Realistic to practice using fake$$

[masse75]

Would appreciate any input here. Started playing online about 8 months ago. Played for real cash starting back in October. Actually did okay, but lost it all (about $200) at some of the other table games. Unfortunately, this was before I was introduced to SSH or the 2+2 forums. Have read and re-read SSH about 10 times.

My question: is it realistic to hone my skills using the fake cash games? My thinking is maybe...I still see all types of players--tight, loose, maniacs. The same types I might see at low-limit tables.


Just trying to figure if I'm doing any good before my wife tells me I can play with the other kids again.


My question:

[blingice]

Since I don't know you're style of play, I can't really decide whether you lost your money for good reason. I have a friend whose up about $200 online. He plays very tight, and thats a good strategy it seems. I think the micro limit play money tables are worthless. The big limit play money tables, I think, are more realistic because people have worked hard to get all the play money they have, so they treat it like it's something they've earned, and they probably have.

[masse75]

Reason I lost money was because I was a typical "come in with crap" player. SSH gave me a better knowledge of starting hands plus postflop play. I feel like a better player...(can see when I should dump a hand because the board is far too coordinated, etc.) But it really doesn't matter until the real $$ is on the line.

[coinflip]

The play money games are useful if you're unfamiliar with very basic poker concepts such as reading the board, calculating pot odds, and the like. Once you progress to actual strategy, you'll find that real money (even at the nanolimits) plays very differently from play money.

If bankroll/money is a concern, I'd suggest finding a site that supports nanolimits and begin playing there with money that you can afford to lose. I started with $50 on Paradise 0.05/0.10 and worked my way up from there. Play at these limits, while pretty bad, is still waaaaay better than a free site such as Yahoo Games or the like. It's also a small enough amount of money that it fits comfortably into most people's entertainment budgets, much like dinner at a restaurant or going to the amusement park.

[Onaflag]

I would agree that in many cases, where one has no concept of the game whatsoever, play money tables are the way to go to learn the game. The OP, however, says he started 8 months ago and has read SSH 10 times.

In this case, I think the play money tables may be developing habits that may be hard to break when he starts playing with the real thing. We've all lost several buy-ins when first starting out. No big deal. You'll look back and laugh at that a year from now. You may even lose another deposit or two until you get in the swing of things. That's perfectly normal.

My advice: You've been playing long enough on play money tables. You are here at 2+2. You own at least one high quality poker book and claim to have read it. Get off those play money tables before they hurt you in the long run. You mentioned you started with $200 before you lost it. I suggest putting in another $200 and playing at the .50/1 level. Don't play without a bonus. There are plently of how-to threads about how to build your bankroll. Try searching for Homer on that subject (I'm too lazy to do it for you right now).

Get the wife some flowers and take her out for dinner if that's what it takes to get "permission" to spend $200, but that's a whole nuther subject. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Onaflag.............

[Cooker]

I am going to say that you can learn about playing in very loose games playing at the play money tables. The players there will be playing so badly that you should definitely be able to consistently beat them if you are a decent player. If you are getting beat at the play money tables, you have no business playing for real money unless you realize that you are terrible and don't mind losing your money.

However, their terrible play might mask some of your problems and you may still be a losing player once you move to real money even though you are crushing the play money game.

[JimGil]

The only play money games that even slightly resemble any real money games are free sit-n-go's. After about 4 people bust (and 3 will bust in the first 3 hands), the remaining players seem to actually want to win.

Most of these tournies are no-limit (I don't know if you're a limit or no-limit player).

But at least people play like the money means something in these games.

[DRD66]

I second the thought on free SNG's being the only thing close. It's possible to use a little strategy. Just realize that you have to have a little patience at first until the idiots get done going all-in with 10-7 suited. Then you can start to build your stack. I swear, these people would play a slot machine if it was online.

[masse75]

Appreciate all the advice. Concerning how well I'm doing versus the play tables, slowly tearing it up. I think if anything I've been able to take it seriously (would I really come in early with Axo?) and have avoided the "it's just play money" mentality.
Concerning the play SnG's--yeah, those I've jumped on are ridiculous early on. First 5 hands and we're down to 5 players. I'm a limit-type by nature. I love playing against the new breed of NLHE players. Guess what, guys? A SB raise won't knock me off this hand.

Damn...just came in with A9o in EP...what was I thinking? /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[derick]

I'm not an expert but here's my suggestions as a new player to another new player.

If anyone wants a few 100,000 play money PM me and I'll give you mine.

I spent months playing with play money on Ultimate bet.


If you do decide to play with play money I recommend that you take your 1000 play money chips and quickly build it up so you can get into the games that require you to have about 100,000 initial buyin play money because the players there are semi sensible. This means you probably want start out playing No limit even if you're more interested in limit.

Although the players on the highest limits (100x initial stake buyin) of the play games are pretty good the low limit play money games are ridculous.

You're far better off playing the nano limits.

Better still is to bonus whore.

I wasted time playing play money because I didn't know that even if you can't beat the play money games then you can probably still beat the real money .50/1 games with a bonus overlay unless you lose over 5 big bets/100 hands. If you want to start small and only risk
$50, startup bonuses like on Party give you $25 if you deposit $50 and play 500 hands. (I used BESTSTART bonus code on party) $25/500hands = 5/100 hands = 5bb/100 hands.

So if I had to start out again, I'd only use the play money to learn the game interface and get to the point where I'm losing less than 5 big bets per 100 hands. After that I'd bonus whore unless I couldn't handle the variance in which case I would stay in the nano limits until I built my bankroll to about $300 and then bonus whore.

derick

[EliteNinja]

No.

[OrianasDaad]

Use the play money to practice discipline.

The fact that it's not real money means you can play absolutely perfectly and still not win any "money", so it's not a good gauge to see if you can beat anything other than the extreme nano-limit cash games.

It is, however, good for getting the process of making correct decisions and accepting that those decisions are correct, regardless of the outcome.

You'll do much better honing your skills playing .5/.10 with a $50 dollar deposit somewhere.

[GuruCane]

The largest problem with honing your skills in limit play money games is that your odds to call are almost ALWAYS there. This is not only true with your standard 5-1 OE/double gut SD or your 4-1 flush draw, but on a 5-out maybe clean, maybe not TPTK draw. What does this do to you in the long run? It is going to make you think that Kxs is a fantastic starting hand in EP b/c, in fact, it might be given the implied odds. As the others said, just don't fall into bad habits.

FWIW, I played for months on the pokerroom NLHE 10K buy-in tables and played rather discliplined poker. After turning 10K into 3M and getting chastised for tight play, I decided to play for real. It is a big difference, let me tell you (I didn't bust out, but didn't have the feeling of self-satisfaction that beating complete donkeys gave me every single night since you don't always win at the real $ tables). Go with the .50/1.00 approach instead. Cheap lessons. Add the fact that when you play a few thousand hands, you will, most likely, have turned a profit and I think the choice is even clearer. If you bust, read SSHE again.

[masse75]

Implied odds before the flop? HUH? I think you mean EV. And following SSHE, you'd better have a damn good reason to even limp with Kxo in EP.

[OrianasDaad]

[ QUOTE ]
Implied odds before the flop? HUH? I think you mean EV. And following SSHE, you'd better have a damn good reason to even limp with Kxo in EP.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure. Any hand that stand a reasonable chance of becoming the best hand or by picking up a strong draw to become the best hand on the flop can be subject to implied odds. Small pocket pairs that must improve and Axs are two prime examples of this.

This is why some of these hands aren't worth playing in early position on tables where a likely raise will cut down your implied odds.

[GuruCane]

You make a good point. I am using improper terminology. My point being because there is so much $ in the pot preflop you end up calling more bets cold than you should. At any rate, I get the right result without articulating it in Sklansky terms (although I have read the passages)--I don't play such hands in such position.

I wouldn't mind (and I am sure the OP wouldn't either) if you expanded on the Kxs and like hands point. The point I was trying to make is that in play money games you might see it capped preflop and 5 to the flop. That means (excluding the blinds for argument's sake), You are getting 4-1 on your money. Post flop, you will always then have odds to call with drawing hands b/c you have at least 20SB in there already.

With Kxs, you will correctly point out that the possibilty exists that KK is out there and you're basically drawing dead (this speaks to your point about so many raisers cutting your implied odds I believe), but my point is about play money games. People don't need such hands to cap it on any street, so your odds are more than there a lot of the time and it doesn't translate to real money games (where your point is certainly well taken). I am happy to be corrected on my assertion as well as the terminology I use since that's what the forum is for. It will help me and the OP so fire away. Thanks.

[GuruCane]

Exactly true in real money situations. Classic example is 22-44. If you limp in, reraises could kill your implied odds b/c of the numerous better hands that could be out there. You must flop a set and, even if you do so, you could be in treacherous waters. My point is really on the Axs-Kxs (yes I know they're not in the same league and NOT for the higher flush possibility) type hands which could foster bad habits and be a major leak created by play money games.