What makes a great cash game player

[BusterAMG]

Cash game players possess superior adaptation to handle high variance, especially if you look at non-online games. Many mediocre players do not focus enough on breaking down their own play in a cash game - busting out of a tourney makes them think much harder about the crucial hand/s. In cash game, the mediocre player will just rebuy (a large amount relative to the same level tournament) and continue on his tilt.

[Simon22]

So then...
A cool approach with zero tilt, excellent post flop strategies, a big bankroll and big balls!
Thanks for your responses
Simon22

[n.s.]

[ QUOTE ]
I also think your 12 BB in a cash game is way too low.

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW, I meant 12 big bets in a *limit* game with a 4 bet cap - with that setup no hand can cost more than 12 BB (unless there's unlimitied raising heads-up, I suppose)

[RussianBear]

Discipline.

[jimitilt]

the best cash game players I know have the best game selection skills, they look for games they can beat and don't let their ego force them into bigger games
"If they're helpless and can't defend themselves, you're in the right game" Mike Caro

[pokernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I also think your 12 BB in a cash game is way too low.

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW, I meant 12 big bets in a *limit* game with a 4 bet cap - with that setup no hand can cost more than 12 BB (unless there's unlimitied raising heads-up, I suppose)

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIWx2 - there has been a lot of discussion / analysis on the merits of playing no-limit hold'em cash games with a short stack (e.g., < 20BBs).

The short-stack strategy advocates (at a very rough high level) buying in for 20BBs or less; having very tight pre-flop standards; raising 4-5xBB when you have a hand, and usually getting the rest of your stack in on the flop.

Being all in considerably simplifies post-flop play since you don't have to make any more decisions (and commit additional chips to those decisions). Ed Miller has a very nice description of the short-stack strategy in "Getting Started in Hold'em," though the idea has been around (in some version or another) for some time.

I would go as far as to say that having a short stack can be beneficial, especially if you're up against good post-flop players. In fact, I think it's easier to become a winning short-stack player than a winning deep stack player.

I agree, though, that short-stack play is not optimal. However playing a big stack incorrectly can be far less optimal. ;-)

[bmxicle]

The ability to deduce your opponents hand, and then the ability to follow through with those reads correctly.

[gauge666]

I agree, I'm a cash game player and when I talk with tournements players, I see that we see things differently

[Rudbaeck]

They almost extract the maximum value, even if it means entering some really high variance situations.

Tournament players often have to avoid high variance, small payoff situations, because when they hit negative variance the cost is astromical, but when they hit positive variance the pay off is modest. Doubling your stack doesn't double your EV in a tournament.

[knife420]

a cash game player pounds the marginal edges, while a tournament player passes the 2% edge and waits for the better chance to get the money in, a cash game player can capitalize on these situations, a tourney player is all or nothing so a big edge is needed. The best cash player can't be afraid to push the marginal edge at times.