
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Total posts
74,641
Awards
20
Chips
1,331
I agree that presents significant challenges. Winning or losing isn't going to be quite as important, but feeling what it's like to play multiple tables and how to handle that physically I think is important, as well as psychologically dealing with the time it takes to receive a hand worth playing, and learning to emotionally deal with people making more miracle draws on you than they should. And one can still analyze whether or not one made proper decisions at the table, whether or not someone draws on you with a hand they shouldn't be playing. I think if someone sits down with the understanding of what a play money table is or isn't, there's still some benefit to be gained versus not playing at all.

But that said, the vast majority of my emphasis is going to be on the study side, since play money is play money after all. Based on where I live, I just don't have other options right now.

edit: any potential suggestions? I don't live with or know anyone who plays, so I don't really have many options for live games.

It will hurt you more than it will help you in every way. It is just not going to be a realistic example. For example - playing multiple tables will be completely different because there will be constant action on every table from multiple players.

The only reason a person should ever use play money tables to learn to play poker is if they have no idea of the basic rules of the game. I am assuming you are past that point.

You are better off using 100% of your time studying - or even getting an inexpensive coach you can rail.
 
I

ifoldquads

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Total posts
9
Chips
0
I'm assuming you are under 18 and that's why you can't play for real money....when you start playing for real money it is usually on 1 table at the lowest limit available for the game you decide to choose, then you build up your bankroll slowly before progressing to 2 tables...then I imagine once you have built up your BR even more, then you can add a third table and so on..........you shouldn't feel any 'pressure' when multi tabling as you would have worked your way up and had previous experience of adding the 2nd table etc....so it will be natural....if you were to jump in from the very start with multi tabling then you would feel pressure, as it is completely new..

Ha, no I'm 26. I have two degrees (bachelors and masters) and graduated first overall at both institutions (I'm serious about that). I can't play real money games because it's explicitly illegal due to local law. It's annoying, because US law is already ambiguous, state law becomes more defined but still slightly arguable, but then local law expressly forbids it (and to illustrate that I do in fact live in Face Palm, USA, the town next to me literally just placed a ban on cursing in public, it's now an offense that will get you a ticket; very WASP-y area).
 
I

ifoldquads

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Total posts
9
Chips
0
It will hurt you more than it will help you in every way. It is just not going to be a realistic example. For example - playing multiple tables will be completely different because there will be constant action on every table from multiple players.

The only reason a person should ever use play money tables to learn to play poker is if they have no idea of the basic rules of the game. I am assuming you are past that point.

You are better off using 100% of your time studying - or even getting an inexpensive coach you can rail.

Well, thank you for that opinion. While I still think that with the right mindset and a series of specific goals one can still learn selected things playing in such an environment, given the general strongly expressed denouncement of even seeing a hand in play money, I simply will discontinue playing at pokerstars.

In which case, I am simply only going to be able to approach the game 100% from a theoretical standpoint. I don't see the point in organizing a home game, because given who I'd be able to gather together, the level of play will be no better than a play money table.

In which case, how do you suggest I best go about obtaining hands to analyze? I may simply have to pose myself examples. For example, say I will assume I always have KQ-suited on the button, then use a real deck of cards and place a flop, then theorize what happens with that flop if there are X number of opponents and Y was their actions pre-flop and Z their actions post-flop.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.
 
AlfieAA

AlfieAA

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 17, 2012
Total posts
10,689
Awards
4
Chips
0
ok cool, in that case you would have to ask your fellow americans what poker site you can use, that allows real money play. i dont know enough about them to recommend any myself as im from the uk. but i do know you can do it, albeit not on 'major' sites i.e, pokerstars, partypoker etc....

And i dont think its illegal to play on american 'real money' sites as the government haven't done anything about them yet. but im guessing it would be a good idea to withdraw once a week incase they do get shut down leaving you busto, if you have winnings/bankroll.....gl
 
C

Caesura

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Total posts
221
Chips
0
You could try watching games but it's a bit boring after a while.

Alternatively, you might find someone willing to act for you by skype or ism. i.e. you pay money into their poker account then call the shots from where you are. Logistically difficult but might work if you had trust between you.
 
I

ifoldquads

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Total posts
9
Chips
0
For all but a tiny number of elite players, it's not so much about mastering the game as it is about consistently playing better than your opponents. Note that "playing better" does not require mastery. You can play poorly and still win against opponents who are worse.

Limit suits some people's personalities better than others. I suggest you try big bet games as well to see what's a better fit for you. And look at both the pros and cons of each; what you've stated seems weighted toward pro-limit.

Certainly poker is about relative ability, so playing better than others at the specific table you are playing is the situation most desired. That said, when I take something on, I want to be the best, period. In which case, if my play isn't up to the standards of that handful of elite players, then I haven't worked hard and thoughtfully enough. I don't want to be barely winning when I play; I want to kill the table. For me, mastering poker means having a superior strategy at any table or limit I play at and executing its tactics as error free as possible.

As for limit versus no-limit, I need to get more real money games under my belt. I've played both in live games, but the sample size is too small, in my opinion, for me to say I prefer one betting structure over the other just yet. But I agree, at least up to this point in my poker education, I think limit is initially the better choice. Conceptually, I like the idea that my relative ability will allow me to chip away at opponents' stacks. OTOH, I also conceptually like the idea of taking all of someone's chips in one shot. I think I just need more time playing in each type of game.
 
AlfieAA

AlfieAA

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 17, 2012
Total posts
10,689
Awards
4
Chips
0
it only takes a minute to learn texas holdem, but a lifetime to master it.....when you crush 1 table, although unlikely no matter how good you are, as there will only ever be 2,3 or 4 bad players at any given table at a time, therefore it doesn't necessarily mean you will crush a different table, OR the few bad players, especially when varience, suckouts, etc hit.....poker is all about timing, luck, bottle, experience,skill and math.....100% luck + 100% skill
 
Arjonius

Arjonius

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Total posts
3,167
Chips
0
Certainly poker is about relative ability, so playing better than others at the specific table you are playing is the situation most desired. That said, when I take something on, I want to be the best, period. In which case, if my play isn't up to the standards of that handful of elite players, then I haven't worked hard and thoughtfully enough. I don't want to be barely winning when I play; I want to kill the table. For me, mastering poker means having a superior strategy at any table or limit I play at and executing its tactics as error free as possible.
As you play and rise up the knowledge / skill ladder, I suspect you'll find it's not so cut and dried. For one thing, no matter how intelligent you are and how hard you work, those alone are not sufficient to reach the level of the top players. They have something more, part of which is difficult, even impossible to define, especially since I, like the vast majority, don't have whatever it is.

Also, poker, at least cash, isn't like chess where you have defined matches and it's clear who won and lost. As an admittedly simplified example, let's say you play heads-up against someone inferior. You play your best and crush him, quickly taking all the money he brought to the table. He realizes you're too good for him and never plays you again. Had you played sub-optimally, only taken part of his money and not scared him off, you might have won a lot more from him. It just would have happened over time. And it's even less clear because you can't be sure if he'd have played you again.
 
Poker Orifice

Poker Orifice

Fully Tilted
Platinum Level
Joined
Jan 19, 2008
Total posts
25,599
Awards
6
CA
Chips
968
folding quads = -ev

Don't do it!
 
Top