Anyone here professional/semi pro?

Cianos

Internet or live? What way do you approach cash outs? How do bad patches affect you? Also, does a bad run have a negative impact on other aspects of your life - friends/family etc?

BigDragon

Cianos wrote:

Internet or live? What way do you approach cash outs? How do bad patches affect you? Also, does a bad run have a negative impact on other aspects of your life - friends/family etc?

We're all pros here. Nobody tell you?

Doc Farrell

I use the internet to grind, not to play my real game. I need real people to get a real feel for the cards. The hundred bucks I win a week online pays for a real tourney or two. I don't really go for the gamble online because there are too many factors missing.

I play a lot but it doesnt effect the rest of my life because I stay in low cost tourney's. I'd like to start playing in bigger ones but a loss of over 100 in a sitting irks me. I played in the 100 Irish open and that annoyed me because the blind structure made it too much of a turkey shoot.

I'm looking forward to tonights tourney in the Fitz, 40 quid plus a stack of rebuys. The average spend will be 120 with a dozen or so going to the full whack, about 200. This is the ideal tourney for me financially. I don't mind losing 200 to win say 2000 but I only hope to lose 120 (and win 3000 of course).

As for bad patches I'm just coming out of one. I won 4 out of 6 tourneys in December then didn't even get to the final table for the next 16. My tiny online winnings stopped me going on tilt and throwing good money after bad but it took a lot of discipline not to increase the stakes. Mostly I just went out and got drunk, very enjoyable. Then last week I hit payload in 4 tourneys, two online, and got back the money I dropped since Christmas. So I'm back to the beginning with nothing to show but a lot more experience.

And that's the reason I'm writing this.

If you have a family or extended financial committments join me in the little tourneys but stay away from the cash tables. I have no committments so I'm hoping to raise my game soon. But until I consistently win I will change gears slowly. It's tough not to jump into the bigger games but I have to take my own advice and only try to gamble using my winnings.

There is one book I cannot recommend enough. It's called Zen and the Art of Poker and it's all about attitude, not stats and maths. If anyone is serious about their game get a copy of this and read it slowly, piece by piece, you can dip into it on any page. There will be some copies in there next week, ring first on 6774754 and ask for Mark on the first floor. The 12 euro price should save you about 17,000 over the next ten years.

I wish you well at the tables even though I can be a schmuck when I'm tilting.

Good luck and take it slow. The money is always there.
Anyway, in the end, it's all about making the wrong move at the right time! (Lancey Hodges - The Cincinnati Kid)

Feel free to reply to me but I'm bad at getting back.

Watch ur chipstack, D.

DeVore

Avoiding the cash games if you have a family is great advice. I'm not pro or semi pro but I have won a good bit of cash in tournies and the odd cash game. Tournies are recreational for me, cash games are far more serious in general and general where you will find the pros and semi pros. You need far far too big a tank to live as a pro tournie player.... the length of time between wins even if you are damned good is too big.

There are a few pro and semi pro players here and I'm looking towards raising my game to make part of my living from playing poker. Right now I make the rest of my living writing about it and running games


DeV.

Doc Farrell

Tom, where the hell did u go on Friday night. I stuck around for half an hour till 3 but had to go coz I had work in the morning. Did you retire to the hotel with a slapper?

NickyOD

Cianos wrote:

Internet or live?

I make a modest second income from online poker but I've had some good ITMs in large MTT tournies and come close on several occasions in satelites to big events. Have only started playing some live events over the last year but living in Limerick means I don't get much live action. This year because of work commitments I've played very little poker.

Cianos wrote:

What way do you approach cash outs?

With Cashouts I usually set an amount I'm happy to play with and cash down to that amount when I have a substantial amount to take out. I always get paid by cheque rather than with Neteller but I still use neteller to move money around.

Cianos wrote:

How do bad patches affect you?

Financially it usually doesn't because I'm very cautious with my bankroll and am always well covered to sustain a run of losses. Without proper Bankroll managemnt I'd end up losing it all. I never have to re-deposit.

Cianos wrote:

Also, does a bad run have a negative impact on other aspects of your life - friends/family etc?

Being on tilt definnitely spoils my mood, that is for certain. I don't mind bad beats but when I make very bad mistakes and it costs me badly I really really do beat myself up about it. You wouldn't want to be near me if I pissed away a chip lead and went out on the bubble. You'd be taking your life in your own hands.

Hectorjelly

that is the angriest blog Ive ever read.

DapperGent

I like it, (http://nickyodpoker.blogspot.com/) the liberal use of the word fúcktard is much appreciated. Added to Bookmarks->Poker->Blogs.

You need to enable anonymous comments. Couldn't be arsed setting up a blogger account.

Cianos

I rely on poker for all my income at the moment. One could say I grind...I am very careful with game selection and my approach to the game in general. But if you do rely on poker primarily for your income, I suppose your whole career is a grind. Im trying to make my website into a succesful site, which I do enjoy because, of course, it is to do with poker. But until (if) that becomes a financial success in the long run, I guess, for the foreseeable future, I will very rarely "risk" higher stake games or big buy in tourneys (coupled with the fact that I have very limited tournament experience). Im happy with my approach though. I dont really like gambling, in fact I dont see the point in it at all. Thats not my approach to poker so I'm a happy grinder .

The worst thing about it is the disheartened attitude you can get to the whole thing when you go bad. Whether this is due to bad luck or bad play, a loss is a loss and it still affects you. But I am getting better at getting over all that. Its just another part of the game and I am learning how to just take it on the chin and get on with it. In fact, having a good attitude to losing feels better IMO to the enjoyment of winning. Then again it certainly is hard sometimes to not be in a pisser when you have lost or played badly (or more often both). As time goes by though, and as you experience that feeling more and more, im sure it gets easier to deal with.

Oddjob

He looks like some sort of 60 year old captain of a gay cruise

I'm guessing this could be Leslie Mc Clean, I've not seen him about for about a year, but the description definitely suits.

NickyOD

Oddjob wrote:

I'm guessing this could be Leslie Mc Clean, I've not seen him about for about a year, but the description definitely suits.

Has to be him. He looks like a Leslie alright.

NickyOD

DapperGent wrote:

I like it, (http://nickyodpoker.blogspot.com/) the liberal use of the word fúcktard is much appreciated. Added to Bookmarks->Poker->Blogs.

You need to enable anonymous comments. Couldn't be arsed setting up a blogger account.

Thanks. DG. I havne't really had much time to keep it up to date and tidy it up but I will do very soon. I'm moving home at the moment and I'm not connected to the web there yet.

Oddjob

I've played with him a few times, never stops talking. I find him a very funny bloke. On his day, he's also a very good player.

Doc Farrell

Actually theres a happy ending. Having been busted out of the tourney by being too aggressive I ignored my own advice above and sat down in the cash games with 150. I lost it all in the first hand.

Ignoring the rest of my advice I got out 200 from my visa(!) card and sat down again, steaming. Fortunately I had my mp3 player and had read Zen and the art of poker before I came out and eventually some good cards came my way. I only wanted to get my money back but I ended up 700 up when I cashed out at 5am. But at my table I could have lost the whole 700 in one hand.

The last 4 in the tourney did a deal for 1700 each. Thats for a 40 euro tourney. The average spend was, as I brilliantly predicted, was about 120. Interesting the top up was for 3500 when the initial chip buy in was only 1000. That means it didnt pay to rebuy too often but definitely did to top up. Made for a tight enough game with a bit of a gamble.

My point is this: in order to win 1700 euro in the Irish Open 100 rebuy game you had to come about 4th. To make 1700 in profit in the 2000 game you had to reach the final table, although the last 18 got their money back.

But for 40 euro you could win 20 times your initial cost for 4th place. I have a general rule of not playing in tourneys unless 1st prize offers 20 times ur buy in, e.g. 2000 for first prize for a 100 game.

But last night 4th place got it. And if they hadnt have done a deal 1st prize would have been 3500. That means if the general spend is 120 then ur getting almost 30 times the cost. And if you managed to spend only 40 euro then it would be 87.5 times the value of ur seat.

Thank you for following me so far. My point is last nights tourney was the most value for ur buck that the Fitz has put on and I will be asking Luke to run it again soon. A little change with the blind time structure and it will be ideal for me.

I won 2500 for 50 bucks in December and I know a chap who won 4000 in the Thursday game on a free ticket which presumably cost him about 20 in the freeroll. Now thats value for money. I dont think the majority of the 170 players in the 2000 Irish Open can say the same thing.

So finally, and the reason I wrote this for the many students and other new players who prefer not the post (probably wise), is that there is much more value for money playing in the smallest tournies agressively and confidently then there is playing ur second best game because the buy in money is too much of a wager.

I really believe that unless the buy in is about 1% of ur liquid assets, that is the money you have to spend on holidays and shoes and dvds, then you are playing outside of your financial comfort zone and it will affect your game in a negative way. Some might argue 2% or 5% but if it stings when you lose for more than ten minutes then (and I'm only talking about the financial sting, not your pride) you are playing in too high limits.

Thats my twopence for today. Thank you for reading and I hope it was of some help. I'm on holidays this week so I'm off to get drunk, listen to music, maybe snog a slapper if I'm lucky and avoid all card games for at least 24 hours!

Cheers, D.

BTW, the bookshop that will have all the poker books in at the end of the week is Hodges Figgis in Dawson st. I recommend phoning first to avoid disappointment.

Doc Farrell

Oddjob wrote:

I'm guessing this could be Leslie Mc Clean, I've not seen him about for about a year, but the description definitely suits.

Leslie is a very nice guy once you get used to him and you will if you continue to play in the big tournies in Ireland. His grandson came 2nd in the Australian Open last month. Entirely your choice, but poker on this island is a small world and I would be careful about advertising your personal opinions on individuals. However I may be completely wrong and it is entirely your choice of course.

NickyOD

Doc Farrell wrote:

I really believe that unless the buy in is about 1% of ur liquid assets, that is the money you have to spend on holidays and shoes and dvds, then you are playing outside of your financial comfort zone and it will affect your game in a negative way. Some might argue 2% or 5% but if it stings when you lose for more than ten minutes then (and I'm only talking about the financial sting, not your pride) you are playing in too high limits.

In keeping with the theme of playing above your limits this is post I wrote in my collumn a couple of months back that should be useful to anyone who is unsure of what stakes they think they should be playing at.


Game Selection:

The first rule of being a successful poker player is picking the right games in order to keep your bankroll healthy

The question of bankroll management and game selection is intimately linked, since the whole concept of a bankroll assumes that you are a winning player overall, and that you can find games that you're both able to beat and almost never likely to go broke in.

If this weren’t the case then, from a financial point of view, you would probably do better to find the smallest limits tolerable to you and consider the money you lose as entertainment or education.

Cash Games

Bankroll requirements vary wildly for cash depending on the type of game, and it takes an experienced player to know when they're out of their depth or need to drop down and recover in the smaller games. Obviously big bet games need deeper pockets than limit ones, wild and short-handed ones offer more fluctuation than tight ring games and pot-limit Omaha players need bigger tanks than pot-limit hold'em ones who play at similar stakes.

The experts on limit hold'em often quote a bankroll of around 300 big bets for ring games but in looser or short-handed games this number is probably too low. Similarly, for potlimit and no-limit hold'em games you will need anywhere between 25 and 50 buy-ins, depending on the type of games you play, your style and the relation of your sit-down to the blinds, and for pot-limit Omaha you can probably double these numbers.

From personal experience at low limit holdem I think its possible for an average player to have a downswing of 400 big bets. This is pretty disturbing when you consider that 400 BBs at 1/2 is $800. Not too many players would have the patience to wait until they have $1600 to move up to 2/4. In fact many players would be quite happy to play 5/10 with that kind of BR. For this reason low limit cash game players are the most likely to have the largest % swings in their BR and the most likely to be forced to reload. The best way to avoid this is to identify the game you are most successful at and stick with it. Identify the players you have won the most money from and keep an eye out for them when looking for a table. Identify the player you've lost the most money to and avoid them. Online players can use Pokertracker to tell them who these respective players are, so keep an eye on who comes to your table, and when there's a free seat beside a fish.

SitnGos

In terms of bankroll management and game selection these score very highly. You can simply unregister if you don't like the field and, while an excellent player might only need to maintain a bankroll of 20 buy-ins to keep safely afloat, even a moderately skilled player shouldn't ever need more than 30. Because the buy-in is fixed, you can easily keep results and move up and down the various stakes as you see fit.

Furthermore, for the expert player sit&gos offer an attractive edge since, besides playing worse poker generally, more inexperienced players also tend to perform worse as games gets shorthanded, and fail to understand and employ a number of specialist tournament concepts which are vital for success.

Personally I think if you have a small BR its fine playing SnGs where you have 10-15 buy ins. But I think you should wait until you have at least 30 buy ins before moving up to the likes of $30/$50s.

MTTs

Multi-table tournaments are probably the most frustrating, costly to the bankroll, and hardest to win consistently out of all formats of poker, in the immortal words of leading player Dave 'Devilfish' Ulliott: 'You need a ****load of money to play the tournament circuit', so wherever you play bear this in mind and find a few regular games in which you know you are a consistent winner and which will allow you a base for 'taking shots' at that big score.

So if you want to play lots of tournaments you should realistically fund the buy in from another game at which you are consistently winning. That way you can comfortably play tournaments regularly where your BR is about 40 times the buy in.

NickyOD

Doc Farrell wrote:

Leslie is a very nice guy once you get used to him and you will if you continue to play in the big tournies in Ireland. His grandson came 2nd in the Australian Open last month. Entirely your choice, but poker on this island is a small world and I would be careful about advertising your personal opinions on individuals. However I may be completely wrong and it is entirely your choice of course.

Point taken. If it is him I wasn't actually commenting on his poker because he actually played well. He was pretty rude to the dealer and that's really what got me going on the guy. I've got no problem with a lot of chat at the table. I just take issue with people who don't have manners.

Davey Devil

Leslie = Legend. I doubt it was him. Leslie isn't the type who would give a dealer stick.

pokertroll

Davey Devil wrote:

Leslie = Legend. I doubt it was him. Leslie isn't the type who would give a dealer stick.

Agreed - could somebody please take his name out of this thread because I know he reads these boards from time to time and it just isn't fair on him.

Doc Farrell

pokertroll is a bit chubby.

On a serious note, this has been an interesting thread and I would like to see some responses from Irish players, even if they think their opinion is not entirely sacosanct.

In other words, I'm mistaken 54 % more often than I am macnificent so if you have a point please lash it out without fear of ridicule (espeically from my arch-nemesis chubby troll).

Oh i hate u troll, i hate u so very much........

AmarilloFats

Nice thread.
On the Leslie issue..What a gentleman. On my first trip to a casino I mucked my cards on top of his. This meant his cards were muck too. He had 88. the flop came xx8..He merely winked at me. He's always polite and has offered friendly welcome advice many times.

I have had the last 2 weeks off from work and have played about 75hours, mostly on VC.

I wanted to use the time to see if I could rely on poker income to travel/ or return to college.
I earned a good "wage" in my time off. But, I got bored with poker! My initial enthusiasm waned and I played sloppy. This was just a 2 week period. I could not play poker for a living. I was disappointed when I realised this.
When I am working I get to play poker for 15hrs - 20hrs a week. I am excited about playing and motivated to earn extra cash. I can live off my poker earnings and save my wage.
I read the Andy Black article in cardplayer he said that he has to learn to "enjoy losing".
When asked, "Why do you play poker for the money or the thrill?" Chip Jett responded, "I play for the pain".
There was a lot of stuff smashed and fecked at the wall during this fortnight of poker. A lot of bad beats, bad humours and bad tilts. No way do I have the temperament to play poker for a living. And all of this came in a winning fortnight!!

Ok enough whining, I look forward to reading Zen and the art of poker...I look forward to enjoying the inevitable pain and enjoying the losing.

DeVore

I have seen Leslie lose it with Player X but then God himself might well do so! I know Leslie can annoy some people but to be honest, he's very courteous and mannerly and that gets a lot of plus points from me. At the very least, you'd have to admit he's a character! I hope when I'm 60 I'm as full of life.

DeV.

NickyOD

AmarilloFats wrote:

Nice thread.
On the Leslie issue..What a gentleman. On my first trip to a casino I mucked my cards on top of his. This meant his cards were muck too. He had 88. the flop came xx8..He merely winked at me. He's always polite and has offered friendly welcome advice many times.

Ok, Now I know it was definitely not the same guy.

bohsman

Cant find Nickys reference to Leslie but Leslie is not God, I have known him to lose it twice once with a dealer and once with Tom (who won 5k in last months end of month) for calling with whatever it was he called with KQ I think. That said I get on very well with Leslie and most of the time he is a gent.

Lafortezza

Tell me more about these gay cruises....

Samba

:eek: