Good tournament player, but SUCK at cash games.

[Jurn8]

Imwatcher to say the competition is worse in tournaments is like saying red is better than blue. Playing micro limit cash games and micro tournaments attracts the same bad players. I agree with what you are saying but you must admit that there are good players there also and you will be going head to head with them in the late stages.

Taaron yes a flip involves no skill, I'll take AA vs QJ every day but I have no need to risk my whole stack in a cash game. I am not saying you can donk to the final table in a tourney. I am saying that when I make 200% of my buy-in in a cash game I can leave, same if I'm down. In tourney you are forced to play for EVERYTHING every time.

If you look at my SNG and Tournament stats (which I cannot post since I don't currently have a HU) then I'm a winning player because I have finished in the money enough to make up for all my buy-ins (but you are talking only like ten or twelve events).

Cash is easier because each hand I am involved with is not "life and death". Every fold in tournament is costly due to the increasing blind structure. You can play a short stack in a cash game and wait for the best spots, in tournament you are forced to play marginal cards when your M drops to untenable levels. We are still talking about small stakes games, higher stakes cash games do become much tougher.

Once again I am not talking about the play skills as much as the difficulty of winning money for any given player with no particular skill in either.

first of all AA v QJ is not a flip its an 85/15.

secondly you are basing your assumptions over 12 donkaments

thirdly your "life and death" attitude shows you arent as interested in hand reading, table dynamics, M, +EV spots but are just worried about busting. Yes you can play a short stack cash game but have actually done the math and seen that a small percentage of them actually win at the tables, they are usually b/e or slight losing lol reg Rb whores.

Cash requires decisions for 100BB +, when the hell do you have 100BB in a tournament. The skill in cash comes from postflop decisions, hand reading etc etc etc I cba to go through it all. In donkaments unless a deepstack you have about 60BB max and due to the blind structures/antes are usually faced with push/fold strat which you can play off a chart, not hard.

 

[PotluckXXI]

Tournaments are easier

Like I said all along tournaments are easier, quit arguing with me!

 

[PotluckXXI]

BTW my AA vs. QJ was the final table HU for 1st and 2nd place (I went out 17th) QJ went all in and ran into AA, guess what flop QJ I Sh** you not. Luckily it was a qualification tournament for a bigger one.

 

[F4STFORW4RD]

Cash is confirmed harder and more challenging than mtt's in general.

The amount of study involved and hand volume needed to learn and beat any level of cash is tremendous. For every 1 hour of play i am studying at least 1.5-2 hrs; reviewing hands (HA-hand analysis), stat-leak checks, reading (quality material) and note taking.

Having the singular mindset of wanting to make money is not the same mindset that good cash game ppl have; its TOTALLY about beating a particular level. Its about the long term, and improving your game to its max potential,
well and also having fun too, but its fun to improve; get better.

So often horrible players bink, due to the structure and nature of tourneys. There ia a lot more dedication and discipline needed to be good at cash. However variance in Mtt's is much greater. (alex ).

if you want to become good at cash, understand that you need to study alot.

Only one sentence I agree with there.

However variance in Mtt's is much greater.

Yes, that's what makes them so frustrating.

 

[F4STFORW4RD]

Cash requires decisions for 100BB +, when the hell do you have 100BB in a tournament.

At the start of the vast majority of tournaments that I play in.

 

[imwatcher]

Start of tourneys is not where money is made

 

[F4STFORW4RD]

Start of tourneys is not where money is made

Another brilliant generalisation, this thread seems to have a lot of them. It is a common strategy in leaderboard chases to try to double up in the early stages of a tournament, while all the donkeys are still around, and then sit out until the leaderboard points begin.

Besides which I was pointing out the inaccuracy of Jurn8's comment, which your generalisation bears no relevance to anyway.

 

[taaron]

It never was about all-or-nothing type statements. Are there some truly solid tourney grinders; YES, absolutlely! The whole context was about the OP's original thread title and post: Good at mtt's but suck at cash.

The reason OP is struggling w/ cash is because there is so much more experience and study needed to dominate any level of cash. Is 4nl easy imo? Yes! Is $10nl easy? yes to me it is, is $25nl easy? right now it is not. but someday it will be.
Learning a solid cash game is more challenging to develop, then the random tourny run good or run deep. Post-flop play among a plethora of other facets are rarely an issue in Mtt's, and therefor marginal for the most part.

This was never intended to be a "pissing contest". Just a response to why so many struggle at cash games.

As far as excitement at cash tables is concerned, Think about this: beating cash levels and moving up= reaching $50nl for me in early to mid-2012- total $ on the table for 6max tables =300$+ on the table in cash money; NOT chips. Profit/ or loss x4 tabling, playing 400+ hands/hour.

 

[imwatcher]

It is a common strategy in leaderboard chases to try to double up in the early stages of a tournament, while all the donkeys are still around, and then sit out until the leaderboard points begin.

lol wtf... ^^

when you are early in a toruney and deep getting into marginal situation is terrible for our tourney equity so we play nitty to avoid marginal spots, which doesnt happen in cash games

 

[Jurn8]

Another brilliant generalisation, this thread seems to have a lot of them. It is a common strategy in leaderboard chases to try to double up in the early stages of a tournament, while all the donkeys are still around, and then sit out until the leaderboard points begin.

Besides which I was pointing out the inaccuracy of Jurn8's comment, which your generalisation bears no relevance to anyway.

pretty much sums up why you wont understand why cash is harder

 

[dcor]

If you are fishy and cannot try multi-tabling try plo. I started to play omaha to advance my postflop play.

FYP

 

[Marginal]

With no delusions about become a poker pro....yes. Total lifetime deposits are around $150---Total withdrawals are about $1250.00. Have had endless fun, and have current br's at 3 sites, which for a US player is probably pretty good.

My temperament and style are tourney based, and try as I may, I can not get the gist of the ring game, which has always been 2 steps forward, 3 steps back. If I never sat at a ring table, that total withdrawal # would be 5x what it is.

Then add in the excitement , nay, sheer rush of getting deep in a big ROI game and that is something you ring dudes don't get...

Ok the reason I asked that is because again it is relative. To you, cash game is harder.

To me, I am at best a breakeven tourny player but that could be due to volume at this point and not winning crucial flips etc.

The point is, it is different to different ppl. Yet the funny thing is, based on what I just said, we should be on opposite side of the arguement.

 

[Egon Towst]

The point is, it is different to different ppl. Yet the funny thing is, based on what I just said, we should be on opposite side of the arguement.

It is weird, isn`t it ? I am a consistent winner at both, and it seems blindingly obvious to me that tourneys are more challenging and more interesting. Yet, perfectly sensible folk here, whose opinions I respect, don`t see it that way.

 

[Marginal]

Again

Darvin Moon

/Thread

 

[Egon Towst]

Darvin Moon

I am not sure I understand. Do you mean that gentleman got lucky and had a big win in a tourney once, and therefore tourneys are determined by luck rather than skill, but cash games are not ?

If that is the contention, I don`t think it passes inspection. As far as I am aware, Mr.Moon has had only one big score, precisely because he is not a particularly skilled player and therefore cannot win tournaments consistently. A player may equally well have a hot streak in a cash game and come out a big winner over a single session. It just demonstrates that there is an element of luck in poker, not that one form of the game is inherently superior to another.

 

[Marginal]

Yes but the point is, Darvin won 5M in a tourney and will always, as a result of that, be a winning tourney player. That does not happen in cash games. 1 Lucky day in cash games = a few buyins. 1 lucky win in a tournament = set for life even if he never cashes again. Over the long run, the cash game fish with 1 good day will lose and be an overall loser, Darvin moon will lose every day for the rest of his life, but will never be a loser.

/Thread.

 

[Jurn8]

but hes a winning player brah

 

[JOEBOB69]

Left out Jerry Yang,and Jamie Gold.

 

[Marginal]

Slash the other way.

 

[imwatcher]

Cash is soo much easier show me a tourney graph this low varience..

 

[RamdeeBen]

What exactly is that graph supposed to be from?

You also forgot to include your "info" box which states the name/profit/roi% etc..

 

[imwatcher]

what do you mean what is it supposed to be? its a graph for BB won... i dont want to show how much i have won in $

 

[RamdeeBen]

what do you mean what is it supposed to be? its a graph for BB won... i dont want to show how much i have won in $

Ah right, I just didn't understand why you posted it and in what reference as I didn't understand what your post meant.

Do you mean tournaments is harder because of ?

 

[imwatcher]

more varience in tourney=cash easier ldo

 

[Marginal]

Alex actually plays MTTs. Because he crushes, it proves it is easier.