cash games is my preference - biggest pro - can stop and start when you like, unlike a tournament where you keep playing until you get knocked out. con - usually larger swings in bankroll as fee for tournament is fixed. cash game may require multiple buy ins.
Thanks for the insight, I've never played cash games really, jus wondering if I'm missing anything. What kind of strategy do you employ?
I personally go with the Bet and Pray strategy, but I think it is really dependant on what you are playing. My favorite thing to do is shortstack games that I clearly don't have the bankroll for (such as 2/4 PLO). I can usually run hot for 5 sessions in a row, then bust everything I made on the 6th. Sad, but true story.
About a year ago I tried cash games for a BRIEF period of time. I'd been doing quite well (I thought) in 3-5$ SNG and thought "I'm a pro, I need to take the next step, I'll try the cash games". Did well first few nights. Smaller stakes games. I remember getting very excited once when I went all in and won $75 in one hand. Then reality kicked in, and I got stomped horribly. The axe swings both ways. Lost my entire bank roll that I'd been building up in one session. In short, if you can't handle the huge swings these guys talk about...stick with what's doing well for you now. If you want to try them, stick with the micro stakes until you get a feel for things. Then at least you can make an informed decision. Don't deny yourself challenges, but don't try flying the space shuttle after a few hours of MS Flight simulator.
My personal preference is SNGs online (I have played cash and go through huge swings....). I save my cash games for live where I don't need to run trackers and stats programs to pick out the regulars/pros.
Currently I am grinding away at 16.00 SNG (4 to eight tabling) at a time, as well as 10-20.00 DoNs. These have been my bread and butter for a while now. (Hence so much strategy posting in the tourney section of this message board). I mean I have played higher (500-1000.00 heads up games/SNGs online) but you are playing against pros/regulars and really I am a part time player so I am happy turning my few hundred a night stealing from the lower level fish. Eventually once I get to about 10-20K online I will start taking bigger shots more regularly.
I find in my cash game (5/5 5/10 10/20NL) live I don't gamble it up enough and I am reluctant to pull the trigger..more when I want to make a move because I am always thinking someone will call me out of spite just because there is so much money in the pot after I re-raise. (Lots of references available). So for the most part I just pick my nitty spots and still get paid but I don't swing more than 500-1000 bucks in a session live depending on the stakes. Too much of a bankroll nit.
Yea I don't think I have the bank or the balls to play many succesful cash games. Magic, do you bother using a tracker or any software while playing your SnGs?
Yea I don't think I have the bank or the balls to play many succesful cash games. Magic, do you bother using a tracker or any software while playing your SnGs?
Not really...I run poker tracker afterwards to review some hand histories and put some notes on players but for the most part I can play 8 tables just by betting patterns for the most part. I find sometime the stats are accurate in the sense that someone could look like they are playing loose but infact they have just picked up good hands and are running hot in the tourney.
At the same time though I have a ton of live experience in tournies and cash so a lot of the people who rely heavily on tracking/stat software may not have grown up playing live.
It has taken me many years of online crap/losing to actually adjust my game online to be profitable. However a lot of the tricks I have used online smash the live games.
Sng's are formulaic in nature. Once you know the formula you simply rinse and repeat. You can teach a monkey to do it.
Cash is much more reliant on reading hands and players. You have to be able to extract maximum value when you've got it and lose the minimum when don't. Pound the weak players and give the aggressive one's a chance to bluff off their stack.
There is also no playing on auto-pilot in cash games. You can play a long focused session for 2 hours, lose focus for 5 minutes and give back your profits and more.
CASH GAMES
- lowest variance, i.e., ~40% of players in a table will be up
- best way to bonus-whore online.
MTT
- highest payoff for amount of buy-in
- highest variance, only ~10% will make it to the money in the tournament
- fastest way to lose your bankroll or become a poker millionaire, like SirWatts, Choron & other K-W champions.
SNG
- variance is between cash game & MTT, ~30% ITM.
SATELLITES
- great for reducing variance to big buy-in MTTs. For example, very few people have the bankroll to buy in directly for $10K+ events, but some can win a seat for much less and either take +EV shots or at least have a great experience.
I try to be versatile and play whichever format I think is best at the time. Online, I play satellites to win multiple entries to the big Sunday MTTs and to big live events. Live, while waiting or after a satellite or MTT, I love to play cash games to help fund my next tournament.
If you are a casual player, I dont see why you really need to weigh the pros and cons of playing one or the other. If you like playing both you might as well play both. If you like playing one more, go ahead and play that one. Bankroll shouldnt be a factor since online you can find a game to suit the smallest and the biggest of bankrolls.
If you are asking how to maximize the amount of money you can win...Id say a player who is equally skilled at both has a much higher ceiling playing cash for a number of reasons...
1. You can select your tables in cash games, so you can continually find yourself at good tables whereas STTs are kind of a crap shoot.
2. You dont have to wait for games to fill up, much less downtime.
3. There are way more cash games compared to STTs of the same stake. Take a look on Stars sometime and notice how many 1k NL (5/10) compared to 1k buy-in STTs going.
4. STTs are really a product of the internet so it kinda handicaps you if you ever want to play live. Sure some places offer STTs but usually they are only satelites into bigger tournaments.
This is not to say you cant be extremely profitable at STTs...its just that its really a small niche of the online poker world.
I prefer sng's for the exact reason that jah was talking about: time. I know that any sng is going to take me roughly an hour (9 player) or 1.5-2 hours (18,27 and 45 player). Ring games, I can find myself too caught up in the "I'm running hot, keep playing" mindset and suddenly I'm late for work. Like anything, it's just preference.
Echo what Kai has said. Also SnG, for the most part, is a game that can be "solved" in a sense that it can be pretty easy to played an unexploitable game once you hit a certain level. Your edge over the field also tends to be lower once you reach a level as well.
cash games ftw. you can play whenever you want for as long as you want. i use HEM but for the most part i know who the regulars are and play accordingly. it's also pretty easy to spot who the good players are pretty quick.
the number one reason i take cash over sngs is because of the auto reload, i can always have a full stack, i never really figured out how to play with 10-20bb's which you seem to have for the majority of an sng.
plus it tilts the hell out of when the blinds get up there and you find everyone (including yourself) just shoving every hand.
The term variance is being thrown around pretty loosely in here. I think the problem is that people associate variance with losing more then winning when in actuality, variance is a measure of the two.
The variance in a STT is inherently low because of the payout structure... for example a $100 STT is a range from -100 to +500 (10 handed) whereas someone playing a $100 NL cash game over the same amount of hands in the STT could likely go something from -500 to +1000 fairly easily. So in that sense, its a much higher variance game.
However...if you are just looking at individual movements in your bankroll, cash games are a lower variance game because you are likely winning and losing a ton of small pots...for example, if you were to look at your bankroll for a cash game NL 100 player...itd look probably like...
+1,-2,+23, -5, +7...etc etc
whereas the STT players bankroll looks like this for the buyins and wins...
-100, -100, +200, -100, +500, -100...
So if you consider that, you realize how dumb it is to try and differentiate the two in terms of "variance" because both are high and low at the same time.
I think you guys are associating like most people variance with only the bad and trying to figure out which one you can string together more consecutive winnings days and have smaller downswings. If thats what your trying to get at then you are talking about "WINRATE".
Comments
Pros for STT are they are probably a better way to build up a bankroll as you reduce risk.
I personally go with the Bet and Pray strategy, but I think it is really dependant on what you are playing. My favorite thing to do is shortstack games that I clearly don't have the bankroll for (such as 2/4 PLO). I can usually run hot for 5 sessions in a row, then bust everything I made on the 6th. Sad, but true story.
Currently I am grinding away at 16.00 SNG (4 to eight tabling) at a time, as well as 10-20.00 DoNs. These have been my bread and butter for a while now. (Hence so much strategy posting in the tourney section of this message board). I mean I have played higher (500-1000.00 heads up games/SNGs online) but you are playing against pros/regulars and really I am a part time player so I am happy turning my few hundred a night stealing from the lower level fish. Eventually once I get to about 10-20K online I will start taking bigger shots more regularly.
I find in my cash game (5/5 5/10 10/20NL) live I don't gamble it up enough and I am reluctant to pull the trigger..more when I want to make a move because I am always thinking someone will call me out of spite just because there is so much money in the pot after I re-raise. (Lots of references available). So for the most part I just pick my nitty spots and still get paid but I don't swing more than 500-1000 bucks in a session live depending on the stakes. Too much of a bankroll nit.
Not really...I run poker tracker afterwards to review some hand histories and put some notes on players but for the most part I can play 8 tables just by betting patterns for the most part. I find sometime the stats are accurate in the sense that someone could look like they are playing loose but infact they have just picked up good hands and are running hot in the tourney.
At the same time though I have a ton of live experience in tournies and cash so a lot of the people who rely heavily on tracking/stat software may not have grown up playing live.
It has taken me many years of online crap/losing to actually adjust my game online to be profitable. However a lot of the tricks I have used online smash the live games.
Cash is much more reliant on reading hands and players. You have to be able to extract maximum value when you've got it and lose the minimum when don't. Pound the weak players and give the aggressive one's a chance to bluff off their stack.
There is also no playing on auto-pilot in cash games. You can play a long focused session for 2 hours, lose focus for 5 minutes and give back your profits and more.
- lowest variance, i.e., ~40% of players in a table will be up
- best way to bonus-whore online.
MTT
- highest payoff for amount of buy-in
- highest variance, only ~10% will make it to the money in the tournament
- fastest way to lose your bankroll or become a poker millionaire, like SirWatts, Choron & other K-W champions.
SNG
- variance is between cash game & MTT, ~30% ITM.
SATELLITES
- great for reducing variance to big buy-in MTTs. For example, very few people have the bankroll to buy in directly for $10K+ events, but some can win a seat for much less and either take +EV shots or at least have a great experience.
I try to be versatile and play whichever format I think is best at the time. Online, I play satellites to win multiple entries to the big Sunday MTTs and to big live events. Live, while waiting or after a satellite or MTT, I love to play cash games to help fund my next tournament.
If you are asking how to maximize the amount of money you can win...Id say a player who is equally skilled at both has a much higher ceiling playing cash for a number of reasons...
1. You can select your tables in cash games, so you can continually find yourself at good tables whereas STTs are kind of a crap shoot.
2. You dont have to wait for games to fill up, much less downtime.
3. There are way more cash games compared to STTs of the same stake. Take a look on Stars sometime and notice how many 1k NL (5/10) compared to 1k buy-in STTs going.
4. STTs are really a product of the internet so it kinda handicaps you if you ever want to play live. Sure some places offer STTs but usually they are only satelites into bigger tournaments.
This is not to say you cant be extremely profitable at STTs...its just that its really a small niche of the online poker world.
the number one reason i take cash over sngs is because of the auto reload, i can always have a full stack, i never really figured out how to play with 10-20bb's which you seem to have for the majority of an sng.
plus it tilts the hell out of when the blinds get up there and you find everyone (including yourself) just shoving every hand.
Why cash games?
There is skill in playing perfect short stack tournament shovebot but ....
I'm much better at playing deeper stacks... and as noted above, cash games have lower variance.
IMO..thats debatable....
I'd be interested in hearing why you think this is so?
Reef - Are you levelling here?
The variance in a STT is inherently low because of the payout structure... for example a $100 STT is a range from -100 to +500 (10 handed) whereas someone playing a $100 NL cash game over the same amount of hands in the STT could likely go something from -500 to +1000 fairly easily. So in that sense, its a much higher variance game.
However...if you are just looking at individual movements in your bankroll, cash games are a lower variance game because you are likely winning and losing a ton of small pots...for example, if you were to look at your bankroll for a cash game NL 100 player...itd look probably like...
+1,-2,+23, -5, +7...etc etc
whereas the STT players bankroll looks like this for the buyins and wins...
-100, -100, +200, -100, +500, -100...
So if you consider that, you realize how dumb it is to try and differentiate the two in terms of "variance" because both are high and low at the same time.
I think you guys are associating like most people variance with only the bad and trying to figure out which one you can string together more consecutive winnings days and have smaller downswings. If thats what your trying to get at then you are talking about "WINRATE".
Variance = standard deviation squared.
That is why bankroll requirements are so different between cash and STT.
20 BI would be ample for a low limit STT player. For cash you would be better off with 40.
If you compare STT to cash you have much more control over your losses in STT however you also have a much more limited rate of earn.