Stick to what I know Or start ring games?

As a strictly tournament player, I've been thinking about trying ring games a bit, but I really have no idea on the bankroll requirements, what levels to play at etc etc. I have some newb questions regarding this subject.

For example, when someone says they are playing 400nl referring to ring games, what are the blinds at this level? I feel so stupid asking this

I am going to deposit like 300 to 400 in two days on my stars account, and I was thinking of mixing it up with ring and my usual sngs, is this a good idea or should I just stick to what I know?

There are some who say you should just master one game and then dominate it.

I think that wading into other games in small stakes can help you in whatever your "master" game is.

For example - my cash games are short handed limit and MTTs. But I have learned some things about position, pot odds, etc. by playing omaha h/l and nl ring. And it's fun to mix things up sometimes too.

In regards to your nl question. The number in front generally refers to the maximum you are allowed to bring to the table. Hence 400nl = $400. The blinds are usually 1/100 of the maximum (in some cases they can be less). So the blinds at 400 nl would be $2/$4.

Thanks Chard!

I have to ask who that is in your avatar?

read my eyebrows.

lol I cant???

Play 25nl. I used to play SNGs almost exclusively but find ring a lot more profitable (and interesting, though perhaps not as exciting). Stars has a reputation of being a somewhat tougher game but I don't know if it's deserved. I play SNGs on Stars and ring on Party.

Originally Posted by Warpe

Play 25nl. I used to play SNGs almost exclusively but find ring a lot more profitable (and interesting, though perhaps not as exciting). Stars has a reputation of being a somewhat tougher game but I don't know if it's deserved. I play SNGs on Stars and ring on Party.

By just browsing the lobbies, I feel like party has a much much larger pool of ring tables going at any given level than stars. This is what has always confused me [well ever since I started caring enough to compare the sites], both sites have very comparable numbers of players on at any given time, but on Party they seem to have more active tables and the SNGs fill up much faster. Is this because a good portion of the stars players are using play money? Or is there really not a difference in number of tables?

I started out in tournaments, believe myself to be a decent tournament player (I maintained a very respectable ROI playing the 10/1 sngs on party), but quit recently because I didn't have the bankroll.

You have to have a very large bankroll (comparatively) to play tournaments profitably. You have to be able to weather through weeks without a big cash. Unfortunately though, tournaments are really, really fun and addictive so I'm always trying to manufacture a bogus reason to continue playing them.

Ring on the other hand, is relatively low upkeep. You only need 15 or twenty buyins to play ring safely (as opposed to 40-50 to play sngs or up to 100 to play MTTs) so it offers the most potential to safely make a good bit of money. Sadly though, if you play ring long enough, you essentially become a bot. Ring play is poker in a vacuum, with the environment rarely changing (except, of course, the playing styles of the opponents at your table).

In tournaments you have to constantly be changing to the ever increasing blinds or the ever decreasing number of players, which makes things so interesting and fun.

I have made $1700 in less than three weeks (playing 25nl and 50nl) playing ring, and I honestly don't think I could have made that much in any other way (unless I took down 1st place in a big tourney, but you can't count on that to happen in such a short time).

Bottom line is, if you are capable of making consistant, repetitive, profitable decisions, then ring is for you.

I plan on amassing a very solid bankroll (around 10-15k) and then I am going to allocate a couple thousand of that and get back into tourneys again. I think I will always depend on full ring for consistant, dependable money.

Originally Posted by Renton

I started out in tournaments, believe myself to be a decent tournament player (I maintained a very respectable ROI playing the 10/1 sngs on party), but quit recently because I didn't have the bankroll.

You have to have a very large bankroll (comparatively) to play tournaments profitably. You have to be able to weather through weeks without a big cash. Unfortunately though, tournaments are really, really fun and addictive so I'm always trying to manufacture a bogus reason to continue playing them.

Ring on the other hand, is relatively low upkeep. You only need 15 or twenty buyins to play ring safely (as opposed to 40-50 to play sngs or up to 100 to play MTTs) so it offers the most potential to safely make a good bit of money. Sadly though, if you play ring long enough, you essentially become a bot. Ring play is poker in a vacuum, with the environment rarely changing (except, of course, the playing styles of the opponents at your table).

In tournaments you have to constantly be changing to the ever increasing blinds or the ever decreasing number of players, which makes things so interesting and fun.

I have made $1700 in less than three weeks (playing 25nl and 50nl) playing ring, and I honestly don't think I could have made that much in any other way (unless I took down 1st place in a big tourney, but you can't count on that to happen in such a short time).

Bottom line is, if you are capable of making consistant, repetitive, profitable decisions, then ring is for you.

I plan on amassing a very solid bankroll (around 10-15k) and then I am going to allocate a couple thousand of that and get back into tourneys again. I think I will always depend on full ring for consistant, dependable money.

Sounds very interesting I may have to give in and start giving ring a try, but I am still confused on something, if I am playing 25nl what are the blinds for this LoL I feel like such anewb

25nl ==== .10/.25 NL

100nl ==== .5/1 NL

and etc.

I would highly recommend you get Poker Tracker and pay close attention to your stats at the beginning. You should run between 10-15 vpip (voluntarily put money in pot FYI). Play a supertight game to begin with and go from there. AA and KK will probably make up at least 35% of your winnings, and flopping sets from pairs will make up a good bit of the rest of that percentage. Players at this level (10NL and 25NL) are dumb as rocks.

.10/.25

Originally Posted by Renton

100nl ==== 1/2 NL

At most places 100NL has .5/1 blinds.

For cash games 20 buyins is good for low stakes.

i was like u once, had a roll of $100 playing $5 - $1 sng's and mtt's...then i started bonuswhoring so i basically needed to play cash games...i started at $25nl and my first 3 sessions i got stacked, i tightened my game up abit and started winning, eventually i got my roll to $1000 from playing $25nl then i moved to $50NL and my roll is sitting at $1300, i strongly suggest u move ur game from Sngs and mtt's to cashgames.

Originally Posted by Les_Worm

Originally Posted by Renton

100nl ==== 1/2 NL

At most places 100NL has .5/1 blinds.

For cash games 20 buyins is good for low stakes.

i fixt it

100NL is $100 max buy in, and usually the max buy in is 100 BBs, so just divide that by 100 for the BB, and 200 for the SB

Originally Posted by dan

i was like u once, had a roll of $100 playing $5 - $1 sng's and mtt's...then i started bonuswhoring so i basically needed to play cash games...i started at $25nl and my first 3 sessions i got stacked, i tightened my game up abit and started winning, eventually i got my roll to $1000 from playing $25nl then i moved to $50NL and my roll is sitting at $1300, i strongly suggest u move ur game from Sngs and mtt's to cashgames.

Thanks for the advice but I am a tournament player at the core, that'll never change. I may work on my ring games more though now after all the advice.