billy the punter Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 With online poker it really seems the bigger the buy-in the bigger the fish. I found it in my previous online life at Ladbrokes. Having played the 30k ($600) on Betfair a few times I can confirm it's the case on there too. It must be down to the % of satellite winners. Why do sites ruin any decent tournaments with multiple sat seats? This should result in value due to the dead money, but I've found the early levels such a minefield that I am probably giving up on them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadlydaveLDN Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins With online poker it really seems the bigger the buy-in the bigger the fish. I found it in my previous online life at Ladbrokes. Having played the 30k ($600) on Betfair a few times I can confirm it's the case on there too. It must be down to the % of satellite winners. Why do sites ruin any decent tournaments with multiple sat seats? This should result in value due to the dead money, but I've found the early levels such a minefield that I am probably giving up on them. Right, so you want tables full of sharks? Good luck with that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billy the punter Posted September 6, 2009 Author Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins Right' date=' so you want tables full of sharks? Good luck with that[/quote'] No I want players like yourself. Ones that think they can play. Ideal fodder for a pro like me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveO Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins No I want players like yourself. Ones that think they can play. Ideal fodder for a pro like me. OOHHH you bitch Billy:lol;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billy the punter Posted September 6, 2009 Author Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins OOHHH you bitch Billy:lol;) :D Poker banter - you gotta love it. :tongue2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Puntalot Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins Got to agree with Dave though Billy, seems a very naive comment to make. Fish are the ones you want, it's like the english going to Vegas, pissed up at 1am, the Vegas sharks are waiting for them. It makes no sense what you said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billy the punter Posted September 6, 2009 Author Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins Got to agree with Dave though Billy, seems a very naive comment to make. Fish are the ones you want, it's like the english going to Vegas, pissed up at 1am, the Vegas sharks are waiting for them. It makes no sense what you said. If you're a consistent tournament winner, you do not wait for cards. Success is dependent on steals and bluffs, especially when blind levels are shorter. I've won 100+ runner tournaments without getting dealt a big pair - I'm sure many of PL'ers have done so many times and will agree with the first part of this reply. If you're playing total fish, those that simply cannot fold a hand, then you cannot steal/move/bluff and therefore your edge has vanished - you now need cards. In a cash game it's fine to sit with these mushrooms, you have time, there is no rush, blinds are static and it's a matter of time before you get their cash. However cash an tournament poker are different animals. In a tournament blinds are increasing, so you cannot sit and wait for the goods (and trap). You have to make moves/steals to be a winning player. If I cannto do that and I'm in tournament which forces me to wait for cards then only have a slightly better chance then Joe Bloggs, wheres normally I would have more than that. I don't think you want a table full of very good players - although that has never bothered me, I like a subtle high-level thinking game. Ideally you want "average" players, and although I was only kidding with my answer to dave, there is some truth in my answer. You want players that think they can play, players that are good enough to pass but players I know exactly where they are at most of the time. You cannot read a player who cannot read himself after all. Again, if I cannot read a player (and low level players you cannot) then again another edge has gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadlydaveLDN Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins You can win tournaments against fish, you just have to adjust your style of play, more towards betting for value. You are correct that the blinds are not static like in cash games, but I assume in a decent buy-in tourney that the structure allows for a decent amount of play too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billy the punter Posted September 6, 2009 Author Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins You can win tournaments against fish, you just have to adjust your style of play, more towards betting for value. You are correct that the blinds are not static like in cash games, but I assume in a decent buy-in tourney that the structure allows for a decent amount of play too. Yeah but it depends on the structure, like you say. The above tourn is 15 mins level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaF Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins Success is dependent on steals and bluffs' date='[/quote'] I totally disagree with that statement - success in poker is about understanding your opponent, getting into their heads and adjusting your style to take maximum advantage of their weaknesses - and the more and bigger weaknesses the better! Good players are not those who have fixed styles of play that they cannot adjust to their opponents weaknesses, and they play in the same way regardless Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billy the punter Posted September 6, 2009 Author Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins I totally disagree with that statement - success in poker is about understanding your opponent, getting into their heads and adjusting your style to take maximum advantage of their weaknesses - and the more and bigger weaknesses the better! Good players are not those who have fixed styles of play that they cannot adjust to their opponents weaknesses, and they play in the same way regardless So if my opinions on the game are wrong, how do you explain my success? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billy the punter Posted September 6, 2009 Author Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins GaF - how do you value bet without a hand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaF Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins So if my opinions on the game are wrong' date=' how do you explain my success?[/quote'] Your sharkscope stats show you to be a pretty good and successful player from what I can see :ok That doesn't, IMO automatically mean that all your thoughts on poker are correct and shouldn't be challenged and explored. It does mean that you are better poisitioned than myself to pass judgement (but that wont stop me challengine something I dont agree with - whether I'm right or wrong!) Perhaps I can use the sharkscope stats from Betfair to make my point: You have played 428 games, for an average stake of $47 and an ROI of 5%. I have played 100 games for an average stake of $9 and an ROI of 8%. Assuming these small samples are totally representative of where we are both at, who do you think is the better player? My money would be on you, because you have a 5% ROI against better players (higher stakes) than my 8% ROI. Would you argue that the players at your stakes are bigger fish, and so I am the better player because I have a higher ROI against better players than you face? (clearly not :tongue2) I honstly believe that most of your profit (should) come not from the good players, or the average players, but the really bad players! You don't! You overbet wiith a hand! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubermonkey1 Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins billy i'm suprised you don't give the ftops/wcoop omaha games a shot :unsure a hell of a lot of the players playing (and qualifying thru)the sats are exactly what your looking for,solid but no real flair. also the real fish are even easier to spot/extract money from ,the prize pools are massive,what more do you want:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billy the punter Posted September 6, 2009 Author Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins Your sharkscope stats show you to be a pretty good and successful player from what I can see :ok That doesn't, IMO automatically mean that all your thoughts on poker are correct and shouldn't be challenged and explored. It does mean that you are better poisitioned than myself to pass judgement (but that wont stop me challengine something I dont agree with - whether I'm right or wrong!) Perhaps I can use the sharkscope stats from Betfair to make my point: You have played 428 games, for an average stake of $47 and an ROI of 5%. I have played 100 games for an average stake of $9 and an ROI of 8%. Assuming these small samples are totally representative of where we are both at, who do you think is the better player? My money would be on you, because you have a 5% ROI against better players (higher stakes) than my 8% ROI. Would you argue that the players at your stakes are bigger fish, and so I am the better player because I have a higher ROI against better players than you face? (clearly not :tongue2) I honstly believe that most of your profit (should) come not from the good players, or the average players, but the really bad players! Betfair only tracks SNG stats. FYI sng's are my weakest area. I don't play them a lot as you can see from my stats. The majority of my time is spent playing MTT's and PLO cash. In fact I feel I'm twice the player when holding 4 cards. If you want to compare we can filter my stats... On $0-$10 games, in order for out stats to be based on the same average stake.... Games - 36 Ave prof - $4 Ave stake - $8 Ave ROI - 50% (!) Total prof - $144 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaF Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins So your ROI is (significantly) higher at lower stakes than higher stakes. :ok (admitedly a small sample, but as I would expect) You dont really believe that that is because the players at the lower stakes are so much better than the players at higher stakes and you cant beat the worse players? If players win money at poker, they will usually move up the stakes. If players lose money at poker they will usually either quit or move down the stakes. There should therefore be better players at higher stakes than at lower stakes. You cannot reproduce your 50% ROI from the low stakes at the higher stakes because the players aren't bad enough, not because the players are too bad! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billy the punter Posted September 6, 2009 Author Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins So your ROI is (significantly) higher at lower stakes than higher stakes. :ok (admitedly a small sample, but as I would expect) You dont really believe that that is because the players at the lower stakes are so much better than the players at higher stakes and you cant beat the worse players? If players win money at poker, they will usually move up the stakes. If players lose money at poker they will usually either quit or move down the stakes. There should therefore be better players at higher stakes than at lower stakes. You cannot reproduce your 50% ROI from the low stakes at the higher stakes because the players aren't bad enough, not because the players are too bad! Weekday $10 SnG players are far superior to the Sunday $5 satellite winners you come across in these big weekend tourns. There is weak, and very weak. I'm talking about the total fish in this thread. The ones that are impossible to read and cannot pass ace-high. No high-level poker player licks their lips when facing these in a MTT. They want average/solid (but inferior to them) players. However those that are actually in the average/solid catergory may fair better against these total fish? I would class regular $10 SNG players as average - not total fish. I would bet my ROI would plummet if I was playing 10c sng's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billy the punter Posted September 6, 2009 Author Share Posted September 6, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins billy i'm suprised you don't give the ftops/wcoop omaha games a shot :unsure a hell of a lot of the players playing (and qualifying thru)the sats are exactly what your looking for,solid but no real flair. also the real fish are even easier to spot/extract money from ,the prize pools are massive,what more do you want:) Cheers mate, I will have to look into. :ok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlunB Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins It's an interesting question this, and one that comes up time and time again. I think there is a more subtle grey area here than Billy is right/wrong. There are plenty of pros who would agree with you and plenty who wouldn't. And believe me I have asked a lot of them. If you have a defined 'style' of play and you are very good at it then you will struggle when the tournament structure/field does not allow you to play it. Take Phil Hellmuth in very deep-stacked events against good players, or some of the looser online pros in tournaments full of fish. But the very best players do not have a style of play. They play the players and the situations not the cards. Phil Ivey is a classic example. He sits down, plays a few hands, observes and adjusts his game to the table. JC Tran has said his best asset as a tournament pro is being 'able to adapt'. I totally understand what you are saying Billy, but perhaps it's a matter of adopting a slightly higher variance strategy, widening your range a little and value betting much lower strength hands. Even total fish have patterns (do they chase draws, call with mid pair and raise with top pair, overbet big hands etc etc). Very few players are totally random. I'm sure you are a very good player, but even the best players can afford to learn new tricks and ways of playing. Even the very very best. Poker is such a complex and unsolved game that the minute you stop learning you start losing. Good luck at the tables! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadken Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins There is one thing you are not thinking about here,i have noticed the same thing in some of the higher stake games, you get some players that seem to play them like they were a freeroll. If a player is very wealthy, he is not going to start playing a $10 tourney, as the money means nothing to him. Some players think a $500 buy in is peanuts and use the tourny as a bit of fun, alongside a cash game where they could be sat with $10.000. Whats a $500 buy-in to them, its nothing, so they will gamble. Their are bad players playing higher stake games aswell, there are also beginers who are very wealthy too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glceud Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins If you're playing total fish, those that simply cannot fold a hand, then you cannot steal/move/bluff and therefore your edge has vanished - you now need cards. Said it elsewere but calling ranges over the last couple of years have been the biggest move in poker tournies and as you suggest you need to steal/move/bluff the change was inevitable. Not at all suprised that players at all levels are adopting the same line. In fact I've seen more of it at higher levels than the ABC stuff we see at lower levels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billy the punter Posted September 9, 2009 Author Share Posted September 9, 2009 Re: "Big" Online Buy-ins Said it elsewere but calling ranges over the last couple of years have been the biggest move in poker tournies and as you suggest you need to steal/move/bluff the change was inevitable. Not at all suprised that players at all levels are adopting the same line. In fact I've seen more of it at higher levels than the ABC stuff we see at lower levels. Yeah, but I think a fellow decent player calling your pre-flop raises with marginal hands (because he knows your range) is a bit different to a fish who is calling with Ax as he believes his is a good hand. Along the lines of your post, in a tourn of decent standard my pre-flop calling range is big against a good player (in pos) and small against an inexperienced player (unless in early levels of a deep stack). However to an inexperienced player that tactic may seem the wrong way round. :ok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.32384c3055cbc1254b0eb6212fda1359.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.