of course it's not tougher if you only play it when it's not tougher

When talking about how tough a game is, I assume you would compare worst case to worst case. I assume worst case in the 40 is much tougher than worst case in the 20, but I have played neither game

SCIENCE!

Also, awesome avatar.

How does commerce 20/40 compare to the one at horseshoe in bossier city?

I don't think this is correct. I probably wouldn't waste my time playing the "worst case" 40 game at Commerce. Probably a good player can beat it, but not for tons of money or anything. I've been in games where its like 7 handed and 6 people are trying to make a living in the game. That's not a good formula for 40, but it's also not really relevant to how tough to soft the 40 games are generally at commerce, because those games are pretty rare and you just don't play them. Good time to take a lunch break, head to the gym, go wash your car, whatever. Games get better.

And people wonder why Commerce games break all the time.

You know, it is cool to think we should all be poker samurai. You and I are sitting there with DosXX, OTR, some guy who crushed Stars 100/200 for a big number, one other guy like us, and one semi-bad player. Sure, maybe we only give up a small bit of a BB/HR to that lineup or even break even. The first three guys in the list are actually going to make money off everyone else there, so of course they want the game to be going. You and I are looking at needing a 6 figure roll to sit in that game very long -- once the whole 0.1BB/100 to 0.5BB/100 WR starts to be part of our mix, we're needing north of 1000BB to keep the old RoR down.

For the three of us who'd probably need to game select to be decent favorites in the 40, we're actually funding the game. Sure, someone "should" take the worst of it so the game goes. That's cool, until you're that someone. Then, you see ridiculous swings due to your low WR. DosXX is going to be mad when you and I get up and break the game. That's OK, because neither one of us owes him his house payment.

I get all the predatory seat hopping and lobby games are terrible, and if we all just did the right thing it would even out. Being the 5th or 6th best player in that lineup never will. The three best guys want us to stay, and we get little in return. Sure, maybe if we keep the game going a couple softer players will sit. I could probably tip someone to get me on the list and rush back from the gym, too. If you aren't a poker genius, it is totally understandable why you might pick a better spot.

If they want their games to always run, they should have props. It's not my job to make sure the game always goes, it's my job to make sure I'm taking care of my family.

Sure, maybe I can squeeze out a tiny WR in a bad game and as we all know "games get better." But when I've got other things i COULD be doing that i MUST do at some point during the day, then I'm doing those things when the games aren't very good. Doug's right, go to the gym, and if you need to tip someone to make sure you can get back on the list in a good spot an hour later, do that.

It's just not worth the swings, even if you do have a 1,000 BB bankroll. There are better ways to spend my time than trying for $20/hr in one of the rare all-star 40 lineups.

I was referring more to the Prisoner's Dilemma aspect of it. If anyone - even a crusher - thinks the game is going to break, they're not going to take their BB, thereby increasing the odds that the game will break.

But even in terms of EV, going to watch a movie for 3 hours is giving up 3 hours of play. I don't recommend playing with DosXX, OTR, an online 100/200 crusher, an equal, and a random for 10,000 hours, but given the flux of players at Commerce, how long would you realistically need to tolerate that lineup before 3-4 droolers fill your table?

And ultimately, if you're going to put in substantial hours, I don't think you can afford to put people up on pedestals. It may be difficult, or even impossible, if they have a head start and study more and play more and are just naturally better. But maybe not, and again, as long as you don't put in hundreds of EV- hours, it's actually very motivating to get your ass shellacked every now and then. I'd play 4-handed with DosXX, OTR, and an online crusher. And if the game didn't pick up after an hour, I'd cry no mas and offer to buy a bottle of Dom if they'd just sit and talk poker with me.

It's not about putting people on pedestals. I mean, obviously there are players who I think play incredibly well... but if 6 of the 7 in the game are solid, then it doesn't really matter to me if they're soul crushers or just regular winning regs, there are better spots and I have enough other things to do that I can take my break then and avoid the "worst case scenario" 40 as mentioned above.

I agree with most of what you say but on the other hand I think to often people forget they have the option of trying to get better at poker. In my experience there's not a ton of people that play 40 and below that really want to put jn the time and effort needed to improve their game when they can take the much easier option of quitting, going tk see a movie and coming back another day.

There's nothing wrong with that but I think if j wanted to play poker for a living I would spend my time getting better rather than waiting for everyone else to get worse. But that's just me and I likely have different goals/priorities than others.

I'm not saying people should play on bad games, I quit bad games all the time, just trying to say people should realize that if they are breakeven in a certain lineup they should make becoming a winner jn that lineup a priority. Obviously this isn't easy to do if our playing against 4 online crushers but there's always opportunity to get better.

Part of taking care of your family is making sure the games you're playing in continue. At some point, the 60/120-100/200 player pool will drop to a point where it doesn't go. People will move down to 40/80, and then collapse that player pool as well. Commerce has been somewhat insulated from this because it's been absorbing the collapsed games in the area, but if the Commerce 40/80 is the last 40/80 in the area, you'll soon see what's been happening elsewhere.

I have to say I am appalled at the suggestion to tip a floorperson to get a seat in a good game. I consider that to be totally unethical, as bad as any other kind of cheating that could go on at the poker table. Might as well suggest to mark the deck or bribe the dealer to give you a good hand.

Well, you have to, because everyone else does it. Same as breaking the game when you suspect the game is going to break.

Hard to believe everyone does it. So if I got on the list and didn't tip anyone, I would never get a seat? I would just sit on the top of the list and never get in the game? Don't see how they would get away with that, even in a corrupt system.

You could be a guy who gets a call when a good game's about to start. I don't have any Commerce experience, but at the Bellagio such things are rumored to happen.

If they were putting in time getting better, it would be online playing shorthanded. It might require getting a place in Mexico for a while. I can't even imagine trying to come up to the level of you crushers getting in 30 hands an hour at Commerce or wherever.

There is "this guy is my hero" and there is a cold understanding that someone gets stuff way better than you do. I had a beer vs. hour of coaching from DosXX bet that I won a couple years back. I think he gave me quite a bit more than an hour. In that time he clearly showed me some spots where I was thinking wrong about playing poker. Here's a guy who only played a couple limits higher, but he is a pro and I was a semi-serious rec player. His understanding of the game was clearly better, enough so that he could quickly see some things I was doing wrong and simply explain both what I was thinking and what I should have been thinking.

Having played a little bit with you, I'm willing to go out on a limb and say you and I play a lot more alike than either one of us play like OTR or DosXX. No shame in it, but gutting it out in games comprised of them will result in either one of us having less money.

You have to. I think tipping floorpersons is an absolute joke. Poker is the only "sport" where it's legal to bribe the referee.

And yet-- they are underpaid, and your opponents will be doing it. So you do what you have to do.

I disagree about not being able to get good playing good players live. I realize that you get a lot more hands in online but I think any time thinking about poker is valuable.

When I play live, I am frequently thinking about hands I just played or watching other people play hands. As long as I am thinking about poker, I think the experience is valuable. Also I think I have deeper thoughts playing live because I can really analyze a hand in my head right after it is played. Online, I'm already playing and thinking about the next hand. It's not until after a session that I'm able to sit back and get into some deeper analysis.

I definitely feel like I've gotten substantially better at poker since Black Friday despite hardly any online play. It is easy to get distracted by phone or tv or whatever live but I think if you are able to avoid doing this too much you can learn a lot.

This is so true. Almost all of the players who crush 20 or 40 in LA were serious online players pre-BF. There's just no substitute for having had the opportunity to play 500,000 or 1,000,000 hands or whatever. The players who try to master live poker without that experience are at a horrendous disadvantage (and often don't even appreciate the extent of it).

You are doing the right things if you are reviewing other players' hands as well as your own....

And yet-- when I played online, I played at least 5-10 extremely interesting hands worth a session review EVERY DAY, and I was only 6-tabling. Anyone playing 12 or 24 tables played even more of them. Plus some players shared databases as well. This was even reflected on 2+2-- the sheer numbers of hands that used to get posted in the uSL forum were incredible-- far more than live players ever post on SSL and MSL combined.

There's just no comparison whatsoever. Even the most attentive, careful player who does session reviews isn't learning nearly as much live as you could if you played online.

I don't contest any of this, but it's a question of context.

I will probably have less money playing with people who are better than me at poker ... for the 15 minutes that it takes for someone worse than me at poker to show up. Then I'll lose a little slower ... for 15 minutes before someone worse than me table changes in. Then the two lobbiers return, and the last seat gets locked up by a 8/16 player who bribed his way to the top of the list when he saw the table changer come to my table. Then I'll make money for the rest of the 3 hours I would have gone to see a movie.

Now, there's a legitimate argument to say, "well, the crushers are too good" or "when the game fills my edge is too small" or "I need to get my passport stamped at the Chinese embassy by 4pm and afternoon games are amazing so I'm going to go now rather than later."

But I suspect (mostly from Jesse's blog) that people already time-select and come to the casino during the best times. People already table-hop whenever they can. And they remain worse than the best players because they're always looking for the easier money.

30 minutes of a brutal 4-handed game isn't going to ruin anyone. Set a timer so you don't get stuck and end up being the pinata for 6 hours; set a stop loss if you're going to melt down. And maybe I'm just ****ed up, but those moments where you realize how awful you are are highly motivating to me to work harder.

you shouldnt play in any commerce 40 game with that line up period. absolutely go do something else. you want to play a tough game to get better thats what 100/200 is for. Theres 1/3 of a bb per hour in rake it has to be soft. id bail on any 40 game if there was more than 1 good player in the game. and dosxx and otr are both strong players.

playing live shorthanded i feel like i learn just as much as i would online

agree. really good players aren't really good because they played a lot of hands online. they played a lot of hands online because they're really good.

I'm sure all the comm 49 regs would love to see you guys in their game