4 ms·
nit: as a former professional poker player, the skill level required to be a long-term winning player at a high-stakes cash game is considerably higher than the
by jknoepfler 10y ago
nit: as a former professional poker player, the skill level required to be a long-term winning player at a high-stakes cash game is considerably higher than the skill requirement to win a single high-stakes tournament. (I would not voluntarily sit at a high-stakes cash table without knowing there were a mark present, I would voluntarily play most WSOP tournaments)
- teej 10y agoWell of course. If you don't know who the mark is then it's likely the mark is you.
- xapata 10y agoI think "fish" is more typical. Though I suppose in Rounders it was "sucker". Still the best poker movie, despite depicting the actual poker play badly. https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Rounders_(film) https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Rounders_(film)
- splonk 10y agoAs another former pro and high stakes player, I agree, and I don't think anyone thinks it's particularly close. I'd even go so far as to say that the skill it takes to be a long term winning player at cash games is higher than that to be a long term tournament winner.
- GCA10 10y agoAgreed, and that's speaking as a stubborn amateur. In tournaments, the escalating blinds point you toward pretty straightforward strategies at different junctures. You're in the shallow end of the pool. In a cash game, you're always in the deep end.