You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Sky Poker forums will be temporarily unavailable from 11pm Wednesday July 25th.
Sky Poker Forums is upgrading its look! Stay tuned for the big reveal!
Winning more than you lose... but still a £££ loser?
That's me. Current stats show that on the DYMs I've been playing over the last couple of months, I'm winning around 10% more games, and taking some prize pennies, than I'm losing. But the entry fee on the penny tables at 20% is putting me in deficit, £££s wise. On the 30p/60p games, if you lose two, you have to win three just to stand still - that's a need to win 50% more than you lose just to breakeven.
Question is though, bearing in mind the volatility of the game; variance of cards falling, loose/irrational play at this level that comes good etc etc, how do you consitently get to, and stay, on the other side of the line? Play for higher stakes with a lower %age buy-in (with an increased ££ risk), and/or play games where the prize pool is split between less players (with greater variance on finishing in the money).
The more I play this game, and understand the dynamics and maths making it up, the more I'm moving to a view that, it's incredibly difficult to gain an edge as long as you're subject to a rake or entry fee of 10%+. Having said that, some people will. I've recently looked at a book by Ken Warren that states in the opening chapter that 19 out of 20 people who take up the game will be long term losers - not because they're stupid, rash, don't read up on or study the game but because any edge they achieve in improving will be negated by the variable factors within the game. Whilst the books one of the better ones I've read, he doesn't say why this didn't apply to him and he's managed to come out a long term winning player.
Anyway, answers on a postcard please.
Question is though, bearing in mind the volatility of the game; variance of cards falling, loose/irrational play at this level that comes good etc etc, how do you consitently get to, and stay, on the other side of the line? Play for higher stakes with a lower %age buy-in (with an increased ££ risk), and/or play games where the prize pool is split between less players (with greater variance on finishing in the money).
The more I play this game, and understand the dynamics and maths making it up, the more I'm moving to a view that, it's incredibly difficult to gain an edge as long as you're subject to a rake or entry fee of 10%+. Having said that, some people will. I've recently looked at a book by Ken Warren that states in the opening chapter that 19 out of 20 people who take up the game will be long term losers - not because they're stupid, rash, don't read up on or study the game but because any edge they achieve in improving will be negated by the variable factors within the game. Whilst the books one of the better ones I've read, he doesn't say why this didn't apply to him and he's managed to come out a long term winning player.
Anyway, answers on a postcard please.
Comments
If you do, try playing at least the £2/£3 ones as lower dyms the rake means you have to win such a high% to make a profit!
I built my roll up by playing £2 dyms, then moved to cash once id got to about £100.
what you need to become a £££ winner imo is bink a couple of main events on here then you can play for "free" at a comfortable limit.
better off trying heads up at £1 and see what results you get imo...gl.dave
I do not understand why the players at the lower level are subject to higher rakes.
Low level cash is very hit and miss, low level DYM's are a no no. Better IMO to enter one or two mtt's, such as the mini main events or maybe the lower buy-in Main Events, per week. A cash even at the lower level will finance your next couple of entries. You will gain good experience and if your ability is such, you will eventually hit a big cash that will launch your poker onto bigger things.
This was how I started online 9 years ago. It's an up and down life playing mtt's but one win can be worth hundreds of entry fees. Why not spend the time you can't afford to play by watching one or two good mtt players in a tournament. Follow them every hand until they finish and you will learn far more than watching edited highlights on TV. It will take time but poker success isn't an overnight thing, it takes work and more work to succeed.
Agreement with Elsadog here (amazing !) MTTs are the best way to progress. I started by playing them for £5, usually the larger fields, and after a few minor cashes fluked one for £300, which is still in my bankroll ! They also are great for developing your game and learning from others. STTs tend to encourage tight play,while MTTs often reward aggression.
And if you are a reasonable player you get a lot of fun for a small outlay while it really can take you to greater things.
But the variance is huge, and you have to have the patience and finance to go a while without a good cash. I have endured several downswings of a month or more, without letting it destroy my confidence in my game.
Most of the top players, having built a bankroll, will then turn their talents to cash , where they can play tables at which they have the all important edge to eliminate medium or long term variance.
The reason I've stuck playing on the penny tables (with the greedy 20% buy-in) is that I haven't been able to see (as yet) how to get and apply a consistent +EV when playing. I've been rumped at the low level cash tables, where on average even with tightening up on around half-a-per-cent of hands I'll catch a cold and take a loss (50BBs+) that will wipe out any winnings I've ground out - that and the fact that the rake equates to c16% of profits on winning hands has left me with a deficit that is irrecoverable if continuing to play at the same level. Up until my last session, my total loss to date was almost entirely the value of the rake taken on the pots I'd won.
On the SnG DYMs, the total of the entry fees are currently twice my accrued losses on over 240 games. I was marginally in front up until a week ago, but the variance fairy put paid to that.
So that's where I am - marginally ahead / breaking even or so on the game results, excluding the rake/buy in, but when this is factored in I become another of the majority of long term losing players - but most of my money has gone to Sky and not other players.
Good post.
The reality of players in profit has been discussed on this forum before. Very few players, even good players, make long term profits without rake-back. Rake-back provides the profit to the vast majority of high volume players. The amount of rake generated from every pound in circulation on Sky is unknown, but what has been revealed recently is that the rake can be in excess of 50% on other sites. I see no reason why it would be less on Sky. That means that half of all money on the site is not available to be won, that's half of all players money, not just the losers but the winners as well.
It has been suggested in the past that only 5% of all internet poker players make a sustained profit. I believe that to be true.
Not as bad as a local Gala casino where I played in an MTT about 18 months ago . . . £10 contribution towards the prize fund (although they top-sliced that) and a £5 buy-in fee. So the Buy-in was 33.3%. I'm pretty sure that if Gala were to approach the Gambling Commission with a proposal to put a new game on the casino floor that carried a 33% house edge, they'd be told to get stuffed - on the grounds it was exploitative of the gaming public. Once you unpick the numbers behind the poker boom, it starts to make roulette with it's 2.7% HE look quite attractive? But because poker has an element of skill, as opposed to roulette which is a no-brainer, people play it because they believe they can aspire to a level of skill that can overcome the rake etc. A few do. Until I get there I shall stick playing with pennies for the entertainment and intellectual challenge of the numbers.
I dont subscribe to the view that cash is the only way to build a bankroll or make a living from poker. Try telling that to the top sit and go players in the world who have cleared millions of dollars in profit (these figures are widely available on scope). Thats the problem with sky in that people genuinely believe that cash is king and as a result sngs get ignored. Fair play to sky for rolling out the turbo dyms, which allow for much more volume and the ability to earn more rakeback. They are fun to play and you dont have to risk your shirt playing them.