Cash Game Buy In Strategy

[GB80]

Could I have opinions of my cash game strategy please. I'm pretty sure I'll get told it's not good, but I just want to know what people think. Maybe this could be my problem? I buy into the $0.50/$1.00 tables with $20, which often makes me the short stack. I try and get it up to $60, and then leave the table when it's my turn for the big blind. I do this because I back myself to triple up half the time, therefore in theory I should make $20+ every 2 tables I play at. Am I going about it all wrong, or does it make sense?

[robilaruk]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy personally I always max buy - simply so I can play a few hands - with a min buy you have no room for manoeuvre - its essentially all in or fold as any significant raise/call/re-raise consumes too much of your stack to throw it away eg you raise from the CO to $3 with AQ and get re-raised by the big blind to $10 - if you call over 50% of your stack (dependant on whether the blinds have been paid) is in the middle, the flop is 10 8 3 rainbow and BB shoves for his last $50 - you would be mad to fold IMO as he may have AJ 44 or a whole range of other hands - the pot is too big compared to your stack to fold however you max buy in $100, and with the same scnario its an easy fold - as your hand isn't worth another $50 - see my point? you can't bully, you can't steal, you can only play ultra tight and raise, no limping for value with small PP or suited connectors - you are at risk of losing all you stack on a 'marginal' holding by getting involved and i am not sure you strategy works? half the time you triple up for a profit of $60-$40 (2 buy ins) less the juice you have been paying which might well be another $4 or 5, so you are making $15? - profit for sure, but how long as it took you to make it? and most importantly can you guarentee that profit over the long haul? just wondering if you would be better to buy in for $20 on a 25/50c or 12/25c table, just so you can play a bit more and be less under pressure from the blind structure forcing to play when you don't need to/not being able to play when you should? Just my thoughts Damo ps I also always finish my game just as I am about to be the BB, that way I get value for my last BB that I paid- always astounds me that someone pays the Sb and BB and then decides to leave when they are on the button - you get to see 2 more cards for FREE (etc for the CO CO+1 etc etc)

Could I have opinions of my cash game strategy please. I'm pretty sure I'll get told it's not good, but I just want to know what people think. Maybe this could be my problem? I buy into the $0.50/$1.00 tables with $20, which often makes me the short stack. I try and get it up to $60, and then leave the table when it's my turn for the big blind. I do this because I back myself to triple up half the time, therefore in theory I should make $20+ every 2 tables I play at. Am I going about it all wrong, or does it make sense?

[GB80]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy

just wondering if you would be better to buy in for $20 on a 25/50c or 12/25c table, just so you can play a bit more and be less under pressure from the blind structure forcing to play when you don't need to/not being able to play when you should?

Ta. I'm always reluctant to go too low, as when I have I've normally lost money to players who have no idea chasing and catching their gut straight on the river. I know I should win lots more times than I lose in that situation, but it seems to happen all the time. I also find that you get a good hand and raise, and 4 others will come in with you, with one catching 2 pair with his garbage.

[gavham]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy Well i've got to say buying in low works very well for me , without going into the ins and outs of it ,since march i've won more than $60,000. so for this reason i will be continuing with this strategy. (doesnt work for everybody though)

[staffy]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy

Well i've got to say buying in low works very well for me , without going into the ins and outs of it ,since march i've won more than $60,000. so for this reason i will be continuing with this strategy. (doesnt work for everybody though)

:zzz

[guesswest]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy

Could I have opinions of my cash game strategy please. I'm pretty sure I'll get told it's not good, but I just want to know what people think. Maybe this could be my problem? I buy into the $0.50/$1.00 tables with $20, which often makes me the short stack. I try and get it up to $60, and then leave the table when it's my turn for the big blind. I do this because I back myself to triple up half the time, therefore in theory I should make $20+ every 2 tables I play at. Am I going about it all wrong, or does it make sense?

The conventional and long-held wisdom is that you should always be buying in with the max. The main reason for doing so is that by doing otherwise you're not in a position to get paid more if you hit your hands, and that a +EV player should always have a greater chance of winning lots of chips vs losing them. Some people have made arguments recently against this idea claiming that a min buy-in means your opponents are more likely to get involved in fishy pots against you because they're less scared of the prospect of losing their whole stack. This may be true, especially in short-handed games, but it may not as well - they'd have to be MUCH more likely to get involved in these pots for it to be more +EV than having a full stack to get called against. So I'd judge the table as it comes. I personally wouldn't recommend min buy-ins as something you do every time - kudos to the mole for his results but it's also hard to tell if he'd have won 180k instead if he'd been buying in for more.

[gavham]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy

:zzz

well what can i say to that. 1 - staffy are you not supposed to be a moderator, and give people support on here 2 - perhaps you only want to hear how people are doing in freerolls 3 - i was trying to give someone the benefit of my experience 4 - dissappointed in your ignorance 5 - because you play at such a low level doesn't mean we all do!

[staffy]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy

well what can i say to that. 1 - staffy are you not supposed to be a moderator, and give people support on here 2 - perhaps you only want to hear how people are doing in freerolls 3 - i was trying to give someone the benefit of my experience 4 - dissappointed in your ignorance 5 - because you play at such a low level doesn't mean we all do!

1. Yes I am a moderator and yes I do give support although that isn't really my role as a MOD. 2. I dont like playing freeroles so I doubt it. 3. "without going into the ins and outs of it". Is this telling people of your experiences. I dont think so. 4. I am not being ignorant. I am just like lots of other people on here dont brag about winings especially without proof. We can al come on here and say we have won $60,000 in 6 months. 5. I have never said what levels I play at. I wont always say what levels I play at because it doesnt really matter. What matters is you play to your bankrole. I could be playing at higher levels that you and winning more than you. Or I could be playing at the lower levels and winning small amount. Whatever level I play at depends on my current poker bank.

[gavham]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy

I am just like lots of other people on here dont brag about winings especially without proof.

contradictory or what, i just looked the bragging thread where i have no posts and you clearly have loads ( some without proof) my point of the origanal post was certainly not to brag, it was to show this is, and can be, a winning formula. unfortunately with cash games the results come down to trusting fellow pl members. i personally think people should be more open about how they are doing in cash games, even if it does mean taking their word for it. at the end of the day i don't need to, nor will i justify myself to you. i know my cash game success. you are welcome to comment or even question my post, not humiliate it the moderators on here do a sterling job so your attitude disappoints me

[staffy]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy

contradictory or what, i just looked the bragging thread where i have no posts and you clearly have loads ( some without proof)

I have never posted a win or place without there being proof. If that is a snap shot of the result or someone was watching me and witnessed it. I think there is a big difference between someone saying they have won $50 in an MTT and someone saying they have won $60,000. I think that is a large amount. At the end of the day I hope you have won that amount I just dont think it should be being posted on here without any proof. It will set a precendence for everyone doing it and not everyone will be honest I am afraid. I am sure the other MODS would back me up on this.

[Sir Puntalot]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy the mole, It's forum etiquette to just not say amounts you have won, because the amount you state is way out of reach of most people on here and they would obviously question it. However, I think if you had put "I have won a lot of money" without stating the exact figure, then it's fine. Only last year we had someone do the same and it turned out he was bullshitting because I have a few contacts who can tell me this information, obviously naming no names. ;) So, well done on your win, but I think if you use the word "lots" in future it will be better.

[^Newbie^]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy wow , $60,000 is hell a lot . I wish i could win that much in poker though :lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol:lol . That would surely boost my bankroll by a lot . :ok

[mrmuzeman]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy Guesswest is pretty much spot on as always. Max buy in (so 100bb) is the best buy in. As long as you believe you are better than the people you are playing against you want as much money on the table as possible (without being unreasonable to your roll of course). You can punish people more for mistakes which is the aim of the game. I always want to match anyones stack on the table at any one time so I can bust them if the opportunity arises. As long as you are a +EV player these conditions will result in more $$$ in the long run. Pocket pairs and flopping sets are my personal favourite stack busters. I like calling raises with them in anticipation of cracking big pairs that people tend to play very badly. If I dont have a max buy in these sorts of plays become less beneficial because I am not getting the implied odds to flop my sets. If you are playing at a level where you are scared or just worried to lose a max buy in at that level, then I dont think you should be playing that level personally. Drop down a level and take the max buy in there, itll make you a better player doing the right things in the long run imo. Having said that, theres nothing wrong with just going on a glory quest type thing just attempting to turn $20 into a lot but its basically gambling rather than playing to your potential I think.

[-ed-]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy Well I don't play cash tables (tried in the past and failed miserably) so I don't want to get into the debate. I can however vouch for mole's vast winnings and that he always goes in with the minimum, whether it be $5/$10, $10/$20, or very occassionally $25/$50 :loon . He has his reasons for this which if he feels the need I'm sure he'll explain. It most certainly works for him so I fail to see why it should be questioned. :ok

[staffy]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy Just a thought that perhaps we could run with. At the level I play I always go in for the max buy in. Just the way I play I guess. I like to win a buy in every couple of hours and thats my aim. I am a very patient player at the cash tables though and I am sure people will win a lot more than I do. But for me it's long term profit that is important and not blowing my bank.

[ubermonkey1]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy i always go with max buy in and keep topping up if i lose more than 10% of my stack in play,there is nothing worse than hitting the nuts and only having 10 or 20% of the possible buy in at hand.

[Sir Puntalot]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy Ed, Without going too deep here, the mole was wrong in what he/she posted. Firstly, Gaz was asking for advice, but the mole stated only what he/she did and no reasons for it, along with winnings that basically anyone can say they have won. As I've said, stating amounts on PL has never got anything but a negative reaction, especially when people state big amounts. Why? Because there's no need, why state an amount, when you can say "lots" instead. It's quite simple and avoids threads like this getting out of hand. I also have to agree with Guesswest and say that despite the winning style of the mole, it surely means the mole could be winning more if playing with the maximum, but it works, so hell what do I know?!

[mrmuzeman]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy The Mole... Id be interested as to why you buy in with the minimum and how this changes your strategy as thats what the threads about. Just saying you do isnt really haelping tremendously, id be genuinely interested as to why you think thats good for you. Im not questioning if it is or not but some reasoning as to why would be sweet. Its also a fact that if people say ive earnt some sort of reasonable/large amount people are going to be sceptical. Purely for the fact that the majority of the people who say these things are in fact talking BS. Again not saying you are talking BS but thats how its gona be perceived especially if you dont back up your strategy with reasoning. I have read that Barry Greenstein (obviously a good player!) buys in with half stacks and stuff as his strategy. Although ive yet to hear a truly convincing argument as to why this is better than the max buy in.

[guesswest]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy

I have read that Barry Greenstein (obviously a good player!) buys in with half stacks and stuff as his strategy. Although ive yet to hear a truly convincing argument as to why this is better than the max buy in.

Greenstein wrote a really interesting article on this a while back - but I can't really remember what he said. I thought of it straight away when I saw this and tried to find it but had no joy. If anyone can find it - it's really interesting reading and sure this thread would benefit from a link.

[slapdash]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy I don't play cash games very much, so these are really just theoretical thoughts. There are advantages, that people have mentioned, for making a large buy-in. But there are advantages to having a small stack, as well. You can go all-in on the flop and play drawing hands that you wouldn't have the odds to play if you might face a bet on the turn. Also, I think your variance is almost certainly smaller playing with a minimum buy-in, so it might well be that some people can safely play for higher stakes playing with a minimum buy-in than they could with a maximum buy-in, and could conceivably have a higher rate of profit through playing for more, despite perhaps losing some through not being able to get the maximum from their good hands. I suspect the strategy may be significantly different if you do this, and you probably need to understand how to take advantage of your small stack.

[GaF]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy The big difference IMO are implied odds - you remove most of them from your opponent (and from yourself) This would make it a mistake for an opponent to pay to draw in far more circumstances than if you had a larger stack. By the same token, I imagine you should be playing more "made hands" and fewer drawing hands - things like suited connectors I imagine lose all value to you.......

[GB80]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy Thanks for the advice folks! Pretty much what I expected to get, so I think I'll abandon my strategy as soon as my bankroll allows it.

[BAM]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy I win 'lots' in cash games Its my main game I play cash everynight (only been playing MTT's for a few months) The one thing I ALWAYS do before joining a table is to watch for at least half an hour to see how people play, patterns, raises, folds etc then I adjust my buy in and strategy for that game depending on what I see. Both methods have plus's and minus's but you need to be adaptable. Well done mole :clap:clap:clap excellent going keep it up mate :ok

[DAN DAN]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy Can I just add that I know Mole and can verify that he does indeed win 'lots and lots' and, I also know that as he is one of the most arrogant, big headed fcukrs I have ever known that he was most certainly not bragging. THAT would have gone on for pages and pages and pages, :rollin I do think a comprehensive explanation to why you think min buy-ins is a better strategy would be appreciated here Moley and I look forward to reading it.

[gavham]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy ok my reasons for minimum buy in are 1 - it's safer 2 - you can play more aggresive ( without too much damage) 3 - less chance of being bluffed off a pot 4 - other players (bigger stacks) do not see you as ,as much of a threat and almost certainly play different against you ( i use this to my advantage, they might have the hand to only call eg a $40 bet but if i go all in for say $90 they will probably call as they know there are no more bets to come)) 5 - you can lose a few buy ins and only need to win once to be in profit eg $20 lost $20 lost $20 lost $20 win $120 profit $40 6 - lets say for talking sake you minimum buy in for $200 at a 5/10 table, you win a few hands and get up to $750, you get a very good hand but not the nuts and someone goes all in on you covering your whole stack. you find its a tough decision and could stand to win a £1600 pot. i think the decision is much easier because i only stand to lose $200 but stand to win $1600 whereas the max buy in stands to lose it all. (hope that makes sense) 7 - you can take more chances go for draws play mid pairs go on a gut instinct all without it being devastating to your bankroll i am sure if i thought about it more there would be many more reasons for minimum buy in. i'm also aware of the debate for a maximum buy in, but i can only say what works for me overall this is only a small part of my play but it has been very effective so far.

[staffy]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy It's an intersting read mate. I have never thought about it the way you describe above and it's something I might consider trialing. I have always gone for max buy in and never tried anything else.

[Guest gazza271]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy

It's an intersting read mate. I have never thought about it the way you describe above and it's something I might consider trialing. I have always gone for max buy in and never tried anything else.

echo Staffy's comments, was a good read and some interesting points :ok I'm not a great cash player and tend to stick to STT's :\ but shall remember these points when I next get the courage to venture to the cash tables :)

[guesswest]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy

6 - lets say for talking sake you minimum buy in for $200 at a 5/10 table' date=' you win a few hands and get up to $750, you get a very good hand but not the nuts and someone goes all in on you covering your whole stack. you find its a tough decision and could stand to win a £1600 pot. i think the decision is much easier because i only stand to lose $200 but stand to win $1600 whereas the max buy in stands to lose it all. (hope that makes sense)[/quote'] This is a purely psychological distinction I think? You're losing $750 in either case...

[gavham]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy

This is a purely psychological distinction I think? You're losing $750 in either case...

not out your bankroll though and at the end of the day thats what counts

[guesswest]

Re: Cash Game Buy In Strategy That doesn't make sense. There are some valid points lurking in your post, but I can't see that this is one of them. If you join a table with $200, get your balance up to $1000 then lose it all in one hand - you're losing 1k on that hand, not $200. There's absolutely no difference between this and joining with 1k and losing it all in terms of your EV and profit.