My First Tournament Win

I don't get it !

How I can win my first 7CS poker tournament at The Tropicana (AC) and play against excellent players and beat them, then lose to 1-5 stud players with regularity. I'm doing nothing different in the Tournaments that I don't do in the live games. I don't get it !


I've read Roy West's 42 lesson's & Sklansky's 21C7S, & Theory of Poker cover to cover many times.


One thing for sure, I'm sick & tired of players chasing me down to the River. 1-5 games are bankroll destroyers


Maybe its time to move to the 5-10, or 10-20 games.


Ronin

Congrats on the tourney win, Ronin. I would also be interested in hearing about the possible advantages of playing 5-10 instead of 1-5. I have been told on more than one occasion that I should move up to 5-10. Perhaps I am being told this because I am out thinking myself at 1-5? Are the players in 5-10 games really that much more competent, such that I can better read their holdings? In other words, do they play more "by the book"? It seems to me that it should not be any easier to get the money in 5-10 games, though I would think that there would be less variance than in a 1-5 game. In any event, I'd like to hear some comments on this subject as well. By the way, I have been a lurker here for a while, and have picked up quite a few tips from the "expert" posters. I hope to start posting regularly, in order to get comments on my play.


-- Thanks in advance for all advice, Homer J.

I don't consider myself an expert in comparison to many of the regular posters on here, from whom I too have learned a great deal, but I think you should try moving up to 5-10 and see how you do. I played 1-5 for several years at Foxwoods, and while I had some nice wins, had a huge variance, and got chased down plenty of times by players looking for gutshot straights and backdoor flushes. Those were the hands that really aggravated me. It is still going to happen at 5-10 and even 10-20, but it will happen a lot less, at least in my experience. In those games, the best starting hand tends to stand up more often.


The other thing you should remember is that in the long run, a player who chases you down and catches you is going to be profitable to play against. Sure, sometimes he will catch, but most of the time he is paying you off. You want that player in the game.


I moved up from 1-5 to 5-10 and found my variance went down and my results greatly improved. The same thing happened when I went up to 10-20. 15-30 at Foxwoods seems to be a little more volatile than 10-20--some of the players are crazy--but there is plenty of opportunity for profit if you play tight and are aggresive when you have the goods.


Congratulations on your first tournament win. I won my first tournament this winter, it really is a great feeling.

because the players are not that strong in those tourneys, asssuming that they are the small buy in tourneys. in fact most of them are the same players that play in the 5-10 games there. That is not to say that winning is not an accomplishment, it certainly is. Your strategy in the tourney was probably a lot better than theirs.


Tourney play is nothing like the 1-5 play. SO the fact that you win in the tourney does not mean you are playing the right strategy for the 1-5 ring game. in fact most sophisticated strategies are wrong at 1-5.


you ABSOLUTELY shoudl play in the 5-10 games there. I used to before i moved on to 10-20 and you will almost certainly do well in them. get your feet wet at 5-10 because you will begin to see how the more complex strategies work. usually there will be a few good players at the table.


pat

You should think about the structure of the games and whether you are playing appropriately for that structure.


Most 5-10 is still tightly structured (low ante, small bring in compared to big opening raise.)


10-20 is slightly less tightly stuctured, and 15-30 is the beginning of "real stud" per Malmuth/Sklansky.


1-5 as played in Vegas has a structure that you should be able to beat consistently--but the rake is very high.


The tighter the structure, the better the game is for people who like to punish drawing hands with big cards and big pairs.

in at least 2000 hrs of 1-5 stud and is averaging 1 BB/Hr. move up to 5-10.

U should have a comfortable 600BB bankroll=6K OR a recurring source of income.

Sitting Bull

Two thousand hours? You would condemn someone to spend 2000 hours in a 1-5 game? I should think that all someone needs is a couple of winning 1-5 sessions and a job to move up to 5-10.

Thanks both for your input. I tend to agree that 2000 hrs is a bit much. One would have to play full-time for a year, or, since most people don't play professionally, about 10 hrs a week for 4 yrs. It seems that one could determine their skill level in a certain game much faster than this. My guess would be 100-200 hrs, but I am sure it varies by individual. Thanks again for your input.


-- Homer J.

when i started i played a grand total of 40 hours at 1-5. a friend plays it a lot so i watch him on occasion. I cant even imagine playing 2000 hours at 1-5. i would give up poker before that.


Pat

Pat, I've gotten bored playing $1-3 at Mohegan and Foxwoods (unless the game is very wild and loose, in which case it can be great). So I've started playing in the $2-4 omaha/8 game at Mohegan and some $1-5. Seems to me there are more competent players at $1-5 and that the structure also makes for a more aggressive game, good charteristics to practice on prior to moving up to $5-10. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on $1-5 (why it's so awful, for one) and also on the differences in the $1-5 and $5-10 games and strategies at Foxwoods.