Fascinating RGP Post

[Bill Murphy]

http://www.recpoker.com/article.php?gID=1&ID=253170

Never thought of tournaments in quite this fashion. Sounds like it would be fun to give it a try.

[CrackerZack]

This is tremendous. Really interesting reading.

[HDPM]

A similar thing was posted on RGP a coupla years ago I think. It makes more sense to me than playing some of the tourns really. But it is kind of nuts, particularly when you fiond yerself saying "4000 isn't much for a 400-800 game. Really? /images/graemlins/tongue.gif


But Bill, the way you stack chips when yer hot you might want to give it a try. You can play more than one game, so if you got to a place w/ a lot of games and a big top section you could really push a rush when you are playing good. I want to see you in a 1500-3000 game jamming your favorite hand and seeing how they react. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Rocco17]

Guys,
Hate to bother you but what is ABC when referring to razz? The RGP post mentions that when discussing the big game.

[HDPM]

A-2-3

[JasonM]

I've thought about trying this many times. I've thought about many ways of doing this, but I think I like this guys idea the best. I am definitely gonna give this a try sometime soon. Unfortunately or maybe fortunately my local card room doesn't spread that big of limits, 2-4 to 30-60. But what the hell, the most I would lose on this experiment is $100.

[Ted Geisel]

Well written post, thanks for digging it up at RGP

[baggins]

wow. cool post. wish we had that big of a spread in limits here.

[mike l.]

i remember reading that before. while it's entertaining, i think it's a fabrication. the key is the very start where he plays 1-2 and claims to win $50. if you seen the rake in that game you would realise that that's impossible.

when i was playing at commerce a lot a friend and i used to ponder the idea of running a parlay from 15-30 up to 80-160 (or 200-400 if they were spreading it). never seemed to get around to it though; taking a $500 buy in and running it into 2 grand playing 15 or 20 always seemed like parlay enough for one night.

[nicky g]

That is a cool post, true or not.

I remember reading a post on a UK forum from a well-known player that there was a player who used to specialise in exactly that kind of thing at the Victoria Casino in London - start in the £50 buy-in Pot limit game, and keep playing and moving up till he was in the big game or bust. It must be a lot easier/faster to do in PL than limit, although also a lot easier too to lose everything very quickly.

[RollaJ]

[ QUOTE ]
the key is the very start where he plays 1-2 and claims to win $50. if you seen the rake in that game you would realise that that's impossible.

[/ QUOTE ]
It is 100% possible, in a given hour to win $50

[ QUOTE ]
taking a $500 buy in and running it into 2 grand playing 15 or 20 always seemed like parlay enough for one night.

[/ QUOTE ]
You are 100% right /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
remember reading that before. while it's entertaining, i think it's a fabrication. the key is the very start where he plays 1-2 and claims to win $50. if you seen the rake in that game you would realise that that's impossible.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not goin gto vouche for the validity of the post, but if you think someone can't win $50 in a 1/2 game I think you kidding yourself. Mybe the rake is enough to prevent anyone from beating the game longterm, but it certainly doesn't have a huge effect on a small rush during a session.

[tiltboy]

One difference between limit tournaments and limit ring games is the rake, not to mention tipping and a possible jackpot drop.

[ElSapo]

This is really similar to the Open Internet Challenge that was going on in the internet forum, where posters started with $25 at .5/1 and moved over time to the highest limits... Interesting reading. Not exactly the same though, as you moved up when you hit a certain number of bets for the next game.

[doormat]

If you think you can't win 50 dollars at 1/2, then you may find the story of a guy by the name of Archie in Las Vegas hard to believe. He borrowed 10k to play poker against Stu Unger, Chip Reese, Johnny Chan and a few others. He took his winnings and ran it up to 11 million on the craps tables at Binions. Then he won millions more playing pool against a famous casino executive. I believe that when his streak ended he was up between 20 and 30 million, but I am sure someone in this forum can give a more accurate number. I know an insurance agent who tried to convince him to buy a 10 million annuity but Archie decided against it and went on a bad run and lost it all back.

doormat

[CrackerZack]

well, he passed on one bad investment and made a worse one by losing it all back.

[Andy B]

When Canterbury Card Club first opened, I played regularly in their $2/4 stud games. They have a 10% rake capped at $4.50 and a $1 jackpot drop for any pot of $15 or more. I would tip $1 for each pot won. I see posts all the time that say that games like this are unbeatable, but I beat this game for something like $7/hr over a significant stretch of time. Rake alone doesn't make a game unbeatable, although it does obviously cut into your profits some. The biggest factor in determining the profitability of a game is the difference in ability between you and your opponents. If you are significantly better than them, you should be able to beat both them and the rake.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

If you want to do something like this for fun, or because you feel it is more profitable for you than "regular" cash play, then feel free.

However, it really doesn't do much to simulate a tournament. The big difference is the mentality and stack sizes of the opponents. In a tourney, when you get deep, not just you but everybody is short-stacked, and they're (almost) all in the spot where if they lose the next hand they play, they're broke or crippled. In a cash game, doing this system, you will frequently be the ONLY short-stacked player, and thus the opposition (and particularly their mindset) will be much different than you would face in a tourney.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[baggins]

i used to play at the Bike when i lived in LA. one night i won $100 playing 1-2, moved to $2-4 and won $200, then moved to $3-6 and won $200 more. no joke. i cashed out 5 racks of whites that night. not a LOT of money or anything, but it sure was a nice parlay. i was playing really well, and i was in that zone where you just know when people are going to fold, or you know your decent hand is second best... come on. you know the players in 1-2 are horrible. and the pots can get huge. you only need to win a pot or 2 to win $50.

[Bill Murphy]

I've played 1-5 stud(w/jackpot) while drunk, for fun, several times and won over $200 in less than two hours.

Also lost $30-50 a couple times. /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[Bill Murphy]

" But it is kind of nuts, particularly when you fiond yerself saying "4000 isn't much for a 400-800 game."

Guy's only mistake was playing in the razz game(although making it there was his goal from the start and he damn dragged a 10K+ pot, too /images/graemlins/frown.gif ).

He went from 25BB in the 100 stud to 5 in the razz, after the rathole. Kinda like the Wendo tourney jumps.... /images/graemlins/mad.gif

IMO, he also had an easy fold on the river, followed by picking up his last 1200 and quitting 3K+ winner for the day. But all props to him.

Oh, I'm gonna give this a try, alright. ElSapo's freakin genius. Internet's the place to do this; smaller jumps & shorter waits. Dunno how high they top out at, tho.

Ya going tae Wendo fir the 'biggies' tha 21-22?

[Bill Murphy]

You're a genius, dude. Online's the place to try this. Smaller jumps, shorter waits, and more games to choose from.

How how do the sites' limits go up to?

BTW, note high you can try this w/a higher buyin; start w/500 at 10/20, etc. Kinda like the WSOP! /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[John Feeney]

Gotta give some credit where due here. Long ago, when the forum was just a lil' thing, "Big John" Hatzell described doing this kind of thing for fun sometimes. He called it 'my own private tournament' or something.

[Men the Master]

Actually, I was the one who wrote "My Own Private Tournament" a few years ago under a handle that I can no longer remember. Some of the things that I suggested:
- Start at a limit two limits below what you're currently accustomed to and what your bankroll allows you to play. For example, if you're a 30-60 player, start at 10-20 or 15-30.
- Buy-in with two minimum buy-ins and use this as a "stop-loss" just like a tourney buy-in is really a de facto stop-loss.
- Only move up if you win at the current limit and only if the game higher up is a "good game".
- Always rathole some chips each time you move up. This insures that you don't give back all of your winnings.
- Realize that you will usually be on short stack 'tournament mode' as you move up and could be exploited (with the Gap Concept) by a player who knows what you're trying to do.
- Be aware that by moving up the "image equity" which you had developed as a result of having won at the lower limit will be wasted.
In addition, I also pointed out in that post that the main advantage of running your own private tournament is that you get to be your own 'tournament director'. In other words, you get to decide when to raise the limits, when to call for a bathroom break, whether or not the act of ratholing chips is or isn't legal, whether to continue or quit the tourney. You also get to pick the tables that you want to play in based on EV considerations. You won't have to be forced to play in a table with such super duper mega tough world championship caliber players like Doyle Brunson, Scotty Nguyen, Johnny Chan, Antonio the Dishwasher, Bong the Filipino Pizza Delivery Boy, Spring, Uncle Thuong, and T.J. Cloutier.
The main downside, as I have already mentioned, is that your being on 'tournament mode' as you move up leaves you open to expoitation. That is, the aware player will use the Gap Concept on you when you're either in the blinds or when you get heads up.
And yes, I implied "the Gap" Concept (though I didn't use those exact words) back then even though David Sklansky hadn't written his tourney book yet. If I remember correctly, I called it the "Old Navy" concept because Uncle Thuong, who taught it to me learned about it during World War II when he was playing freeze-out games with his navy buddies while they were stationed in some obscure Banana Republic somewhere in the Pacific.
BTW, John. When are you coming over to Zzyzx, California? Cousin Meng loves your book and would like to have your autograph. And you're more than welcome to our friday night games at Uncle Thuong's Noodle House.