Question for the PROS

[Royal Flush]

For me, un-sponsored like most of us, Bankroll Management is all that matters.

Going for the win is all very well & heroic, but no money = no poker, so for me, priority number one is to cash.

Laugh if you will, but how else does one of such mediocre talent survive in poker? Many a better player than me has gone busto going for the win, & many of them exist on the Circuit only by nipping.

I pay my way, my way. Earning enough to stay in the game I love  - without nipping all & sundry - is all that matters to me.

Bankroll management is a completely different matter. Of course you can reduce the amount of risks you take in tournaments so you don't need as big a bankroll, it will cost you money in the long run though, but for some that is the best thing to do. Personally though when i play a comp it's usually (not festivals) about 0.2% of my bankroll so i don't have to take such considerations.

I actually think Bankroll Management IS part of strategy in Tourney Poker - well, it is for me!

Ideally though Tony you don't want to be in the position of having to adjust ttourney strategy because of your bankroll, of course that's the ideal, like i said on occasions you will make the trade +£EV for less variance because of bankroll considerations. Like i say though in the Ideal where you can play optimum tournament poker with a huge roll it should never be a consideration.

So a £30k + bankroll then - nice

ty.

[tikay]

For me, un-sponsored like most of us, Bankroll Management is all that matters.

Going for the win is all very well & heroic, but no money = no poker, so for me, priority number one is to cash.

Laugh if you will, but how else does one of such mediocre talent survive in poker? Many a better player than me has gone busto going for the win, & many of them exist on the Circuit only by nipping.

I pay my way, my way. Earning enough to stay in the game I love  - without nipping all & sundry - is all that matters to me.

Bankroll management is a completely different matter. Of course you can reduce the amount of risks you take in tournaments so you don't need as big a bankroll, it will cost you money in the long run though, but for some that is the best thing to do. Personally though when i play a comp it's usually (not festivals) about 0.2% of my bankroll so i don't have to take such considerations.

I actually think Bankroll Management IS part of strategy in Tourney Poker - well, it is for me!

Ideally though Tony you don't want to be in the position of having to adjust ttourney strategy because of your bankroll, of course that's the ideal, like i said on occasions you will make the trade +£EV for less variance because of bankroll considerations. Like i say though in the Ideal where you can play optimum tournament poker with a huge roll it should never be a consideration.

So a £30k + bankroll then - nice

ty.

It depends what we mean when we say "ideally".

Ideally, we should not even think about bankroll when playing Tourneys, decisions should be made on the Tourney situation alone. Obviously.

Ideally, I need to earn enough to stay in the game, which I play because I enjoy, by one means or another. As I can't quite go with the big boys at the sharp end of Tourneys, I have to fiddle & diddle to earn cashes to sustain my Bankroll.

It's that balance thing again.

If I had pots of money, I'd play Tourneys VERY differently. But I'm not sure my results would be as good, truth to tell. Sponsored Pros or zillionaires never play scared poker. I do, sometimes, particularly in the bigger buy-in comps. But I'm comfy with my game in the £100 to £500 range, & do OK in them.

[TightPaulFolds]

Laugh if you will, but how else does one of such mediocre talent survive in poker?

lol, selling yourself a bit short there I think.

[MANTIS01]

OK

I am well aware most 'professional' poker players make their living from playing cash games.

But something i have always wondered is: when you sit down in a tournament, whether it be a £20 rebuy at your local card room or a 'major' event is your INITIAL goal to WIN the event or to try and make sure you CASH? (any profit has to be good if you are doing it for a living)

Fellow members can provide you with an answer that is specific to them.

The beauty of the forum is seeing the diversity of attitudes that exist and comparing them to your own.

So what is YOUR initial goal? And what are YOUR expectations? Because this is specific to you.

When I first started playing the game I had a certain arrogance about my own expectations. I only played to win. If truth be known I still do. I try to put the money side of things out of my head and play each hand as it comes.

I earnestly believe that the purest form of poker is played without the thought of money corrupting your mind. I do try to live by this philosophy no matter what the potential reward is.

However, during my first year playing the game the following happened....

£1,500 NL Hold Em Event
Walsall Grosvenor

I am deep into the second day with just two tables left.

I am currently sitting third in chips with fourth a long way back. I could just leave the table now, have a few drinks, and wait to take my place at the final table.

I have played great so far, but have a deep, deep, burning desire to win this thing.

It is bubble time....I care not!

Everyone passes around the table to me on the small blind. To my left is Barney Boatman, the chip leader, and the big blind.

I look down and see    . I decide to just flat call, hope to see a monster flop and trap this guy for all his chips.


He checks.

The flop comes.....     ..............Bingo!



Check...Bet...Raise...Re-raise...All-in...Call



Now the table, which included El Blondie and Howard Plant amongst others, had been very, very aggressive throughout the day. They didn't like me because I was an unknown aggressor and was playing the bubble situation like a seasoned pro. I was not scared....No Sir!! I put Boatman on a steal or a draw and he was NOT HAVING MY POT!!!!

Barney Boatman showed pocket eights.

I am not sure what happened for the next 20 minutes or so. My head hurt.

Whether I played the hand well or not considering the history at the table is unimportant...and of course I still could have got lucky. The fact remained that I had missed out on a big, big cash that day because I wasn't scared.

It took me a week to recover.

It was a lesson learned and I am kind of grateful for that...cough!

Today, I sometimes play scared.

But I call it Tournament Management.

[matt674]

OK

I am well aware most 'professional' poker players make their living from playing cash games.

But something i have always wondered is: when you sit down in a tournament, whether it be a £20 rebuy at your local card room or a 'major' event is your INITIAL goal to WIN the event or to try and make sure you CASH? (any profit has to be good if you are doing it for a living)

Fellow members can provide you with an answer that is specific to them.

The beauty of the forum is seeing the diversity of attitudes that exist and comparing them to your own.

So what is YOUR initial goal? And what are YOUR expectations? Because this is specific to you.

When I first started playing the game I had a certain arrogance about my own expectations. I only played to win. If truth be known I still do. I try to put the money side of things out of my head and play each hand as it comes.

I earnestly believe that the purest form of poker is played without the thought of money corrupting your mind. I do try to live by this philosophy no matter what the potential reward is.

However, during my first year playing the game the following happened....

£1,500 NL Hold Em Event
Walsall Grosvenor

I am deep into the second day with just two tables left.

I am currently sitting third in chips with fourth a long way back. I could just leave the table now, have a few drinks, and wait to take my place at the final table.

I have played great so far, but have a deep, deep, burning desire to win this thing.

It is bubble time....I care not!

Everyone passes around the table to me on the small blind. To my left is Barney Boatman, the chip leader, and the big blind.

I look down and see    . I decide to just flat call, hope to see a monster flop and trap this guy for all his chips.


He checks.

The flop comes.....     ..............Bingo!



Check...Bet...Raise...Re-raise...All-in...Call



Now the table, which included El Blondie and Howard Plant amongst others, had been very, very aggressive throughout the day. They didn't like me because I was an unknown aggressor and was playing the bubble situation like a seasoned pro. I was not scared....No Sir!! I put Boatman on a steal or a draw and he was NOT HAVING MY POT!!!!

Barney Boatman showed pocket eights.

I am not sure what happened for the next 20 minutes or so. My head hurt.

Whether I played the hand well or not considering the history at the table is unimportant...and of course I still could have got lucky. The fact remained that I had missed out on a big, big cash that day because I wasn't scared.

It took me a week to recover.

It was a lesson learned and I am kind of grateful for that...cough!

Today, I sometimes play scared.

But I call it Tournament Management.

tournament management? you have KQ suited in a battle of the blinds - no matter how you are playing the tournament you go broke on this hand unless you pass preflop - and if you are passing KQ suited in the battle of the blinds whilst on the final table bubble then you probably need to find another game as your playing more than scared.

[MANTIS01]

Matt

tournament management? you have KQ suited in a battle of the blinds - no matter how you are playing the tournament you go broke on this hand unless you pass preflop - and if you are passing KQ suited in the battle of the blinds whilst on the final table bubble then you probably need to find another game as your playing more than scared.

This was my very attitude at the time.

Not now though

There were a number of very short stacks left in the tournament at the time. I did not have to play this hand at all. Barney Boatman was chip leader. All I had to do was wait for a short-stack to bust....any minute now, earn £2000 min, and save my gambling for the final.

Like I said....Tournament Management

[matt674]

Sorry, when you said you were deep into a 2 day event playing final two tables that you'd already be in the money.

Even so - if i ever look down and find KQ suited in the battle of the blinds and pass will be the day i give up poker. If i'm paying £1500+juice to play a tournament then £2000 is not what i'm looking to win, its significantly more.

[taximan007]

An interesting array of different views, thank you very much for taking the time.

With regards to MANTISO1, in his position in that tourney and as a 'professional' someone who makes his living playing poker, surely ANY return on his buy in has to be looked at as profit? So like he said, "there were a number of very short stacks" and he didnt need to get involved. But by doing so, instead of returning say £300 he lost £1,500 plus(a bad day at the office?) Thats not a critiscism, just my take on things if i were to look at making money from the game (many will say weak play) but bills have to be paid.

Anyway once again thank you all very much.

[matt674]

With regards to MANTISO1, in his position in that tourney and as a 'professional' someone who makes his living playing poker, surely ANY return on his buy in has to be looked at as profit? So like he said, "there were a number of very short stacks" and he didnt need to get involved. But by doing so, instead of returning say £300 he lost £1,500 plus(a bad day at the office?) Thats not a critiscism, just my take on things if i were to look at making money from the game (many will say weak play) but bills have to be paid.

If your that worried about paying the bills then you wouldnt be paying £1500+juice for a single tournament.

[kinboshi]

With regards to MANTISO1, in his position in that tourney and as a 'professional' someone who makes his living playing poker, surely ANY return on his buy in has to be looked at as profit? So like he said, "there were a number of very short stacks" and he didnt need to get involved. But by doing so, instead of returning say £300 he lost £1,500 plus(a bad day at the office?) Thats not a critiscism, just my take on things if i were to look at making money from the game (many will say weak play) but bills have to be paid.

If your that worried about paying the bills then you wouldnt be paying £1500+juice for a single tournament.

What if you qualify for it?

[Senor Nick]

Interesting points, im not a full time pro but do take my poker very seriously and I live in spain but have managed to get over to play the first 3 GUKPT events.

Anyway just a couple of questions for the Pro's how do you deal with the bad beats which i have had two herendous ones in Walsall & Cardiff and as you cant win every event you enter what how do you judge your relative success of a tournament etc etc

One lesson i have learnt is if you end up getting low stacked you get a lot more bad beats

I made a decision to play the first 3 events just so i could see what level i was at and the bottom line is bar one mistake in Cardiff I'm very happy with the way I played for the 8 hours or so before this idiot made a horrnendous play and put me  out, I wont bore everyone with what happened in Cardiff( As I did that in Cardiff) but just to say the person who won the hand wont be winning many poker tournaments.  Kashan who made the final table was also in the hand and DTDs Carlo was also at the table.

The interesting observation for me is that the Bolton was won by the poker player and the card catcher has won the last two tournaments

Anyway I probably wont play Manchester  but hope to be in brighton

[kinboshi]

Interesting points, im not a full time pro but do take my poker very seriously and I live in spain but have managed to get over to play the first 3 GUKPT events.

Anyway just a couple of questions for the Pro's how do you deal with the bad beats which i have had two herendous ones in Walsall & Cardiff and as you cant win every event you enter what how do you judge your relative success of a tournament etc etc

One lesson i have learnt is if you end up getting low stacked you get a lot more bad beats

I made a decision to play the first 3 events just so i could see what level i was at and the bottom line is bar one mistake in Cardiff I'm very happy with the way I played for the 8 hours or so before this idiot made a horrnendous play and put me  out, I wont bore everyone with what happened in Cardiff( As I did that in Cardiff) but just to say the person who won the hand wont be winning many poker tournaments.  Kashan who made the final table was also in the hand and DTDs Carlo was also at the table.

The interesting observation for me is that the Bolton was won by the poker player and the card catcher has won the last two tournaments

Anyway I probably wont play Manchester  but hope to be in brighton

That is the key isn't it.  Whenever you're all-in there's a chance you can go out if the other player's got you covered.  Also, when you've got the chips you're less concerned about the cards and more focused on using your stack as a weapon.  When you're short you have to make moves - but it often comes down to your hand having to win a showdown.  The more this happens, the more chance you have of losing one.


(oh and  to Blonde)

[MANTIS01]

OK

Firstly, I won a seat through Blue Square, so free-rolling all the way in that one and any cash would have been pure profit.

The important thing is this though.

Myself, Barney Boatman and Darren Grosvenor were well clear of the pack in terms of chip position.

Darren won the event pocketing £66,000, Barney came second for £34,600 and I left with nothing.

I got busted that day because my absolute and only consideration was winning.

Like Matt said. That hand was almost impossible to get away from once the call had been made and the flop came down.

But the important lesson I learned was this...

When you very first start playing the game you only really consider the cards. But as you become more experienced you take into account a variety of other factors such as mentality and situations.

Fact: Every time you put chips into the pot you are gambling.

So at this point in the tournament, in a markedly healthy position and with a number of short stacks in play, I did not need to gamble! I certainly didn't need to gamble with the chip leader! That was the situation.

When I flat called with the suited K-Q I thought about flopping something big and taking all Barney Boatman's chips. So before the flop came down I was dreaming of getting all the chips in the middle. Winning a big pot would mean risking all my chips and my tournament life. This was my mentality. Looking back it was the wrong mentality for that particular situation.

Clearly I am not afraid to gamble. In many situations this is a good mentality for a poker player to have. I should have been afraid to gamble in that situation.

My priority should have been to cash. Then go on from that foundation and use my amply sufficient stack to gamble in the final. To try and win it there rather than here.

So I think that the answer to the question is to change your expectations dependant on the situation. A poker tournament is a living entity. Things are changing around all the time and it is important to consider a variety of factors before deciding what your next step should be.

In this tournament, experience and an ability to manage their tournament certainly won the day for those guys. On the other hand my raw aggression, inexperience and will to win cost me dear.

[wsopin07]

This might be the most interesting post I have ever read on Blonde. REALLY

I think there are some many variables that go into this that there will never be a "great" post, just great opinions. As has already been stared the "money" is a way to continue your poker playing. Look up Tony Cusineau on the Mob or another results site. I swear that I would be more scared to play a pot w/ this person than any OTHER PERSON IN THE WORLD, bar none.      Why??

He is the best "casher" in the world!  There is no value here. Even if I win 10 pots from him he may get it all back latter in just 1 pot. Here is what I am saying, this guy plays to cash 1st and win 2nd. Not a bad thing, but he is actually harder to play than Phil Ivey!!!!!!  I cant lay a hand down to Ivey, but I sure can to Tony C.

I want to play "loose" players early on, I want to be able to outplay people later w/ their own chips.

To get back to the original question! I think this is one of the BIGGEST "tells" in poker!

It really is simple, figure out why the other player is there and take advantage of it. On the bubble or not!

EXAMPLES:

1) Tikay finding out a guy had a $1k last longer in a $75 comp, bingo====== information = +ev
2) Knowing a player is broke
3) Knowing how he qualified and what his expectations are ( usually get this at the bar the night before)
4) Befriend the quite guy at the table, they will tell u anything
5) Watch the table 20 minutes prior to sitting down at the start of the comp
6) Basically just talk to the people at your table, they will tell u everything.
7) 2005 ewsop in Vienna, I outplayed the mug because he "told me to" w/ our precomp conversation.

The bottom line is that u really are always playing on the bubble and u r really always playing to cash if u listen to what the players at the table are telling u!

The idea of making bad or -ev plays does not apply, u should always be making +ev plays even if it is just to cash. If not u are not "reading everything around you and u r not playing poker at a +ev so it may not matter anyways.

I would talk about my WSOP final table but I dont want to be FLAMED by anyone that I sucked out again!!!! Sorry, It was a good story. 

[Peter Costa]

I am well aware most 'professional' poker players make their living from playing cash games.

But something i have always wondered is: when you sit down in a tournament, whether it be a £20 rebuy at your local card room or a 'major' event is your INITIAL goal to WIN the event or to try and make sure you CASH? (any profit has to be good if you are doing it for a living)

This is a great topic, simply due to the many different approaches that can be applied.

Firstly, we have the “safety first” approach that can sometimes prove costly in terms of how many chips you win from an opponent, while on other hand; can save you from going broke. The problem is, in many instances (like the K-Q V 8-8), there is nothing a player can do to stop the chips going in. The other problem, really depends on the mentality or approach of the player. Example:

With playing so many tournaments over the years, I have gained a lot of experience in terms of trying to control just how much money goes into a pot. Obviously though, in the very late stages of tournaments, this is less likely to play any great role. Simply put, the blinds tend to force issues. But in order to make the late stages, we first must negotiate the minefield that we face. Some like to blast through the minefield and take their chance that they don’t get blown up. Some players like this approach. And in truth, there is great justification in trying to accumulate as many chips as possible. After all, with such big field to overcome, it improves a player’s chances to go deep. And in truth, this approach has proven successful for some aggressive players. 

But I guess one of the points being made in these posts, can a player play with this type of aggression, irrespective of financial state? Obviously, it‘s so much easier if one is flushed and can play without fear. But very few players manage to reach such a major safeguard. In fact, for the majority, their financial state DOES dictate or influence certain decisions. But is that positive or negative? I guess the answer to that is: it depends. Because at the end of the day, the luck factor will play a role when it wants to. And the more you push with your stack, the more you are asking luck to play a part. So I would guess, what works one day, may fail the next. It therefore seems that there is no clear indication as to the best approach on any given day.

So what is the answer? Perhaps the only answer is to find a style that befits the moment, or the day, or a poker life. In other words, try and find a balance that allows you to play a hand well, to play good during the day, and to give you a chance through your whole poker life. I guess you just have to gauge the balance between taking a tournament by storm and finding consistency. No doubt players have varying views - but isn’t that the beauty of this game?

So what did I choose?

My initial approach to poker (when poker became my only hope and only source of income), was to look for consistency. To be honest, around 2001, there were very few really big pay-day opportunities, it therefore made much greater sense to focus on consistency. After all, one tournament win would not have set me up for life! The outcome to this approach, was perhaps my saving grace in terms of surviving. Things may different now days. One tournament can set up a player for life. Bt no one can choose which tournament they win. Perhaps therefore, this approach still holds true today?

As an after thought, I just wonder the importance that this approach had on my brain? Because I must admit, I liked consistency. I liked to have a chance in every event I played. In fact, it made me very strong in terms of handling the downside of poker. So even though some beats had proven costly, the fact that I had confidence in my ability to be consistent, was probably my biggest weapon in that fight. I guess not everything is as black and white as results. Perhaps it’s what’s behind the results that ultimately matter?

So what exactly was the approach?

Firstly, I would say that my first goal was to not get busted. That may sound negative. Perhaps it does sound negative when compared to the approach of wanting to steamroll through a tournament? But when does one player actually achieve this? In my experience, this was vary rare. In fact, I saw so many tournament wins from low stacks, that it really hit me as to how many ways there were to win a tournament. So for me, not getting busted became my prime aim. Did it work? I guess I lost count of the number of events that I won because of my desire not to go broke! It may sound like a negative approach, but overall, players need to know how to handle a short or medium stack, because that is the case more often than not. And also, wins sometimes come when least expected!

So how could I example one or two cases that highlight the positive? Obviously, even though there must have been numerous times when this approach lessened the amount of chips I took off another player, I vary rarely dwelled on this. Because overall. I doubt if any of them proved crucial to a getting a result. On other hand, getting busted was always final and critical!

So, from the many examples I could use, I will choose the same one that featured -Qs. The event was a the 10k Buy-in for the WPT in Tunica about three years ago.

On the table, about four to my right, was the one and only Alan Goerhing. For those that have not played with Alan, I got to say that if you don’t enjoy playing poker with Alan, then give up the game. Simple reason being, Alan is just a true gent and so much fun to play with. Oh…and another things, he plays every hand he can. From garbage to A-A, Alan sees potential. And boy can he play well at times!

Anyhow, I decided from the moment we teed off, that I would go along with Alan and play him at his game. Looking back now, it still makes smile what we got up to. In fact, we must have played 70-80% of the hands during the first level or two. The problem is with Alan, he sometimes has the goods. And when that happens, he can send you to the rail scratching your head.

Anyway, we have had fun galore while waiting to trap each other. Finally, I have him where I want him. Calling one his usual raises, I have position -Qs. On a flop Q and two small spades, I also seem to have him with a monster hand of top pair and a four-to-the-flush. The expected flop-bet from Alan has me contemplating a raise. But really, even though I have a big hand, I am still not in love to start committing chips from my stack. I guess the years of playing in this manner managed to control my desire to get too busy at this early stage of a tournament. However, when the hit’s the turn to give me top two pair, all thoughts of safety disappear. Suddenly, my only thought is how to extract as much from Alan as possible?. In fact, I was already trying to find the right figure to bet, once the expected check came from Alan. He is bound to check this, isn’t he? After all, even though we have been at other from the outset, he is badly out of position in the hand. But to my initial delight, Alan leads out with another bet.

Trying to work out Alan’s hand, the worst I could put him on was A-A. Should I commit now? But what if it pairs the board and he does have A-A? Would I be sent to the rail with nothing more than a bad beat story to keep me company? You know what, I’m going to play this safe and if I like the river, I would try and extract the right amount from him.

Looking to either make a boat or a flush, I wasn’t too disappointed with the blank rag on the river. Surely I thought, Alan HAS to check now. But Alan again leads with a bet that is almost a third of my stack. Suddenly, from trying to work out how much I would win from Alan, I contemplated a muck. I can’t help but smile at Alan. How can you bet into me three time, was the only question that filled my mind. I make a crying call and Alan shows me his set of Queens.

About an hour later (having recovered from that setback), I raise Alan’s BB and get the expected call from him. The Jack high flop with two hearts is checked by Alan. Trying to trap, I check with him. The turn card manages to pair the board and also bring out the flush. Alan seems to like his hand now and leads out with a bet. Wary of the combinations that are now out there, I just call the turn. Alan leads out again after the river and I decide that my A-A may not be good enough. After I muck, Alan shows K-K. How strange for Alan to play the hand as he did. On first thought, it seemed that he was trying to trap. But in fact, Alan was just playing it safe. Funny really, if Alan played the hand as he should have, I would have doubled up and crippled him in the process. But I guess I’m not the only one that plays it safe sometimes!

These above two examples how both the positive and negative from playing “safe”. However, in this instance, the A-A had little effect and I went to increase my stack that first day to becoming one of the chip leader; whereas if I chose to raise with the K-Q at any stage, I would have gone broke in the hand.

Footnote.

In the very next hand, Howard Lederer raised Alan’s SB and Alan re-raised. Holding Q-Q, Howard pushes all-in , only to bust out to Alan’s K-K.

Footnote #2. Alan and I soon parted ways when our table broke, only to met up again when Alan joined my table just before the day was done. And as it happens, Alan busted me on the first hand when he raised my BB from the just behind the button. I guess I could have put him on K-K, but Alan rarely has the goods. But when he does…….