Moving to LA to play pro @ commerce? (long)

[ProfessorBen]

[ QUOTE ]
If you move to LA can you please tell me what is good to eat at Commerce. I pretty much hate everything I have ever had there and basically try to not eat when I'm there now. I can't stand even the old faithful fruit plates because it's like they microwave the [censored] fruit or something. Canteloupe is somewhat edible. The bananas are nuclear powered, the watermelon is orange half the time. Everything else is just plain awful.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
Terribly, terribly rude to give wrong information and then to yell at other people (or have his buddies yell) for giving answers based on his own post.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) Your paranoid. This is not a conspiracy. People are chiming in to give him real good advice and discounting the bad advice given - those "buddies" as you call them are all qualified to advise because most of them are acknowledged to be very good players as well who are active in the strategy forums here which gives them more credibility.

2) The ones who gave him good advice know the OP is a very well known player, he is considered by some to be one of the best players in the short handed mid-limit games online and one of 2+2's best limit posters.

3) Relax.... dont take things so personally. Everyone else knew exactly what the OP was asking for, instead of blaming everyone else, try looking within.

[MitchL]

Good Grief,

I suppose you took offense to my comments. I apologize. It was mostly a tongue-in-cheek response more directed at the nitty culture in B&M as well as the idea that the Commerce mid-limits are somehow wilder than every other live game. I think your suggestions are very worthwhile for someone with less experience and and new to professional poker in general and didnt mean my response as a slight on your advice.

[ActionFreak]

goodgrief,

don't worry about it. TT's posts put me on tilt as well

[The B]

[ QUOTE ]
I do like your approach of mixing b&r and online.

[/ QUOTE ]

best of luck....enjoy LA and post TR's

[BK1248]

How are the 100-200/ 200-400 games on the weekend?
How many and do they have some fish?

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
How are the 100-200/ 200-400 games on the weekend?
How many and do they have some fish?

[/ QUOTE ]

Fish = wealthy LA locals. They exist, good game selection is important.

[pyroponic]

(EXTREMELY EXTREMELY LONG)

The following is probably a bunch of unnecessary rambling from no sleep, but hopefully you can take one or things from it. To be honest, I don't know what you're looking for but this is worthwhile advice for anyone that is doing exactly what you're doing. I don't know what is useful and what isn't so I just decided to include it all, so take it FWIW.


I just played $40/80 professionally (60+ hours a week) at the Commerce for the month of August and part of September, and from my experience I did very well in the game. If anyone played there regularly, I was the Michigan student who sat with an average of $4k in chips.

What I love about the game is that bills play, so often I would have 2-3k in $100 bills or white ($100 chips). Often times i'd have half the table playing cash (people buy in notoriously short in that game, and if things were going right they'll keep reloading $500-$1000 in cash which is gone in just a few hands). Here's an illustration: during my time there my edge was so big that many times I would be up a significant amount (2-4k) a majority of time after playing my usual 8-12 hours. After that much time, many of the players are the same, and are majorly stuck since most of them suck. Many players have deep pockets and play much longer sessions than what I am used to people playing where i'm from (typically 6-8 hours and sometimes more).

Hopefully if i'm up a decent amount, I have 1/4 of the chips on the table and had a lot of the players playing short-stacked with like $400 in $10 chips and maybe a few stray $100 blls/chips that I have been putting in play over the course of the session. What's my point? Playing cash/big chips which is extremely unconventional, but it makes you look like an action player and from my experience bad to mediocre players play MUCH MUCH worse when half their stack is cash/$100 chips than when they have stacks of chips in front of them. Many times I was able to get half the table playing with these types of chip stacks, since over time the pots I win I don't put the chips back in play and when they win from me they're getting these large denomination bills/chips. How is this possible? Once you get the table going, they totally forget the chip runner exists. If things go right, half the people that would have bought chips originally just stick a wad of bills on the table. And believe me, they almost always lose it quick. Usually what happens is if they rebuy or have $500-$1000, the next hand they play they'll put 3-4 bills in, and this is enough to make typical players chase a decent amount more than when they're playing with brightly colored wagering discs. On good sessions when I had decent control over the table, I was able to set a tempo of increased fishy gambling but also truly intimidated players. Basically MORE LOOSE AND PASSIVE. This equals higher expectation AND lower variance which is the optimal result for all poker players. NOW i'm not trying to revolutionize the poker world or anything, it works for me and my style. In fact, i've never seen a player buy in on average the number of BB's nor have I ever seen someone use $100 chips or bills to raise and bet with on a regular basis in a limit game.

This may sound like a bunch of BS or something that is unheard of, but believe me, it works like a charm for me. It is just a quarter of my gameplan to hijack a table. Based on your experience, it sounds like you have the potential to become one of the best players in the $40/80 game if you happen to bring certain other qualities to the table in addition to expert play. Believe me, there are a slew of online players that although play great, would just be a typical ABC 2+2 player that I could run over or put on tilt so he plays a little more like the fish. I think it takes a lot of other things in addition to great play (e.g. appearance, sense of humour, table demeanor, how you dress, being able to talk in the middle of hands, putting the table on tilt if you go on a small upswing, READING your opponent through betting patterns AND tells, and having the fish give you a ton of action even though you don't deserve it. The goal is to take control of the table every session. If it doesn't happen, you'll (hopefully) get better at it. All the big winners in the game (and other loose big fishy games) have mastered these skills and more, which just cannot be learned online.

I don't think this is nearly as easy at a slightly higher limit, say $60/120. The opponents are MUCH tougher on average, and not only is it harder to manipulatate them the better players are constantly trying to manipulate you. Why would you want to deal with check-raises, constant resteals, optimal bluffing frequencies, and other tricky plays? I honestly had enough of that in $10/20 6-max. But actually I doubt the prevalence of these moves is as high as I think. I think it's just a bunch of decent players who figured out that playing extremely tight and coming in agressively will win the money. But it leads to sort of a rockfest IMO, and we all know the money is made from the bad players. In fact, one thing I love about live poker is the games are much looser, the players are less agressive and knowledgable, and the variance ridiculously lower than multiple tables summing to similar stakes. A strange phenomenon at The Commerce I find there is that players are EITHER $60/120 or $40/80. I saw very few players switch between the two, and for many of the $60 players I think it was a pride thing to stay at $60. That's because many decent (but not expert) players get grinded down at $60 but are either unable to beat the $40 since it's a just a "loose, no fold'em" game or they actually suffer higher variance at $40/80 since the play is looser, a little faster, and a little unpredictable. This is one of the best things about MLHE at The Commerce! These tight players who should otherwise be beating the donkey fish for all their money find the $60 and stay there. Most of these players do not even play $40 while they're waiting for an often times "mile long" list at $60. These people would be better off playing $40/80, or at least play in an uber live $60/120 game like the one at Casino Arizona. I almost guarantee that my winrate over 600 hours was higher than anyone at $60/120 and probably $40/80. All this with MUCH less variance to boot. I'm pretty confident that I wasn't just getting lucky either, as i've played over a million hands (about 70% online) and I can tell when i'm getting lucky and when i'm playing good. The simple fact of the matter is, if you know what you're doing I believe your win rate should converge quickly IF you're a good player. It still boggles my mind how these tigher players at $60 complain about not being able to get anyone to lay down a hand or get anyone out and why they don't figure out how to beat one of the best limit games (risk-return, and availability) in the country.

In fact if you think the above sounds a little silly, then fine. IT probably WON'T work for you. I think you need to have a specific style of game, appearance, the ability to manipulate opponents through tricky plays, reverse tells, degenerate gambler-like chatter, etc. Every live player plays significantly different, even more different than online. There will be no VPIP/PFR/AGR stats but rather characters and personalaties. Your goal is to get inside that person's head, figure out his weaknesses, his strengths, his motivations, figure out what makes him tick. With a lot of experience, I think a great player will be eventually be able to do this as effortlessly as Poker Tracker imports hands. With this, comes the real fun. I hate to repeat this again but I truly thing it extremely important: the ability to manipulate and confuse your opponents (all the way from fish, to mediocre players, to great players) is sign of expert LIVE play. Anyone with enough talent, time, patience, and discipline could learn how to play a 28/20/2 game online, but being able to keep your opponents totally clueless (espeically after 10+ sessions with the same people) is the difference between your average .75 BB/hr 2+2 live player and someone who is beating it for 2 BB/hr.

What happens from here? Here's one unobvious point: I think the size of your chip stack becomes important as the stakes increase. How much you buy in for should increase as the stakes increase: I've always liked using $10/20 = $1000, $20/40 = $2000, $30/60 = $3000, $40/80 = $4500, etc. These figures may sound absolutely ridiculous amount to buy in for but like I said, few live players (even great ones) realize the significance of the effect it can have on the game:

1. You look like an action player (especially if you throw in the occassional back-raise or UTG raise with a hand like 98s.

2. You look like a (lucky) winning player. Often time new players will sit at the table and figure you're up a bunch, and this will encourage them to keep playing against you, regardless of how stuck they are. You'll be suprised how many fish will stick around and play when they should definately leave the game, all for the perception that they could hit you up for a quick $3k.

3. Eventually the regulars will see you as "unbreakable." That is they will have the perception to be able to win money or make you go bust regardless of how many hours they play with you or how well they play against you. At this point you've owned them (especially after you've been manipulating them with tricky plays during previous sessions). They will play more passively against you and make many more mistakes than they would previously, and will often start misplaying many streets where they would have previously played correctly (or to the best of their ability)

4. If you're new to live poker, especially at stakes as big as $40/80+, you may be suspectible to tilt. For me, having a lot of chips makes me play optimally since I have trained myself to never feel stuck. Even when i'm down, there's no need to win any chips quickly because after all, you're just grinding it out.


Believe it or not, the fish don't find big chips and $100 bills in play annoying, they LOVE it. It toally makes me look like a degenerate player even though i'm relatively tight. I mean if you sat at a $40/80 game and saw some unknown guy with $1000 in $10 chips, and $3000 in $100 chips or $100 bills, would you put this guy as a tight, tricky, expert player? Hell no! Typical players are dying to get in the pot for this person, no matter how strong the betting, how tight they're playing, etc. It also SIGNIFICANTLY speeds up the game since most of the time the bet is at least $80, and players make their own change from the pot. You won't believe how much time is wasted when people splash a bunch of $10 chips when it is $80 or $160 to go and how long the dealers sometimes take to count the betting down.

Over the last year i've played quite a bit of $40/80 and $60/120 at Casino Arizona (probably the 2nd best place to play limit behind The Commerce) i've tightened up my game signicantly and play even more agressively after the flop. People underestimate the value of playing extremely tight. Whether or not you want to appear loose is a matter of skill and preference. Personally I love having either a tight or loose image because I can properly exploit my opponents' current perception of my play, by making a few moves here or changing gear appropriately. The faster you can change gears, quite simply the better player you are. It is a skill that must be used carefully, as many people dump chips unecessarily by advertising too much. In fact, although I make a very large number of moves relative to my opponents, I still make a very small number of moves of what I'm capable of. Because the goal in this type of game is to should be to value bet relentlessly, not outplay someone. I am able to sucessfully play much faster than even a TAG or LAG since I am able to make this up by purely having a better hand and having superior postflop abilities. IMO full ring requires a slightly different strategy than $10/20 6-max, in a fishy game like this you're best (I believe) to play extremely tight, with enough moves to make them forget about that. And when I say moves, I don't mean trying to raise or reraise the turn as a semi-bluff or with air since these guys don't bluff enough or fold enough. So this play is not only worthless it's more than worthless in this game. And quite honestly, i've never found a game (online and live) where a lot of the stuff in Theory of Poker is even worth trying. You're better off popping it in the BB with 88 or 76s, or even add a limp-reraising component to your game. Ever try limp-reraising UTG with 88 10% of the time, JTs 25% of the time, AA 90% of the time, and AKs 40%? It's this type of play which will maximize your return in that game is because what will end up happening a lot of the time is you get 7 people trapped for 3-4 bets with AKs, 88, JTs, or AA. What more could you ask for? Now that most the players are "in to deep," they'll get overinvolved like they always do and you may win a $2000 pot if flop lucky. Don't be afraid to play those multi-way hands a little crazy, believe me, the tighter at the players will definately lose respect for you pretty quickly after a couple of these plays.

Like I said before, you'll be surprised what capping the flop with strong draws and back-rasing with JTs will do for your image. You'll become very difficult to read, and the live ones will pay you off despite being fairly to extremely tight (most I find equate aggressive with loose).

One difference between live and online is the tilt factor. Fortunately I am very good at manipulating my opponents and had very good control over most of the player base (estimate 100+ players) within a few weeks. There are always 5-6 tables going, with surprisingly very few tough players (a lot of the players capable of crushing the $40 will fruitlessly wait or play in the significantly tougher $60 game. In fact, one of the reasons i'd rarely lose is
because unlike some other games, the $40/80 Commerce game is one of the best risk-return games in the country. How does $120/hr sound with little variance? Forget 200 BB downswings. It is all possible due to the complete absence of winning players! During my ~400 hours of play there, I estimate that that less than 10% of the $40/80 are winning players. Believe me, these fish didn't have to grind it up from $0.50/1 like a lot of had to. Remember, it's LA and $100 isn't worth beans there. I'm sure $100 is still something in Canada, but in a city with $4000+ mortgage payments, you better believe they think they're playing $5/10 or something.

I'd advise playing against the $60 game there, if you're going to move up from $40 go ahead and play $100.

Now if you made it this far you may think that I am just understimating the toughness of online play and the skills you develop playing. This is definately not true. I think that playing multiple tables in tough, fast, middle limit online SH games develops your postflop and preflop skills to the next level that often times is unmatched by some of the better of the live players. But I will say it's like apples and oranges, they are both sort of a different beast.

My history is similar to yours, I used to multi-table $10/20 6-max on Party in it's heyday so you'd definately be prepared for the swings. Live poker is much different from online poker. It's not as simple as just playing ABC (middle-limit TAG) poker, there's a lot more psychology and for expert players, manipulation. Table image, emotional control, and changing gears is not only more important, but it is crucial for beating the mid-high limit games for 1.5+ BB/hr. And one more important note: don't underestimate the difference between live and online play. It took me a year or two to fully adjust from playing exclusively short-handed tough games to full live ring games. I'm maybe overestimating the transition since I'm used to the loose/wild/fast $20/40 and $30/60 limit omaha and HE round-by-round homes games in Detroit which often times would play bigger and faster than the Commerce $40/80. Like someone said above, I would give it three months and give it a go. What I recommend AGAINST is playing $100/200 when you initially make the swtich over, which I think it would be a mistake for most online (even expert) players.

Hopefully this was of some help.

[davidlong14]

...tessarji's advice is "spot on."

[jk90029]

For pyroponic's comment "During my 400 hours of play there, I estimate that that less than 10% of the $40/80 are winning players" as above, I agree with his opnion. Only one player out of ten players in single table shall be the long-run winner. Do you have any objection for that?

Why only 10% of winning players? Due to the huge accumulated rake, most cash in 90% pocket SHALL goes to the drop hole eventually. Any objection to this proposition? If any, please comment.