Winning at Play money any indication for real money??

[AKQJ10]

Once you know you're playing with +EV, I agree. Until then, unless you really don't care whether you lose $100-200 or not, seems to me like you're better off making sure you really understand Lee Jones or Ed Miller before you play at stakes high enough for it to hurt.

For me going through the swings at Pacific $0.05/0.10 gave me confidence to pull through them at B&M $3/6 and 4/8. The Pac micros are only a tad looser/more passive than Foxwoods low-limits. And while the stakes may not mean much to your opponents, it's up to you whether they matter to you.

To each his own, though. If being down $150 and still not knowing if you're playing +EV poker is no concern, then play 50c/$1. If you can say the same thing about being down $24,000, then go learn in the Bellagio $80/160. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] It's all relative.

[BlackRain]

I assumed he was talking about NLHE. I think you guys are talking about limit.

[archcity]

As someone who did really well with play money for about 6 months and just started with real money at PokerRoom (Mac user) about a month ago, I thought I'd jump in with my first post.

Playing NL SnGs is definetly more challenging but I think more fun. Most play money games would finish before blinds even became an issue. Also a ten person play table would be down to 6 or 7 players after a couple of rounds, because of crazy all-ins at the beginning. That made it easy to get in to the "money". At real tables you have to play real smart poker to get in the money.

Also playing NL .25 ring games, because that is the lowest they have at Pokerroom. Probably would prefer at .10 table given the choice. I am holding my own, down just a little. The difference I see is it's much harder to extract money with a really good hand, and you can loose a bunch with a really good hand that is not the nuts.

I also found that it is hard to build a big stack and make money by "ruling" table. In play if you build a huge stack, people stick around or more players fill empty seats. In real money if you double your stack people leave and no one is anxious to sit in with you. Quickly you'll find yourself playing heads-up. I don't like playing really short handed (2-4 players) at a ring table. So you have to sit in with the standard buy-in at another table.

That's my 2 cents as a beginner.

[KenProspero]

Well, if you were losing at play money, regularly, I'd say that you need a serious change in tactics to win at real money.

Winning at play money regularly, means it's time to test the waters with real money.

[Komodo]

If you are beating the playmoney big, there is no doubt you can beat the real money too. Play is mostly the same, bluffs, valuebetting, semibluffs, slowplaying etc. The main difference is perhaps a much bigger bankroll, a bit more maniacs, and the fact that you play more hands in playmoney.
All-in preflop by Ak is likely to get called by J8off just like in playmoney. Microlimit is stronger, but not that much.

[vexvelour]

Play money is great practice. When I first learned the game of poker but was reluctant to play for money, play money let me learn my style and get comfy with the cards (as well as reading books). When I won $400k at a $2000 NLH game one night, I decided I was good enough. I sort of went through culture shock, because people defending and trying to win real money is much much different than people who have an infinite amount of (play) money to gamble with. Depending on your bankroll, I would start off at 1-2$ games. It's still cheap enough to get a feel for the game, and be profitable. Good luck, and welcome to the forum!

[vulturesrow]

I think that playing play money games has some value for 2 reasons.

1. Just getting used to the game: calculating odds, learning how to use the checkraise, etc.
2. It teaches you how to play against loose players. This is very important. Now, real money players arent going to play as loose as play money, but its pretty close some times.

I think you should have no problem starting off at .5/1 as long as you are adequately bankrolled. Start off tight and then loosen up with the more speculative hands once you get comfortable.

FWIW, I think that Chris Ferguson started off playing at the play money tables. Not to say he needed it, but obviously he thought it had some value.

P.S. I just reread your post. Get your flops seen down [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
If you are beating the playmoney big, there is no doubt you can beat the real money too. Play is mostly the same, bluffs, valuebetting, semibluffs, slowplaying etc. The main difference is perhaps a much bigger bankroll, a bit more maniacs, and the fact that you play more hands in playmoney.
All-in preflop by Ak is likely to get called by J8off just like in playmoney. Microlimit is stronger, but not that much.

[/ QUOTE ]
(Emphasis added.)
Where on earth do you play play-money games? I don't think I've ever seen one where bluffs and semibluffs worked, or where slowplaying was necessary. In fairness I've probably played more play money limit than no-limit, but either way people will call down with anything.

On your last point I agree with you: it's really just a matter of degree, because micro games are pretty loose too. They're probably often more passive (easier to raise just for fun when it's only play money) but not always. I'm not saying someone should stay at $0.05/0.10 forever, or even to accumulate 300 BBet/20 buyins for the next level, just long enough to know they can beat it.

To the poster who pointed out my limit bias: you're right, the post was fully neutral until I brought up Jones and Miller. Incidentally i generally indicate betting limits with a slash ($2/4) and NL blinds with a dash ($2-4), and the OP used a dash, so I must have really been predisposed to thinking in limit to override this convention that AFAIK i dreamed up by myself. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[bholdr]

...you seem serious enough, and that's more important than your play anyhow.

If you're taking the time to track your sessions, winrate, stats, etc, you are on the right path (and you're doing things that most other players are just ignoring), and should consider switching to real money as soom as possible. While a player can learn at play money or nano limits, they will undoubtedly learn much faster at a limit where people CARE about the money. .50/1 or .25/50 (at paradise) is an excellent place for a person to start, imo.


You'll likely take a beating when you make the switch, and should expect to "pay for lessons" for a while, but if you're diligent and committed (looks like you are) and willing to study (HARD) you should be able to become a winner or at least breakeven (anyone beating the rake is a good player, IMO).

GL to you, and remember- the only stupid question is the one that doesn't get asked...

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

Deposit a few bucks. Play at micro/nano limits. Post hands. Read. Study.

Play money is play money. Who worries about losing it?