Home Contact New York News Photos 1 2 Reviews Sports Web Finds
Your Host
Site Tools
Categories
Archive
Greatest Hits
Photos
Interviews
Search



PaulKatcher.com
All of Web
Friday, September 15, 2006

My First Week Playing Online Poker (For Real Money)
All my life I've been fortunate enough to be a poor gambler. Without an emotional craving for "the action," I never got hooked on the idea of consistently losing money. Call me crazy.

But I have caught the poker bug. I know this because I've played a couple thousands hands online, for real money, over the past six days. Since I make the plunge to genuine risk, I've hardly been able to get away from the computer, praying for pocket aces till close to 6 a.m. on a couple of occasions.

I'm down a whopping $4, and I can honestly say I'm pretty satisfied with the results.

What follows are my limited poker experiences, to share with those curious about online play, as well as a welcome to more experienced players to share advice and critiques. (Hey, there's no better form of constructive criticism.)

How Did I Get Here?

• Clearly, the ESPN telecasts introduced me to the game, and I devour every episode. Though I've since learned that we never know the true story behind how televised hands are played, because players' strategies may have been influenced by prior untelevised hands against the same opponents. Hands that ESPN are loathe to reference, because they don't want to make the games seem edited. Which they are, heavily.

• I began playing with free credits on PokerStars seveal months ago. Started with 1,000 chips, as all newbies are entitled to, and quickly busted. Hey, ya gotta start somewhere. I reloaded 1,000 chips (as players are allowed to do three times an hour, I believe) perhaps four times, never a sixth, and have since turned 5,000 play chips into 3.5 million. Yes, I know free-money games are quite different than real-money, but it's great practice for quickening your evaluation of hands and boards, if you can discipline yourself to not be a free-wheeling turd like so many others.

• I began reading some of highly recommended books out there. Started with David Sklansky's Hold 'Em Poker, which was headache-inducing in its technicality. But if you can't handle the math, stay out of the poker room. I followed that with Phil Gordon's Little Green Book, which I loved. Reasonable people can debate his personal style, but it's nothing if not a comprehensive (and, more importantly, comprehensible) collection of strategy. I've also read Dan Harrington's three books on no-limit tournaments, which are perfectly adaptable to "home" tournaments and even online cash games. In each, Harrington analyzes dozens of actual hands (played by recognizable world-class pros and unknown players online), sharing how he would play every step: pre-flop, post-flop, and after the turn and river, should the hand advance that far. Absolute gems, even if you disagree somewhat with Harrington's personal tight style of play. I'm also getting through Mike Caro's Book of Tells, which is a classic, but maybe a little too advanced for my purposes. Especially when me and my buds are getting drunk and don't even know what we're doing, let alone our opponents.

• The most significant thing that led me to finally throw some cash on the online table: my sterling performances in a regular home tournament. Usually about 6-7 players, a modest $40 buy-in, and lots of beer! We are hardly candidates for the WSOP, but in nine games, I've won five times and placed second once — a statistically significant rate of success, and a validation of my ability as a supplement to chance (at least against them) — for a profit of $740 ($1160 take from $420 investment, which includes two $40 re-buys).

My Mission:

With that $740 in house money, it was time to find out where I stood in online play. Was I leaving money on the table if I had the ability to swoop in every now and then and pick up a few bucks? Are people that bad that I could pick up more than a few bucks regularly?

It was time to find out where I stood. And being the cheap bastard I am, I loaded my account with a whopping $50.

How to Get Your Money In:

I tried making a direct deposit into PokerStars through my credit card. Which was denied, because of some laws or some shit. In fact, there are many recent news reports about a possible Internet gambling bill on Capitol Hill. Hope the jail cells are roomy.

Anyway, I was able to make an instant payment from my checking account to NETeller, which charges am 8.9% fee. So be it.

And Here's How It's Been Going:

I started playing the cheapest tables, 1- and 2-cent blinds, in which you're allowed to bring only $5 to the table. That was fun for about half a minute. Nothing is more mind-numbing than deciding whether to call a penny in the small blind.

Since, I've bounced around 5- and 10-cent-blinds tables ($10 max), 10- and 25-cents ($25 max), 25- and 50-cents ($50 max) and 50-cents and $1 ($100 max).

Foolishly, perhaps, I move up higher when I'm losing, because I'm usually down only after taking a significant, unlucky hit, holding my own pretty well in smaller pots. Therefore, I hit the higher (OK, a relative term) tables to play small ball and recoup the same amount that would require a monster hand at a smaller table. And that's worked pretty well for me.

The first night I lost all $50. It may sound naive, but I don't think I played too badly. I don't recall actual hands, because I've played maybe 1,700 since, but I don't recall ever thinking, "That was dumb of me." If anything, I may have overestimated online players' propensity to bluff. But that's what I was here for, to learn such things.

After the $50 drop, I plunked in another $50, and here's how things have gone, playing hundreds of hands each day:

Sept. 9: Won $60
Sept. 10: Lost $15
Sept. 11: Won $14
Sept. 12: Won $15
Sept. 13: Lost $49
Sept. 14: Won $21

So, including the initial $50 loss, and another $50 deposit, my bankroll stands at $96. A loss of $4 (not including the 8.9% NETeller fee, which I'll pretend was just two beers I bought for friends) over 2,000 hands, a loss of a fifth-a-penny per hand, which averages out to -$1 over 500 hands, which takes about six hours.

It's hard for me to gauge what the average pot has been, since I've played many different low-level limits, but I'd say it's about $2 a hand. I've lost 1/1000th of that on each. Which is great.

OK, I'll admit it's a little disappointing that this doesn't appear (yet) to be a potential money-maker for me. I think 2,000 hands is enough of a sample size to know where I'm at, which is straight-up average at even the low-tables. But everything is relative, and I can also be happy that I genuinely enjoy the puzzle aspect of the game, even more than the gambling part (just not my nature, thank god), and know I can have a couple hours' fun with only about $25 on the line.

And, who knows. There's nowhere to go but up, right?

How I Play:

I would classify myself as a tight player. The reason is simple: among novices, whom I play in home games and assuredly in the low-level games online, their No. 1 mistake is playing too many hands. It's a simple strategy: if the table is tight, you play loose (chasing out players who are afraid of confrontation); if the table is loose, play tight (sit back and try to pick 'em off). That works best when players don't even know they're playing loose. They might think KJ offsuit is a big hand, but it isn't, as you can see from this ranking of poker starting hands. KJ offsuit isn't even in the "playable" category from middle position at a full table.

As you run into players of greater ability, a common critique is not playing aggressively enough. I believe this has to do mostly with post-flop betting, which can be a real art form, getting your opponent to put you on a hand far greater than what you hold. And, while I'm not entirely incompetent in making such moves, I have a feeling that's where I can use the most improvement. And it'll come, but not overnight.

Online, I play tables with a max of 6 players. It's a little more active than 9-person tables — we're here to play, after all — and I go in only with cards good enough to start in middle position, or better, at a full table. (With the usual considerations, such as being half- or full-in against callers in the blinds.)

General Poker Thoughts:

No limit can be demoralizing. Duh, you might say, that's the point. But it sucks to come to a table with, say, $25, move that up to $43 after an hour of solid play of 10- and 25-cent blinds, then take a $20 hit on a hand that's just too hard to lay down. And that happens, I don't care who you are. All of a sudden, your solid play netted you -$2 for an hour's worth of playing real well. It's more a mental hit than a financial one (obviously, if we're talking $2).

It's cool to just observe the high-limit tables online. Yep, you can enter those rooms and just be a voyeur. Theoretically, calling for $200 in middle position should come with it the same strategy as th 2-cent table, but we know it doesn't work out that way.

Is there anyone in the world who knows how to play pocket 9s? I sure as fuck don't. Nor pocket 10s, 6s, Js ... you get the point. The worst is when you have something like pocket Qs against two players and the flop comes A, 7, 2. You bet, one calls and you have no idea where you're at. Actually, I usually have no idea where I'm at.

Hell on Earth is sitting in the big blind with pocket aces and everyone folds. That hand comes once every 221 deals (see a slew of poker odds). The fuck if I'm gonna be happy picking up a small blind from it!

Sit on the left of a hyper-aggressive bettor, if possible. Similarly, sit on the right of a tight player, who will fold when faced with confrontation. My seond night online, I sat to the left of a psycho at the 5-cent/10-cent table, in which we wee allowed to sit down with only $10. He'd pre-flop raise constantly several dollars, up to $8, which is 80 times the big blinds. Once or twice, we'll give you a smidgen of credit. Do it over and over and there's just no way to win. I sat there for hours, promising to not leave before he did, as he kept reloading $10 and increasing my stack to $75, to the point where incoming players thought I was a shark, ordering me to higher-level tables. No way, Jose. And I was in the most fortunate spot, because I had a ton of house money and first crack of calling a suicide bet. And if I called, the rest of table knew I had to have something and were scared away. The person to the right of Mr. Charity must've been real jealous.

Most memorable good hand: Had K-9, so I must've been on the dealer button to consider a call at the 5-cent/10-cent table. Flop comes KKK. I check a hand that could lose only to a straight-or royal-flush (which would still need two exact cards to complete). Fool next to me puts in all of his chips, about $5.50 worth, which I immediately call. Next card is a 9. Haha. Next card I don't remember. But I made 50 times my original bet. Which brings me to the best betting advice I could give:

Don't make a huge bet that will be called only when you're beat. You see this a lot online, and almost never on TV. People making bets many, many, many times the size of the pot when it serves no purpose. If the purpose it to make money on a monster, you're supposed to bet only as much you think they'll call, or as much as will induce a re-reraise. If your purpose is to make them fold when you have little, why risk $50 when a $5 raise might get the same job done? It's a simple matter of putting your entire neck on the line for no reason. And it will get cut off more often than you'd like.

Hands that sucked for me: Played a huge pot (yes, I've won a couple that were $75-95) where there was no pair on the board and nailed an ace-high flush. That means there was no chance of a full house, and I beat any set, any straight and any flush ... except a straight flush! And guess what the fucker nailed on the river? To his credit, he didn't go all-in till he got it, but you tell me if you've ever laid down an ace-high flush with no pair on the board. That's the kind of loss when you get out of the chair and ask yourself, "Did that really happen?" Another time I hit an ace-high flush with 6-6-3-x-x on the board. Fucker slow played a full house, with 6-3, that he flopped. Again, how can you give credit to that exact hand. Just unreal. And I'm sure there was no pre-flop raise. Hey, it happens.

Get cute with A-A, and you could be in trouble. I'm gonna make it a habit to play A-A either as a normal good hand (raise 3x the big blind), or pretend it's a pair of 10s or Js (maybe 5x the big blind, normally to discourage action, but in this case hoping to get lucky with someone who wants to play with two high cards against what they think is a vulnerable pair). Just too much risk inviting a lot of players by calling. Unless I'm under the gun, then I'll call and pray I get a re-raise in front of me. I guess you're supposed to play A-A different ways every time, but since they only come once every 221 hands, and you're likely to never see the same players again at an online table, should you really be worried about being put on that exact hand?

When everyone limps in, tread lightly. As novice as I am, I don't even think about putting someone on a hand in this spot. I don't know that anyone could. Which is why a huge bet on the river is maddening. You could have J-9 with a board of J-2-9-7-K and just have no idea if someone stayed in till the end with 2-2 or 9-9 or 10-8 or K-J, thinking his top pair with K kicker was good enough through the turn. Do you call an even money bet at the pot?

Any hand worth a call is worth a raise. That's what I've read. Think I follow it? Fuck, no. Too much of a pussy.

So, Whatcha Got?

If you play often, I'm sure this was all quite elementary. But that's where I'm at, and I'm having fun with it. This might be the first mention I've made here about my poker hobby, so I'm just letting you know I welcome comments, e-mails and suggested sites regarding the subject.

And if you're a cheap bastard like me, maybe I'll see you at the low-limit tables.

Category: Sports | Permalink | Post a Comment (11)


Comments: My First Week Playing Online Poker (For Real Money)

This was a fun read :-)

I've been playing online for 4 years now, and blogging specifically about poker for three years.

I started rather modestly like you did, but I've become rather successful at it over time. It takes time more than anything. 2000 hands is not really a good sample because you have to play to learn.

Some quick thoughts on your play:

1) Don't get in the habit of playing above your bankroll. It will often lead to timid play that will only cost you money. I'll generally want to have at least three max buy-ins in my bankroll before sitting down at a NL table.
2) If you are going to play the 6-max tables, you HAVE to open up your starting hands if you want to be profitable. You can make a little money by sitting and waiting for monsters... but that's not the optimal way to play.
3) Be prepared to lose. Often. Learning poker, especially online, can be maddening. The swings can be vicious, especially at the NL tables. Avoiding tilt is important.
4) Finally, here's my advice on pocket pairs at a NL table. More often than not, with anything below Tens, I'll limp in and even call a small raise as long as my stack is at least 10x the size of my bet. That's because in a little more than 10% of the time, I'll hit my set and there's a good chance I could get all my money in with a monster.

By the way, glad you choose PokerStars... it's the best on the net. We'll have to get you into the poker blogger tourneys. I'll probably link you up over at my Poker Blog... so I'll apologize in advance for any razzing you might get! ;-)

Posted by CJ at September 15, 2006 11:35 AM

Yep, I realized, after I wrote that, that I would have to open up a little at 6-man tables because blinds come quicker. In tournament style, I know you have to open up if the table drops to six, because blinds get greater, but if it's still 5-cents/10 cents, I'm OK dropping 15 cents on a round every now and then. (Of course, the strategy should remain the same at any price level, but whatever for now.)

Yeah, it's limp-city with middle pairs from here on out. Of course, last night, in the big blind, I have Q-Q against only the small blind, who limped. Wanted to get at least some action. End up losing when he flopped two pair on 9-6!

Sat two seats to the left of another maniac after I wrote this. Just 5-cent/10-cent stuff but he raised everything before the flop, took the lead evey chance he got after the flop, and my cards were cold as ice. Saw about 150 hands, never got A-A or K-K -- got A-K once with a shit board, got Q-Q once and lost to two pair -- never seemed to get in a pot worth more than $1.50 (and did well when I did), but I rarely got cards, rarely hit a flop when I did play, never hit a flush or full house, never even flopped trips, and lost $3. More aggression would have worked, perhaps, and I guess I have to try it sometime, but it wasn't even like I had J-10 to play around with. More like J-4!

I don't mind razzing. Long as they're cool about it.

Posted by Paul Katcher at September 15, 2006 12:55 PM

For the 6-max tables, it's not necessarily that the blinds come around more often... it's that there are less players, and therefore, less premium hands. As you play it more, try to get more comfortable playing more hands, and keep an eye on what kinds of hands are shown down as winners.

Short sessions can be tough if you don't catch at least some cards. Those are sessions that are guaranteed to be losers... you just don't want them to become big losers by chasing bad hands.

Although, watch what you say about J4. It's a storied poker blogger hand named the JackHammer :-)

And don't worry about poker blogger, they're about the coolest bloggers you'll ever meet. We have twice yearly live poker blogger tournaments in Vegas. It's crazy. In fact, next weekend, we've got a big party planned in Philly that includes a special charity poker tourney with some poker pros that I'll be playing in. You should drive down!

Posted by CJ at September 15, 2006 2:24 PM

I'll actually be in Vegas next weekend. Any idea where I can find a cheap poker game?

Posted by Paul Katcher at September 15, 2006 2:29 PM

Nice write up. I'll echo CJ's thoughts that you need to be prepared to lose at the beginning. The fact that you've done alot of reading bodes well for your potential but it still just takes actually sitting down and playing alot of hands to take all that info and put it into practice.

For me, I had my learning period of losing followed by about 2 1/2 nice years of winning followed by a solid 6 months of losing which slowly sapped my desire to play. All in all, I'm still on the plus side but finding it harder to win consistently.....there are alot more players out there than 3+ years ago but I've found that people have gotten alot better overall as well.

Speaking of razzing.....how bad is it going to be for Big Papi this weekend? It's a shame his quotes where taken out of context...I know he's going to be Public Enemy #1 in NY for the next 3 days.

Posted by monte at September 15, 2006 2:32 PM

I haven't really thought about what to expect this weekend. I'm thinking a lot of "Red Sox suck" chants if we're on our way to a third victory and counting down the outs to a ninth straight AL East title.

Oh, and a lot of quiet Sux fans. Very, very quiet. That oughta be a nice change.

Papi's a good guy. Most sensible fans realize that. Might see some creative signs, though.

Posted by Paul Katcher at September 15, 2006 2:46 PM

Hey Paul, nice article.

Re: Vegas ... a great resource is http://www.allvegaspoker.com . There you'll find reviews and pictures of just about every poker room in Vegas. The lowest limits offered in Vegas is typically $2/$4. I personally like the room at the MGM Grand the best.

Low limit poker on the Strip is usually profitable -- plenty of fishy tourists around. Good luck!

Posted by DavidC at September 15, 2006 3:28 PM

I'm actually staying at the MGM Grand. I guess I would want to take $200 to the table with me in a $2/$4 game.

Only problem is I'd be one of the fishy tourists!

Posted by Paul Katcher at September 15, 2006 3:34 PM

$200 should be fine for the $2/$4 tables. A good rule of thumb is to sit down with 30x the big bet (i.e. $120). It's usually enough to play with for awhile, assuming you're not terrible :-)

Posted by CJ at September 15, 2006 4:15 PM

That was refreshing. :) You've got some solid strategy there and are obviously thinking about the game and working to improve, which makes you better than about 95% of the people you'll encounter online. Best of luck to you.

As for Vegas...the MGM Grand is my favorite place in all the world. The games are juicy, and especially in the limit games, you will see people playing trash right and left. Get the lay of the table for a while; you'll probably end up loosening up a bit because 9/10 times your top pair medium kicker will be the winner. And don't forget to get a player's card ($1 comps for every hour) and if you think you'll be playing in their poker room for at least 4 hours a day (an easy thing to do), ask for a poker room rate.

Posted by NotAPokerBlog at September 15, 2006 4:58 PM

Hey Paul, I hope you're winning tons of cash in Vegas. I still stop by, from time to time, to read your blog (I shut down my blog at journalspace a while back when I took up poker lol).

It's cool that you started playing online poker. I play at pokerstars too. What's your nic there?

Here are a few sites you might enjoy:

http://www.thehendonmob.com/index.html (you can make a poker diary)

http://www.thepokerdb.com/ and http://www.tournamentreporter.com/main.asp (both keep track of all pokerstars and also UB FTP PP players tourney winnings)

http://www.sharkscope.com/index.jsp keeps track of sit and gos (I prefer playing these)

Email me your user nic. I will visit you at the tables sometime.

GLLLLLLLLLLLL!


Posted by jadedgrrl at September 24, 2006 11:47 PM
Post a comment
















Fark.com
- [Interesting] Crips and Bloods still keeping it real ... in New Zealand. Wait, what?

- [Amusing] Police searching for teeny tiny gang of horse thieves after 28-inch pony stolen from field (pic)

- [Photoshop] Photoshop these ancient columns

- [Asinine] From the Department of Redundancy Department: Texas issues a report declaring that Texas has too many reports. Bonus: Report is 668 pages long and took 18 months to compile

- [Hero] Woman on crutches rescued from rapist by five bystanders (With scary mugshot goodness)

Yahoo! News: Most Emailed
- Calif. wine patriarch Robert Mondavi dies at 94 (AP)

- Huckabee quips about gun aimed at Obama (AP)

- Bush fails to win Saudi help on gas prices (AP)

- Alabama sheriffs feed inmates on $1.75 a day (AP)

- A personality test for your cat (AP)

Yahoo! News: Sports News
- Pats' Belichick lashes out at ex-video assistant (AP)

- Magowan to step down as managing partner of Giants (AP)

- NFL owners may opt out of labor deal next week (AP)

- Olympian Montgomery gets 46 months for check fraud (AP)

- Amputee runner wins right to try for Olympic spot (AP)

Web Friends
News
Sports
New York City
Sex
Internet
Guitar
Powered by Movable Type 3.31.