Byrn
12-30-2002, 05:09 PM
I often read articles and internet posts by skilled players stating that they love tournament time because the side games are so good – they can play at higher limits and win more. I have been trying to figure out why that is and have come up with a few reasons why it might be. 98% of my poker experience is online play, so I don’t have any firsthand experience in this area.
My theories are:
1. Tournament time brings out less skilled players who are “taking a shot” or there for the excitement. These players either do not play many events or bust out so early that they spend a lot of time in side games, and the players with more skill can beat these players (who are playing at a higher level than the skilled player normally plays). As this happens for each level - the 20/40 players move up to 30/60 or 40/80, the 10/20 players move up to 20/40, etc – this allows essentially the whole player base to move up without facing necessarily tougher competition. My only problem with this theory is that intuitively I would think that tournaments bring out the better players, not the less skilled ones, but perhaps there are still plenty of the lesser skilled players that come out of the woodwork.
2. In the same vein as theory 1, a lot of home game players and players who don’t normally face cardroom competition will be playing at their normal home levels, even though their skills won’t hold up when faced with more worldly competition.
3. This is a little weaker of a theory, but perhaps as money gets paid to winners in tournaments and “re-circulated”, those players start taking shots at higher levels. Also, those who have brought buy-ins for a whole slate of tournaments, the large amount of money burns a hole in their pockets and the side games (at a higher limit than they normally play) become too tempting.
I have a few other ideas, but those are the main three. I’m sure the reason is a mix of all 3, with 1 and 2 having the most weight. Any tourney side game players want to chime in?
My theories are:
1. Tournament time brings out less skilled players who are “taking a shot” or there for the excitement. These players either do not play many events or bust out so early that they spend a lot of time in side games, and the players with more skill can beat these players (who are playing at a higher level than the skilled player normally plays). As this happens for each level - the 20/40 players move up to 30/60 or 40/80, the 10/20 players move up to 20/40, etc – this allows essentially the whole player base to move up without facing necessarily tougher competition. My only problem with this theory is that intuitively I would think that tournaments bring out the better players, not the less skilled ones, but perhaps there are still plenty of the lesser skilled players that come out of the woodwork.
2. In the same vein as theory 1, a lot of home game players and players who don’t normally face cardroom competition will be playing at their normal home levels, even though their skills won’t hold up when faced with more worldly competition.
3. This is a little weaker of a theory, but perhaps as money gets paid to winners in tournaments and “re-circulated”, those players start taking shots at higher levels. Also, those who have brought buy-ins for a whole slate of tournaments, the large amount of money burns a hole in their pockets and the side games (at a higher limit than they normally play) become too tempting.
I have a few other ideas, but those are the main three. I’m sure the reason is a mix of all 3, with 1 and 2 having the most weight. Any tourney side game players want to chime in?