WHY i feel the so called pros are laughing at us all.

mario999

mario999

Enthusiast
1st off..most of us here are playing freerolls for pennies.

WHAT MAKES A PRO>>???
MONEY MONEY MONEY....thats it.

alot of us who win a freeroll hear and there, go on to try there luck at the $5 or $10 mtt's...and your still playing against 100;s of players....man, that makes it tough even for the so called pros.

but if you look at the $30 + 3 tournies at pokerrooms...theres lees the 100 players in them. wich gives you a better chance at winning some good coin.

at pokerstars you would have to play the $50 and up mtt;s to have a reasonable playing field.

i played a $33+3 mtt at pokerrooms last night and came in 12th out of 86, missed the money by 2 spots...but thats all good...
i was in the top 3 for most of the tournie...and got beat by a chassing asshole who got runner runner spades to beat my trips.
but now i know i can compete with the big boys...

thats all its about, MONEY...more you put up...better chance of winning.
do the math....compatition was no diffrent then a $5 sng.
 
S

StackThemUp

Guest
Whilst i never consider myself a pro,i do play big stakes online compared to the average joe. What your saying has some truth to it but also its a little niave to take the view the bigger the entry fee the less the field. I reguarly play in the 20k and 50k on paradise and both have fields in excess of 500 where the entry is $30, i also play in the party poker 200k which has usually around the 2000 players mark and has a buy in of $200. The competition is tough,people play ultra tight because they want to savour the moment of playing in such big events. The WPT fields have grown to over 500+ nearly every tournament. So yes if you pick your right tournaments,there is a decent chance of making the money but don't be fooled by this.

John
 
mario999

mario999

Enthusiast
the big money gareenteed tournies are diffrent.

but like i said...at pokerrooms you cane play a freezout mtt with less then 100. for $33

at stars you need to play a $55 mtt freezout to play less the 200

1st place is anywere from $700 to $1500
5th is anywere from $100 to $500

id rather play these types of mtt's.

all im trying to say is this.
i see alot of good pokerplayers playing for nothing,
so i say next time you wanna go out and party...stay home, put $100 into a pokersite and play the tournies with less then 100 players. you can get in on 3 for $100. take at least 5th in one of them and you break even...do better then that...you make alot of money.

hope this clears it up.

sumary...dont play mtts, with more then 100 players untill you have at least a $10,000 bankroll. its not worth the time.
 
Bill_Hollorian

Bill_Hollorian

Rock Star
You could play cash games... No field at all, if you win 1 hand you can take those winnings home. If you lose one hand you can leave, with the balance of your chips.
The tournament is hard no matter who you are and what level you play. The bottom line is a tourney is all or nothing.

I take 10 large into a tourney and just dont feel up to it, sorry gotta play.
I take 10 large into a cash game, win 1 or 2 hands all night. Cahs out a decent nights wage. Loss a hand or 2, decide I'm not up to playing lose just a bit.

I don't have to win 7 million risking losing 10 thousand.

Try cash games also, they are great. And where most make that poker living.
No tv, no cameras, no fame, but make a fortune.

Bill
 
N

ninemilly

Guest
i like where you're gettin at on this... if my bank card would put money into online poker games i would also be playing the higher stakes tournaments... the lower cash games just have too many ppl in them and it's not like the more expensive buy-ins have better players only difference is they have more money. Doesn't make them better players
 
diabloblanco

diabloblanco

Guest
How do you think most players with larger bankrolls built their roll? Beating the shit out of the lower buy-in tourneys and lower stakes S&G's and ring games. Don't make the rediculous assumption that anyone with a computer can win the higher $$ tournaments just because they're are less people.

Sure a large bankroll helps make more money, but if you can't win the small stakes poker games and tournaments you're throwing your money away by moving up in limits.
 
robwhufc

robwhufc

Cardschat Elite
mario999 said:
,
so i say next time you wanna go out and party...stay home, put $100 into a pokersite and play the tournies with less then 100 players. you can get in on 3 for $100. take at least 5th in one of them and you break even...do better then that...you make alot of money.
Surely the most likely outcome is that you'll enter 3 tournament and finish out of money in all 3. You've got tournaments cracked, yet finished out the money in your tournament yourself.

I've made an overall profit on tournaments (by their very nature, 1 big win can offset 50+ entry fees), but my strike rate of top 5 finishes is much less than 1 in 3.
 
S

StackThemUp

Guest
This is the funniest thread for a while.... Don't play MTT unless you have $10,000? What the hell is that all about? MTT are the best way to make a profit without a doubt, i play cash games to get a nice profit for the day but from all of my winnings so far,over 70% have come from big MTT wins.
 
IrishDave

IrishDave

A Member
Don't know about everyone else but I was offended by the first line of this persons post. He just assumed that we are all freeroll whores and aren't willing to compete for money. I suggest he ante up for one of our buy-in events and prove his obvious superiority...
 
woodsy44

woodsy44

Rock Star
"dont play mtts, with more then 100 players untill you have at least a $10,000 bankroll"
Very comical - i dont have $10,000 and whats wrong with lower buy in tourneys?
There are more people but they play a poorer game. If you are like me and dont always place then entering a high buy in tourney cant very quickly eat away at your bankroll which has taken you ages to build, when entering low buy in tourneys.

where it says cant it should say can /\
|

God ive messed this up lol
 
Last edited:
diabloblanco

diabloblanco

Guest
Who said don't play large buy ins with less than 10K?

Bill used a 10K analogy in his post but he didn't say all that...
 
mario999

mario999

Enthusiast
ninemilly said:
i like where you're gettin at on this... if my bank card would put money into online poker games i would also be playing the higher stakes tournaments... the lower cash games just have too many ppl in them and it's not like the more expensive buy-ins have better players only difference is they have more money. Doesn't make them better players
only one member here gets the point...wtf.

im not trying to run the pro's down...
all im saying is that there are alot of forum members with the skill to win tournies with less then 100 players.

the guy/girl, that said you gotta be a win in low-stakes games ...is a dummy.
i won a pokerroom freeroll with 2400 people in it...$75 ..big deal.

but ive also won $50 sng's at stars more then once...
i have a folder full of emails from stars for the sng;s ive won
and im not talking play-money...im talking reall money.

im just trying to tell everyone that you can do better.
if 10 low limit players here entered $50+ tournies on the same night on different site,...
ill bet we would have 5-6 placing in the money.

if im a stupid dummy for trying to give you all a boost...
kick me out of the forum...
hell i dont even have enough post too play in the freerolls you have here yet..
and im not turbo posting to get there eather.

i was just trying to give you all a push.

if you dont like my advice...then take that next $100..go get drunk and fell like shit the next day and be out $100 anyways...i really dont care.
 
bubbasbestbabe

bubbasbestbabe

Suckout Queen
Now now boys. Mario I think your point is if you are going to chase after the pot'o gold you should do it at the higher level tables cause they have less of a field to wade thru. That's not a bad point but don't dismiss what the others are saying and smooth those feathers down. There were a couple of good points made here.

Diablo and Rob both said that basically unless you know the fundamentals you are better off learning at lower levels where your bankroll won't be taking such a lesson also. We don't know your play level and are making the assumption that like your label you are a newbie to the games. If you've read thru here you will see that a lot of people with big bankrolls hit a dry run and lose quite a bit of it at times. If you are playing lower limits you won't run thru it all before you see what's happening.

I do like part of your last idea, only leave out the feeling like shit and I'm in for that.:)
 
H

heather25

Guest
I play the freerolls/lower buyin tourneys for the practice. The more practice the better in my case. Even the pros had to practice right?
 
diabloblanco

diabloblanco

Guest
Mario999, if you're refering to me when you said I was "a dummy," allow me to retort. I will repeat my original statement for you and this time I will type it slow so you can understand it. If it helps you to read it aloud, feel free to do so. If you can't consistantly beat the lower buyin tournaments and the lower level games, you will not be a long term winner by moving up in limits. If you think that is a sound strategy, you are mistaken, there isn't even a valid argument you will put forth to support your claim.

You also have no concept of bankroll management, variance, or regression to the mean. All terms I don't expect you to know. *shrug*

If you think because you did good in one 30+3 tournament you can compete with the "big dogs," allow me to be the first one to explain to you that the "big dogs" are playing much higher than 30+3. You played with decent players who beat the 3/6 games.

I understand you think I am a "dummy" so you'll probably read this and still swear by Mary that you're right and I honestly couldn't care less. However, when I see someone make a post that's general idea is severely flawed and makes absolutely no common sense, I usually comment on it.

PS-I aint no dummy, dummy.

Mario999, if you're refering to me when you said I was "a dummy," allow me to retort. I will repeat my original statement for you and this time I will type it slow so you can understand it. If it helps you to read it aloud, feel free to do so. If you can't consistantly beat the lower buyin tournaments and the lower level games, you will not be a long term winner by moving up in limits. If you think that is a sound strategy, you are mistaken, there isn't even a valid argument you will put forth to support your claim.

You also have no concept of bankroll management, variance, or regression to the mean. All terms I don't expect you to know. *shrug*

If you think because you did good in one 30+3 tournament you can compete with the "big dogs," allow me to be the first one to explain to you that the "big dogs" are playing much higher than 30+3. You played with decent players who beat the 3/6 games.

I understand you think I am a "dummy" so you'll probably read this and still swear by Mary that you're right and I honestly couldn't care less. However, when I see someone make a post that's general idea is severely flawed and makes absolutely no common sense, I usually comment on it.

PS-I aint no dummy, dummy.
 
Last edited:
E

EnlightenUp

Guest
man, i had something worth reading typed out, but really its just a glorified version of "what diablo said."

diabloblanco, well done.

mario's mentality is common among new players. hit a big score in a tournament, live life in the fast lane for a while, than starve (figureatively speaking) whle chasing the next big score.

i guess im old school. build through the ring games.
 
mario999

mario999

Enthusiast
ya ok ill shut up...

low limit...2000+ players...better then
higher limit...less the 100 players.
i got it...lol

i gotta go out of town tomorow.
when i get back in abot 10 days ill anouce my next game...20+2 or 30+3
at pokerrooms...if i dont make the money...ill shut up and go back too reading..."deal"?.

if i make final table...then meabe you will understand what im saying.

so if you wanna watch...you can, and then judge me.

im not all mouth/typing-fingers...lol...ill put up in 10 days when i get back.
 
diabloblanco

diabloblanco

Guest
I really couldn't care less what you make or don't make online. I am simply warning others who may read your post that it isn't as easy--or as smart for that matter--as you make it sound. If you place in your next 20 or 30 tournament, good for you. But what I said still holds true. Three things you are ignoring that will most certainly bust you out if you're actually playing to build a bankroll; bankroll management, variance, and regression to the mean. You are obviously ignoring all three and that's fine with me, after all, it isn't my bankroll.
 
bigjace

bigjace

Guest
Ok i can see both sides of this so heres my 2 cents.Mario is right that its easier to win against 100 people than 300+ no problems there just basic maths.However the bigger buyins generally have a higher standard of players than the lower ones and they will eat the average freeroll whore for breakfast.Of course there are rubbish players at every level,people with more money than sense exist in all walks of life.(i once won nearly 2 grand at a 2/4 ring game against 2 players in 45mins)The easiest mistake to make is moving up the levels too quickly after winning a few games at a lower level.About a year ago i was regular at 2/4 and 3/6 levels but blew my bankroll in less than a week with bad beats,cold decks and to be honest some bad play.i've now dropped down to .50/$1 to rebuild my stack and my confidence.Its no good playing a $30 tourney if your bankroll is $50.Stay small until you can afford to go large and make sure you're game is up to it(and your bankroll can take the bad times which happens to everybody)
 
D

dastrey

Guest
Why don't you play at sites that offer low stake NL tournaments with less than 100 people?
 
J

JonSherwood

Guest
I actually see a little bit of your reasoning, but I disagree.

I tend to do better in bigger tournaments. Where I play, nearly 10% of all entrants get money, i.e., 1000 entrants, top 100 pay, 100 people, top 10 pay. I do a lot better in the larger tournies, AND there's a larger prizepool.

I'm a regular at the RVP 20k guaranteed. It's a $10 buy-in rebuy and add-on tourney. I NEVER rebuy or add-on, but there are so many people who don't care about rebuying ten times that if you play your cards right your guaranteed to make it to the money. Usually the payout right into the money is only $40, but onc eyou get to the money people drop out like crazy. I find these kinds of tournaments lots easier than a 100 person tourney because people are generally a little more concerned about trying to do well. That's just how it seems to me. I play the 100 person mtt's ona regular basis too, so don't get me wrong, I've got experience in both.

A general rule I go by is that if I make money, I want to be payed a resonable hourly wage. I don't want to play 3 hours for $15. I'll make sure to play tournaments that if I hit the money I'm going to be making atleast $10 and hour, plus my buy-in back.

Also, you don't have to play high buy-in's for good money. I play $10-$20 buy-ins max and I make a reasonable amount. I'm not going to play with any higher, because with any higher I'd be too worried about losing the money which would not allow me to play my best game. Period.

Anyway.

Jon
 
T

Theocpoker

Guest
Well I don't know what you are saying. I feel like this title is wrong. Pros are not laughing at us. They respect us for respecting them. Ever go on Fulltilt? The pros' names appear in red. You can chat with them. Sorry you didn't place in the money.... very close though.
 
Top