Making the move to cash games - MTTer needs advice

[NoahSD]

1) At least on Stars, there's a big difference between NL100 and NL200. NL100 players play much more like the average tourney player than NL200 players. So, if you really have no cash experience, starting at NL100 might be more comfortable.

2) You should definitely learn to play with 100 BBs.

3) I'm sure there are a bunch on this forum, but a lot of them weren't successful. It's amazing how many really great tourney players are break-evenish at cash.

4) Well, there's the obvious advice... learn to fold overpairs sometimes.

There are a few more nuanced things. For example, with 100 BBs stacks, calling 3-bets and 4-betting are both really awkward, so you're kinda forced to play more tightly than you'd like to against 3-bets. Because of this, 3-bet decent a lot.

Also, everything mlagoo said was really good.

[A_PLUS]

The biggest difference for me was the way I approached situations in a general sense. I hadn't played cash games seriously since I was basically a fish. I got back into a few weeks ago. First week was horrible. I got stacked with overpairs, way too often, c-bet and fired barrel 2 and 3 too often, etc.

Now I am comfortable laying down overpairs, and getting to the point where I know when a set is no good. I don't really read the cash game forums, although I should, but I would say jump in 200NL with 100BBs. Your leaks will come out, plug them and move on. If you are always thinking about the stack sizes in play, you will find a lot of tough spots coming up. think about them, or post them when the session is done, and you will be fine.

[DonT77]

Thanks for all the advice in this thread guys - I knew I could count on you. Looks like I'll be buying in for 100BBs, being careful to game select well, reviewing more trouble hands, making tougher laydowns, and trying to get lucky [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img].

Update: off to a good start, +6 buy-ins thru the first 3500 hands [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img].

[BadgerPro]

Are you playing full ring or 6max? Just curious.

[Confused1]

I think Rizen said it in a video once, but I liked it.

In a cash game, don't worry about defending your blinds. Instead, defend 'position'.

That'll make a bigger difference at NL200 than anything else I could offer. Also, don't be afraid to play after the flop.

[DonT77]

Full ring for now.

[mlagoo]

[ QUOTE ]
Full ring for now.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[BadgerPro]

[ QUOTE ]
Full ring for now.

[/ QUOTE ]

I started there too (at full ring) and from what I've seen there are plenty of 200nl games running to support full ring. I've found at 400nl though you will constantly have 4-8 regulars at your table and while the games are still beatable they are not as good as other games.

I've recently dropped back to 200nl after having a little downswing to work on my 6max game. You'll find, as I did, that most good players prefer 6max and that 90% of the hands posted here in the forums are 6max.

So far I've found 200nl 6max to be really easy to beat but I'm not sure if it's because I'm back down at 200nl or if 6max has more fish but it's probably a combination of the 2.

[DonT77]

[ QUOTE ]


You'll find, as I did, that most good players prefer 6max ...

So far I've found 200nl 6max to be really easy to beat but I'm not sure if it's because ... 6max has more fish

[/ QUOTE ]

BP, you have me [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

On the one hand if most good players prefer 6-max, shouldn't I want to avoid them and play full ring? OTOH, if 6-max has more fish and it's really easy - then obv that's probably where I'll want to play. Perhaps 6-max has both the good players and the fish while full ring games generally have the in-between players?

Anybody else want to chime in on why I should play 6-max or full ring? Mlagoo, obv you have an opinion - why do you like 6-max better than full ring?

[Body Man D]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


You'll find, as I did, that most good players prefer 6max ...

So far I've found 200nl 6max to be really easy to beat but I'm not sure if it's because ... 6max has more fish

[/ QUOTE ]

BP, you have me [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

On the one hand if most good players prefer 6-max, shouldn't I want to avoid them and play full ring? OTOH, if 6-max has more fish and it's really easy - then obv that's probably where I'll want to play. Perhaps 6-max has both the good players and the fish while full ring games generally have the in-between players?

Anybody else want to chime in on why I should play 6-max or full ring? Mlagoo, obv you have an opinion - why do you like 6-max better than full ring?

[/ QUOTE ]

Don, it sounds like you and I are in similar situations. Like you, I have almost always played MTT's exclusively. I have recently however started playing and learning cash games as well. I am playing full ring only during my learning period. It allows you to be a little more conservative while you learn the differences between cash and tournaments.

Like confused1 said earlier, position is even more critical in cash than tournament's because there is a lot more post flop play. Because of how deep you are you will play a lot more small pairs, suited connectors, etc. etc. When I first started I think I had the fgator's syndrome of playing certain starting hands from certain positions and expecting to win just from playing ABC poker. I still have a lot to learn, but reading Super System has helped open my eyes to learning the value of other hands and the value of aggression.

I think once you become a good cash player 6-max is more profitable because you are forced to play more hands. This gives the better player a bigger advantage. That is why I am sticking to full ring until I have learned enough to be better than average. Good luck to us both as we progress.