Is winning, at least marginally, over the long haul as easy as just not being as bad as the other players at the table?

I try to log some hours before coming back here to post hands/questions and last night I sat at a pretty good table (for me anyway) where people could not fold second pair, small flush, even A high sometimes when it was fairly clear they were beaten.

People just like to play too many hands and just don't like to fold. I am still pretty tight preflop, but instead of trying to overthink things is it better to just accept I won't ever have super big wins (or very large losses) by playing my good hands fast and folding everything else?

Basically, just let them hang themselves? This means I fold a lot and am not getting tricky and if I'm at a table with 3 or 4 decent players I'm likely not seeing many turn cards for free/cheap, but still gonna get paid with a flopped set.

I'm not saying this is how to crush, but is it a way to win small without all the variance?

Just don't suck as much as them=profit?

That's winning poker in a nutshell.

If you're a decent player and everyone else is horrendously spewing, yes, you can win, but not at an incredible rate because the rake/tips are still taking a chunk out of you.

Why don't you think you will have any big wins?

that's poker, yes

You actually worded my question better than I did. I'm worried that just waiting for good hands and bad players won't happen often enough to pay for the rake and hands I have to fold on the flop.

Mostly because the biggest pots I see are nitwits getting it in with draws vs marginal TPTK type hands. I'm just not the type to commit my stack on a draw, I know I'm sacrificing EV for the sake of variance control, but I'm OK with that.

I'm sure there will be times I get it in with top set looking to fade the flush draw and I'll win my share of those so relatively speaking that's a big win, but most of the giant stacks I see at a table are built through risky plays that pay off in that instance. Those stacks usually quickly bust when they move over to the 2/5 game.

Again, I'm OK with less variance.

On your next session, note how many big stacks are made with risky plays and how many times players lose large chunks of their stacks or get felted with those same risky plays. In the end, I think you will see that the ratio of losses to big wins is weighted to the side of losses. As players do, you are only remembering the times that players made big stacks off of bogus plays. The guy who lost 500, got up and left quietly isn't sticking with you. There is money in low limit grinds but it definitely is a grind.

if you are risk-averse, you will never be a winning poker player, even at extremely easy tables. In other words, you will be sacrificing too much ev to beat other players AND rake.

I might be fooling myself, but I don't think I'm completely risk-averse. I like to think there is a difference between risk-averse and low variance.

I'm not against calling or even betting a draw if I'm getting the right odds, but I'm also not set mining with 88 against a preflop three bet.

once againg, if you sacrifice your ev for anything else, there's just not enough ev to be had, even vs terrible players. You need to accept that often you are going to lose - 5, 10, even 20 buyins, because that's how poker works.

I play poker for a living, mostly online, but I did have live sessions where I lost 2000bb, twenty std buyins, in one sitting (granted it was very deep game with uncapped buyin) - if you pass up on those situations, your winning sessions won't make up for your loses when you run bad. Not accepting that sometimes you just will lose a lot of money and trying to avoid that is one of the most common mistakes many players make.

For example, if you pass up on the spot where you should bluff off 200bb into 200bb pot, even though you know you are getting called roughly 40% of time, costs you literally thousands bb/100, you just can't make up for that money in other spots. Passing up on 4000bb/100 spots (if I calculated correctly) would actually cost you more than openfolding aces whenever you get them.

Your point is well taken, thank you.

This is an interesting topic...

Yes, although you could put it another, simpler way, and say it's as easy as being better than the other players at the table. Which is actually not easy at all in a lot of instances.

It's been addressed already, but this is a surefire way to be worse than other players you will run into.

Basically you should constantly be asking yourself whether you are getting good odds to make a call or commit your stack. If you're getting good odds then gamble and this goes for any cards you may have at any given time during the hand.

If you do not take these chances then you will miss out on making money in the long run. Not only that but you will bleed off money in blinds, antes, buy-ins, and folded hands that will ultimately make you a losing player.

This ^^ and what Tutejszy is saying. Yes you can win easily if your game pool is just passive loose non-adjusting calling stations, but you won't get any better and you'll be stuffed when better players join. And online you'll get precisely nowhere.

The problem with not taking a +ev spot for the sake of reducing variance can actually work against you in both ev and variance. If you have a massively profitable semi bluff you don't take your winrate drops so significantly that you are inherently going to get bigger swings.

So even if your deviation is smaller, if your reduction in winrate is higher than the difference in deviation you actually have higher variance with lower ev. Obviously that doesn't apply to small edges but there are plenty of 30% showdown equity spots with huge ev.

Forgive me if I'm wrong or if this seems unkind, but in my experience, when people ask questions like yours, USUALLY, what they're REALLY asking is, "Can I make money playing poker without actually studying hard and practicing to get better?" or "Do I really need to be properly rolled for the game I'm playing to play winning poker?"

Ask yourself if these are what you're REALLY asking. If not, feel free to give me a cyberfinger .

My opinion of low stakes live cash games is that you can in fact make money while being a lazy mediocre poker player, source = me. That said, it's not enough to make it a viable job choice.

No, at least I don't think so. Maybe to the "am I properly rolled" part, but I think that's a different question than I asked in the OP. I am very willing to do whatever it takes to get better, for some of us the learning curve is just steeper than others.

I guess I started working through some hand reading videos and it SEEMS it's kind of a waste of time when the average villain at a 1/3 game (at least where I play) are just as likely to show up with AA as they are 59 suited.

Literally had a guy two seats on my left who did not raise with AA or KK because "you want action with those hands" but would raise with JJ and QQ and AK (literally nothing else) because "you don't want someone out flopping you with those hands".

Now, I don't think you spend a lot of time putting a guy like that on a hand other than you KNOW what his raises are 100% of the time.


I could give a good number of examples from that table and I had a good night because I (for once) wasn't the worst player at the table. My good hands held up and there was no reason to try and outplay anyone. Putting them on a hand was nearly impossible when their range was any two cards. Letting them call off with second pair when I flopped top set seemed much easier.

Suck less=profit more, I think.

Poker will never be a job choice for me. I'm on the wrong side of middle aged and genuinely just enjoy playing. My job pays me well enough and I've been there long enough that it only makes sense to retire there.

If I'm being honest, I don't have a "poker bankroll", I just take what I feel comfortable playing with to the poker room that night, usually three buyins.

Now, ColtsFan may be onto something as I do like to stay and play for a while when I go. It's not unusual to be there 12+ hours and maybe I avoid variance because I don't want to bust three buyins the first two hours and have to go home (don't bring an ATM card and won't play on credit).

I'm not wealthy by any stretch but losing $900 in a night won't kill me either. Having said that, winning is much more fun than losing and I hate to post hands here and get feedback that I pretty much gave away the money so I'd like to improve as much as I can.

in heads-up, most people will play 90%+ hands from sb and 80%+ from bb, do you think hu players don't put people on ranges and just click random buttons?

Fair point.

No. This is exactly what you do if you want to be good player. Anyone can analyze the easy situations and make the right decisions. It's the medium to hard decisions where you can really differentiate and make your profits. If you don't try, you'll never get better in these spots.

But to answer your initial question, yes, the money you make in poker is from others making more/bigger mistakes than you do. If all 9 players at the table are horrible at poker, 1 of them will still be better than the other 8 and he should make money overall against that lineup.

OK cool. Well for live 1/3, my opinion is that you need a baseline competence at poker, which is a low bar compared online poker standards. There are a number of players I see, usually younger guys, who achieve that easily. Where they often fall down is all the other things you need i.e. patience to sit and fold for hours, tilt over an 'unfair' beat, entitlement tilt etc. etc. If you have that dialled in, you're starting from a good place.

Sounds like you want to be a moderately sucessful live rec player. If that is so, then much of the advice (well intentioned) that you will get here is not as relevant to your situation as it is to somebody with a different goal. Best of luck.

Quite an interesting thread here ... So many information points here. You sound as if you have a pretty good grasp of low-limit table dynamic. You may be a touch too broad with your thinking in some spots. You fall into a 'card player' category for me, rather than a 'poker player'. And to a certain degree there is nothing wrong with that .. except when I'm at the table putting you on that style. I will probably jump around and miss some points here as there are so many to pick from ...

1) Yes, be 'less worse' than the other players 'IN THE HANDS YOU PLAY' ... not necessarily at the whole table. Play (Know) your position, know the opponents tendencies when they limp or raise when players flat behind. There is nothing wrong with being aware, and adjusting to, the table dynamic.

2) You are smart not to set mine into 3-bettors when not deep enough (or can flat multi-way) .. the odds just aren't there most of the time, but don't forget about Rule #1

3) Ignoring implied odds and/or fold equity certainly is a way to reduce a higher variance (stack swing) but I'm not sure you can consider this 'low-risk' since it's really 'zero-risk' as you aren't putting anymore chips into these pots. Set v draw hands don't really come around too often, which typically leads players to playing too many hands trying to create 'action' that the game just wouldn't produce otherwise ... Take advantage of this, don't despise it!

It sounds as if you 'can' range players but don't necessarily know (or want) to play against players with wide ranges ... So find a way to do it within your own comfort zone. Limp 88 instead of opening so you can call an opening bet instead of folding to a 3-bet. Take advantage of your image when a Flop checks around ... bet out and take it, even from the blinds. Low-limit poker is typically face value. So if someone flats or raises, it's an easy fold. I've picked up plenty of pots with a 25% pot bet on the Turn or River from 'any' position.

I have a player who just can't figure out that I change my style against him when in or out of position on him. He constantly tries to change seats to get an 'advantage' on me somehow.

'Know' your players, it sound like you do a bit. But be more willing to trust those reads via your play!! I play ATC and the table knows it. The other day I folded ATo to a UTG open and showed a pretty tight player next to me the fold. His face was astonished I would ever consider folding that hand based on my image. But I was facing an UTG open from a 'high pair' only opener/raiser and a flat from tighter MP player ... Which to me was AJs or better, but not 99+ pair. Flop came out A68r. Check/Check Turn=8 Check/Bet/Fold and MP shows AQo, UTG shows KK.

Very next orbit same UTG limps (Strong Ace or KQs) while this time MP opens. I flat and UTG flats. Flop is Q56. UTG Donks, MP raises, I hem-haw flat, UTG shoves a 'short' stack, MP shoves his stack and I call it off. Both of them say 's**t' when I call "You got a set?" Turn 9, River 3. I show 56s to scoop. Guy who I showed the ATo says "I don't know how the hell you get so lucky. You should've lost all your chips in that last hand."

Long story to a point, but the point is I knew how I wanted to proceed against each spot .. and this time I was right (and lucky?) Certainly I have to fade a 'high variance' spot on the Turn and River against AQ and KK as the pot is 'huge'. But I'm a 67% favorite heading to the Turn and will be almost 80% if the Turn is a blank ... getting 2ish to 1 on my chips when I'm a massive favorite!! I've also been there when someone flipped over QQ in the same spot.

This is dragging on, but all I want you to do is play some 'poker' have a plan against the flow of the hand, which includes folding most of the time!!

The issue you will find, and I fear for you, is that you will eliminate a lot of your good variance that 'would' be profit for you in lieu of 'only' big loss variance when your opponent either gets you to fold or sucks out on you.

I've been telling a few for about 2 years now that I wish I knew less about poker in some spots because 'in the old days' I would be diving into these hands head first and taking down some big pots whereas now I know it's 'right/correct' to fold and miss out on the big suckouts. I'm rarely putting in 'bunches' of chips when I'm only 15-25% to win ... it's either 65-80% favorite or 7% dominated (oops).

4) Not taking advantage of your image (no matter tight or loose) will cost you chips in those 'poker' moments. How can I 'afford' to play so many hands? Because I'm taking down 'so many' pots before the Turn or River come out due to my image. Taking down pots before showdown is a huge part of a successful session for me. Whereas your style 'only' allows you to profit when you are hitting cards.

5) I don't send chips to chairs that I don't think will send them back! This is actually good for 'goal' of reducing variance as the only time we will conflict is when it's a cooler one way or the other ...

I don't think anyone here is saying it wont work, but IMO it would have to be against a fairly large player pool in a pretty rec (not reg) setting. I wouldn't make this big of a post unless I saw a 'poker' player in you, but if you just want to play 'cards' then I still would welcome you to my table. GL