I may be one of the few, but I am really liking this season of High Stakes, much better, actually, than the last two. Vanessa Selbst says in a mini-interview during - I think episode 4, that she likes tournaments better than cash because there's "more to think about."

That really struck me, being I like both, but like trnys better, also. But I never thought about them as having "more to think about" - so my two questions ITT are: which do the women here prefer and why, and, do you agree/disagree with Vanessa and why?

I prefer cash. Tourneys have too much of a luck factor for me. I also disagree with the ogre. I think that in cash, there is so much more to think about.

I have always like trnys way better, but played the last 4 days of 5nl to try and catch one of the milestone hands (no luck), and really had a good time. I played FR, 2 tabling as I am so new to cash games. Turned an ok profit too (400 BB - lol). I'm going to mix these in with trnys for a while to see how I do. In playing both, there is a lot to think about either way, decisions are just different in each, esp. when you're playing deep stacked cash games or raising blind levels of trnys.

I find cash games are MUCH more interesting and complex, bc you are 100-200bbs deep and can get very creative. Tourneys require more luck and a little less skill/thought imo.

Agree that you can bink one tourney pretty much by getting lucky-- but long term I highly disagree with this point.

I am not saying that tourneys are more difficult than cash. But the game does have a lot more factors that change (blinds/antes, ICM factors, all the nuances that come with low effective stack depths late) and I don't think it is fair to say that they require less thought-- especially since deep, well-structured MTTs are a lot like a cash game very early in.

Obviously, I am in the tourney camp. For me ICM is fascinating, as are reshoving ranges, Nash Equilibrium, unexploitable shoves vs optimal play and playing Heads-Up at the end for a very significant % of the prize pool. And my competitive drive to win I think will always make me prefer tourneys, though I have as much respect for a great MTTer as a great Cash specialist.

I think in the long-run, especially, a technically unsound cash game player has no chance of profiting bc of the consistent deepstacks (he won't valuebet when he should, he'll pay off more when he should fold). In a tourney, most of the money is on the line when the stacks are the shortest, and many skilled players' hands are tied bc they can't really play creatively with 25bbs.

I enjoy both, but from personal experience, I just refuse to sit in a 5/10 game tired bc they'll eat me alive...but I'm fine with firing up tourneys on not enough rest bc the same decisions keep coming up, and it's become second nature/not mentally taxing.

I agree with Jamie in that I don't believe a non-skilled player has a chance in the world at being long term profitable in cash games. Whereas while not likely, some true donkey could have a chance at being profitable in tourneys just based on the insane amount of variance that naturally occurs.

Mad props for successful players in both games though!

From my perspective, both forms emphasize different skill sets. I tend to agree with Harrington that deep stack cash is a more complex game than tournament play simply because the hand ranges are wider and the FE is lower. That said, cash players tend to be ignorant/unaware of ICM values and the value of remaining in a tournament. Cash players are going to burn up too quickly in 60/40 flips.

I will say that I only watched the first episode of HSP this season and based on Vanessa's stack off early, she would probably benefit from reading the cash game forums.

"When I was younger, I knew everything. As I got older, I was amazed at how much less I knew."

I play cash only mostly because I already have trouble wrapping around my head around cash games I haven't the brain space to fit in all the tournament strategy stuff like ICM and so on.

I'm hoping maybe in the future I can get into it, but then again, the whole luck factor bugs me out too. I like knowing that I can sit down at a game and get up whenever I want.

I thought about this all day (on and off) and I realized I really like trnys for the simple reason I can plan my time. Online daily tournaments all take about the same amount of time and I know, over the course of a month of them, I'll end up green.

But I also almost always have a cash table open while I'm playing the trnys at the first 5-6 levels. I don't play NLHE, not sure how that all would work out. Playing Stud games, mixed games and such, two tables is my limit. If I only play cash, I too often get stuck in a downswing feeling like I am chained to the puter 'til I make up the loss.

I don't think one form is better than another and I really don't believe if you are a successful at one you are not as good a player at someone successful at the other.

I like Vanessa, BTW, I like smart, fierce, committed people. I thought not playing cash much these days might hamper her on High Stakes. I don't know if my take on it is correct, but I thought during the week you could see her switch up her game and kind of remember, like a bike she hadn't ridden in a while.

I was going to make a similar comment, but less eloquently.

When I first started playing, I learned in a home game that was a cash mixed game. Naturally, I gravitated toward cash games and, in particular, split-pot games. I spent a significant amount of my poker-playing time in the NYC underground O-8 games and the Borgata OE game. When I first tried tournaments, I was incredibly frustrated. When I asked a friend about a tournament situation, he asked me what my M was (back when people still thought in terms of M). I had no idea what an M was

I've now started to devote more time to learning tournament skills. I still consider myself predominantly a cash games player, but I can see the good and the bad in both. I think if that home game was a series of tournaments instead of cash, my story would be the opposite.

its likely impossible to beat live tournies (after rake,tips, travel, and taxes). if ur a semi-cute chick you might be able to do it hustling great staking deals and getting sponsorships/invites (the model/player route) but really, at the end of the day, cash is where its at.

Rake, tips, travel and taxes don't apply to cash games?

They do, but not to the extent they do in live tournaments.

Rake: At the Foxwoods Classic running this weekend, the rake is $175 off the top and another 3% is collected for the staff. That works out to be more than 10% of the money invested. At the 2/5 level, the max rake is $4 and is only collected after the pot reaches $60.

Tips: Most cash players will tip about $1 per pot. At a "high" level, that is typically less than 1% of the pot. Many tournament players tip a couple of % on top.

Travel: Someone like limon lives closes to where he plays, so the only travel expense is gas and car depreciation. In these days, I get enough direct money comps back to basically cover food expenses where I play. At a high level, you're flying to the tournament and staying at the casino. You aren't earning any comps playing.

Taxes: If you hit a $200,000 score one year, you have to pay the max tax rate for that year, even though you might not hit again for 2 more years. A cash player is going to have a more steady income and be taxed at a lower rate over that 3 year period. Of course all of us report all our winnings. In cash, the IRS has to depend on your honesty. In big tournaments, the room will issue documentation.