Best games for us fish to play to have a chance of winning in the long run?

[Pawprint]

everyone missing the point here imo.

I think deciding where to play there should be a load more important factors to consider before where the softest stnd of play is, whether or not you're going to make a big ICM mistake is, or if there will be a gaggle of Pro players hunting you for your money.

The best thing about being a recreational player is that you can play poker without a legitimate expectation of profit, and because of this you can base decisions about where to play on much more pleasant criteria than pro players; playing DTD tonight cos that fit valet is working, going to play some 50p£1 and get smashed with my pal, going to play Gala tonight cos it's a 10minute walk and I can have a drink etc.

Spending too much time deliberating about the "value" of certains games just seems like a drain on the enjoyment of playing recreational poker to me. I've spoken to with loads of guys over the years and heard lots of different explanations for there motivation to play poker, from "gets me away from the wife one night a week" - "I just like trying to break some pro's soul" - "I really like playing" (simple I know!!)

Basically if you wanna win at poker then you have to play in games with weaker players than you, as B+W as that sounds, and if you've ever run a variance simulation (not something I'd advise as it's quite confusing and probably the dullest thing that it's possible to do lol) but you'd see that if you play poker sporadically over a year then the difference between a -10% and +10% ROI is irrelevant. I would focus my energy on where you want to play, where is most fun to play, what satisfies you most - fast action, low exposure, rowdy table banter, chance to win big money etc and playing well within your means instead of trying to find game that you feel are +EV, when they might still not be, and even if they are you'll never really be able to beat the variance, and if you're going to be at the mercy of variance then you need to get lucky anyways, may as well go to where you like playing, play with people you like playing against in games you want to play and just accept you need to be slightly luckier than you would be playing elsewhere!

This post deserves a signed Chris Moorman book

Absolutely spot on.  I think too many recreational poker players get caught up in making +EV game selection decisions (because they've read it on a forum somewhere) and forgets the reasons why they are choosing to spend their hard earned cash and valuable spare time playing poker.

[Marky147]

Told ya Woodsey

lol I don't think I've ever been to a casino or to play poker to chase birds 

Haha, I meant my first post...

[Woodsey]

everyone missing the point here imo.

I think deciding where to play there should be a load more important factors to consider before where the softest stnd of play is, whether or not you're going to make a big ICM mistake is, or if there will be a gaggle of Pro players hunting you for your money.

The best thing about being a recreational player is that you can play poker without a legitimate expectation of profit, and because of this you can base decisions about where to play on much more pleasant criteria than pro players; playing DTD tonight cos that fit valet is working, going to play some 50p£1 and get smashed with my pal, going to play Gala tonight cos it's a 10minute walk and I can have a drink etc.

Spending too much time deliberating about the "value" of certains games just seems like a drain on the enjoyment of playing recreational poker to me. I've spoken to with loads of guys over the years and heard lots of different explanations for there motivation to play poker, from "gets me away from the wife one night a week" - "I just like trying to break some pro's soul" - "I really like playing" (simple I know!!)

Basically if you wanna win at poker then you have to play in games with weaker players than you, as B+W as that sounds, and if you've ever run a variance simulation (not something I'd advise as it's quite confusing and probably the dullest thing that it's possible to do lol) but you'd see that if you play poker sporadically over a year then the difference between a -10% and +10% ROI is irrelevant. I would focus my energy on where you want to play, where is most fun to play, what satisfies you most - fast action, low exposure, rowdy table banter, chance to win big money etc and playing well within your means instead of trying to find game that you feel are +EV, when they might still not be, and even if they are you'll never really be able to beat the variance, and if you're going to be at the mercy of variance then you need to get lucky anyways, may as well go to where you like playing, play with people you like playing against in games you want to play and just accept you need to be slightly luckier than you would be playing elsewhere!

I take your point. But if I knew I was going to lose playing game xyz I probably just wouldn't play. I'd probably just play casino games instead so I could get instant gratification via regular sweats rather than waiting around bored to get a few playable hands, and being able to neck down a few pints knowing it wasn't going to affect the outcome.

[Marky147]

And I thought my old dear was hard work!

[SuuPRlim]

That's fair enough, though to know where you're winning or losing though tbh, there are still forms of poker I wasent certain I had any edge in after a pretty large sample.

I think you're probably never going to see this long run and by the time you do and figure out if it's winning or not then it'll be too late. Sounds

Sounds to me like you just want action? Short stack in aggro live cash games with the right players sounds like the best thing to me. Quit when you like, have a few (+) jars, and it'll be pretty high variance so if your a slight dog in the game then it's not really an issue, this is actually a spot where you want a couple of decent pros in the game cos they are the ones most likely to give you slightly faster action!

[AlunB]

Woodsey is absolutely spot on. There is this nonsense idea peddled by online gambling executives that everyone is happy to lose money hand over fist because they are being 'entertained' by the gambling.

I'm sure some people are, but an awful lot of people in poker need to be able to at least suspend disbelief and give themselves what they think is a fair chance to win. It's the same in sports betting. For example, oh I dunno, some random poker player punting on the darts with no positive expectation whatsoever thinking they are just getting unlucky

[AlunB]

IMO

If every 'rec' knew, really deep down knew, they were never going to win in the long term the vast vast majority would never play again unless it was with their mates or in the occasional tournament for a chance at a bink.

Funnily enough that's almost exactly what I do now...

[AlunB]

My advice to poker pros. Start lying to recs. A lot. And quickly.

[AndrewT]

People don't mind playing -EV games (otherwise every casino would be empty) - sometimes they know the odds aren't in their favour but just want the thrill, but most of the time they just don't understand the maths behind the games.

However, 'there's a group of pro players who are using special programs against you and all talking to each other behind your back'? Well, you don't need to know anything about maths or probabilities to not like that, it'll touch a nerve of 'that's not fair' within the casual player.

Even if it is just happening at a tiny subset of games that most people won't play anyway, the perception is there.

[SuuPRlim]

Woodsey is absolutely spot on. There is this nonsense idea peddled by online gambling executives that everyone is happy to lose money hand over fist because they are being 'entertained' by the gambling.

I'm sure some people are, but an awful lot of people in poker need to be able to at least suspend disbelief and give themselves what they think is a fair chance to win. It's the same in sports betting. For example, oh I dunno, some random poker player punting on the darts with no positive expectation whatsoever thinking they are just getting unlucky

Yeh, you wouldn't believe whilst I'm shrewdly picking out my darts bets how many dumb, drooling, moron poker players I see just punting there money off - they probably think they're winning CLOWNS

[AlunB]

People don't mind playing -EV games (otherwise every casino would be empty) - sometimes they know the odds aren't in their favour but just want the thrill, but most of the time they just don't understand the maths behind the games.

However, 'there's a group of pro players who are using special programs against you and all talking to each other behind your back'? Well, you don't need to know anything about maths or probabilities to not like that, it'll touch a nerve of 'that's not fair' within the casual player.

Even if it is just happening at a tiny subset of games that most people won't play anyway, the perception is there.

Yeah, but they often need to lie to themselves or kid themselves that "this time" I'm going to beat the odds! We all do it. It's hope more than expectation, but you need to keep the hope alive. Poker has done a dreadful job of keeping losers happy. As I'm sure you well know that's pretty much the entire job of a casino or sports betting operator. Making losers happy. Poker sucks at this.

[AlunB]

Woodsey is absolutely spot on. There is this nonsense idea peddled by online gambling executives that everyone is happy to lose money hand over fist because they are being 'entertained' by the gambling.

I'm sure some people are, but an awful lot of people in poker need to be able to at least suspend disbelief and give themselves what they think is a fair chance to win. It's the same in sports betting. For example, oh I dunno, some random poker player punting on the darts with no positive expectation whatsoever thinking they are just getting unlucky

Yeh, you wouldn't believe whilst I'm shrewdly picking out my darts bets how many dumb, drooling, moron poker players I see just punting there money off - they probably think they're winning CLOWNS

LIKE

[theprawnidentity]

Poker has done a dreadful job of keeping losers happy.

This may be true, but I'm not sure I've met any.

[SuuPRlim]

tbf though, poker gets a hard time at that, as it's person vs person not person vs corporation, when you dust £10k off at blackjack and the pitboss comps you dinner, you don't really feel that much tilt at him, he's just got your dinner and he doesn't actually get the money - the faceless corporation has it, and now you're going to have dinner, on them.

you lose £10k to a pro poker player HU, its a big hit to the ego, he's now sat there with your money - he started to lock up a bit when he got up a lot, he played the hand with the 77 pretty shit and got lucky it's pretty infuriating but you have someone to directly direct you irratence towards. What exactly can the poker player do? Take the man to dinner? Buy him a watch? Tell him how unlucky he was and comfort him? All he can do is act with some class and win like a gentleman and whereas most of the time that's enough a fair amount of the time it just isn't - through no fault of the player.

I always remember once in a casino a while back (before I'd really played a huge amount of live poker games) at about 5am when i was drinking this guy sat down at 50p/£1 with pile of cash made it £20 blind every hand and then berated the whole table for not gambling, I sat down and said to him "i'll gamble with you if you fancy it?" he said bring it on... I ended up winning ~£2500 off him including this final hand where I had K2 vs his 66 on 26T and won, 15minutes after he left the table i was chatting to someone next to a roulette table and he came up - I, very sincerely, said to him "brutal that hand mate very unlucky" to which he replied by calling me a "little c*nt" and to "fuck off before he broke my legs" - this was a old, respectable looking guy.

Learnt a few lessons here - firstly any of that post-hand empathy, no matter ho sincere has a far greater chance of coming across patronising and needly over genuine (espcially younger guy to older guy) so unless I knew the person well and had a relationship with them where they'd know i was sincere I wasn't going to do that. Also, despite the fact that you shouldn't, people take poker personally and rather than thinking "they shouldnt do that" you should respect it. The casino's don't have to worry about the social nuances of this they just do their job.

Similarly, the pokersites, they don't care about this either. The happiness of Rec players, and the contentment of Reg players is just something they take for granted (stars prolly less so than anyone else) and if they spent 1 minute thinking about this for every 60 they spent counting there money it'd be a lot nicer - however I'm not sure they'd make any more money.

[AlunB]

tbf though, poker gets a hard time at that, as it's person vs person not person vs corporation, when you dust £10k off at blackjack and the pitboss comps you dinner, you don't really feel that much tilt at him, he's just got your dinner and he doesn't actually get the money - the faceless corporation has it, and now you're going to have dinner, on them.

you lose £10k to a pro poker player HU, its a big hit to the ego, he's now sat there with your money - he started to lock up a bit when he got up a lot, he played the hand with the 77 pretty shit and got lucky it's pretty infuriating but you have someone to directly direct you irratence towards. What exactly can the poker player do? Take the man to dinner? Buy him a watch? Tell him how unlucky he was and comfort him? All he can do is act with some class and win like a gentleman and whereas most of the time that's enough a fair amount of the time it just isn't - through no fault of the player.

I always remember once in a casino a while back (before I'd really played a huge amount of live poker games) at about 5am when i was drinking this guy sat down at 50p/£1 with pile of cash made it £20 blind every hand and then berated the whole table for not gambling, I sat down and said to him "i'll gamble with you if you fancy it?" he said bring it on... I ended up winning ~£2500 off him including this final hand where I had K2 vs his 66 on 26T and won, 15minutes after he left the table i was chatting to someone next to a roulette table and he came up - I, very sincerely, said to him "brutal that hand mate very unlucky" to which he replied by calling me a "little c*nt" and to "fuck off before he broke my legs" - this was a old, respectable looking guy.

Learnt a few lessons here - firstly any of that post-hand empathy, no matter ho sincere has a far greater chance of coming across patronising and needly over genuine (espcially younger guy to older guy) so unless I knew the person well and had a relationship with them where they'd know i was sincere I wasn't going to do that. Also, despite the fact that you shouldn't, people take poker personally and rather than thinking "they shouldnt do that" you should respect it. The casino's don't have to worry about the social nuances of this they just do their job.

Similarly, the pokersites, they don't care about this either. The happiness of Rec players, and the contentment of Reg players is just something they take for granted (stars prolly less so than anyone else) and if they spent 1 minute thinking about this for every 60 they spent counting there money it'd be a lot nicer - however I'm not sure they'd make any more money.

I don't think that's true at all anymore. Maybe once, but not now.

But yeah you make a good point. Much is often made about the late great Chip Reese and his knack for keeping the fish happy. No idea how he did it though.