how is it possible to make money at the higher stakes?

all the players playing 10/20 NL are top players. how can they all win?

at the lower stakes you have a lot of fish bringing money into the game. but when you get up to the $5000 games everyone's a pro.

i don't understand where the money comes from?

you might be able to win one day, but the next day you'll lose and after a year everyone will still be where they started

I think the money comes from rich gamblers and people beating lower stakes and venturing upwards.

Yeah, some players win consistently at say 1000NL but are loosers in 2000NL and 5000NL. And I guess there are some people there with a lot of money too. Live it's nicer though, cause almost everyone there are rich guys who are not too good, at least in the game I play

i would imagine at high stakes its really more about having a tiny edge on the field and making a small amount of money (in terms of BB) from that edge.

Some are better than others?

some tilt or play drunk

Originally Posted by gabe

some tilt or play drunk

But is that pretty much it in the 2000-5000NL area?

Whereas at low stakes crushing a game is generally around the 10PTBB mark (as far as I know), what's generally the highest sustainable winrate at high stakes?

no, what everyone else said is true too....pure fish make their way up, mid stakes grinders take shots but dont play well enough, but my favorite is the tourney donk. there are at least 3 successful mtt players that the railbirds recognize who i LOVE to sit with in cash games.

So Gabe, if you were a 25/50 regular, and the table had nothing but other known regulars; would you even bother playing? Assuming no one has shown to be having a "dumb" day or tilting. Or are there regulars that you would just know you have a slight edge on and play against that guy mainly whilest staying out of the way of a guy you think has a small edge over you?

its usually possible to find a better game

Also, remember that at low stakes, you're paying 2 BB/100 or more in rake, so you have to be a lot better than the field to make money. At high stakes they're paying a lot less than 1 BB/100 so even a small advantage over your opponents will make you a winning player.

all the players playing 10/20 NL are top players. how can they all win?

If you ever watched one of these games, you would quickly realize that this is not true.

Even if it were, obviously the good regulars have an edge on the bad regulars. You'll also get the occasional rich fish that wants to gamble, the guy that puts his last $1257.21 on the table hoping to get out of debt, and the frequent 2/4 3/6 5/10 grinder that has a big bankroll but is -EV at 10/20 or higher.

If you ever watched one of these games, you would quickly realize that this is not true.

meant that they are not all 'top' players, although some of the 10/20 games have gotten very tough, no doubt.

LOL @ everybody winning. Most people are losers at any given stake, whether it be .10/.20 or 10/20.

ok. thanks for the replies.
now, what about high stakes poker on tv with a bunch of top pros like dan negreanu, doyle brunson, barry greenstein, etc. how does anyone profit in that game?
or are some of the players at that table quite bad really and they're just there to gamble with the money they've earnt at lower stakes and from tv?

bad nits like sheikhan, harman, buss, and laak , along with total fish like chamanara and nasseri and of course bad laggs like sam farha populate that game

Originally Posted by Renton

bad nits like sheikhan, harman, buss, and laak , along with total fish like chamanara and nasseri and of course bad laggs like sam farha populate that game

Wow if you think Laak is a poor NL player.

im sure he's a great tourney player, but he wasn't playing very well in what i saw of hsp

Originally Posted by pokerroomace

ok. thanks for the replies.
now, what about high stakes poker on tv with a bunch of top pros like dan negreanu, doyle brunson, barry greenstein, etc. how does anyone profit in that game?
or are some of the players at that table quite bad really and they're just there to gamble with the money they've earnt at lower stakes and from tv?

it's the same thing. The top pros are better then some other 'top pros'. Supposedly, Hellmuth is a huge fish in the big NL cash games (keeping in mind that 'fish' is entirely relative). You also get the occasional rich asian gambler with the suitcases, etc...

Originally Posted by Renton

im sure he's a great tourney player, but he wasn't playing very well in what i saw of hsp

We must have seen diff episodes, he was crushing the game for several 100k buyins on all the episodes I saw with him in it.

on hsp, elezra and negreanu (surprisingly) are the huge fish...chamanarra, nasseri, farha, and sheikhan are just bad...

laak, esfandiari, the brunsons, and greenstein rarely make any mistakes.

Eli Elezra is awful at no-limit hold'em.

Originally Posted by nutsinho

on hsp, elezra and negreanu (surprisingly) are the huge fish...chamanarra, nasseri, farha, and sheikhan are just bad...

laak, esfandiari, the brunsons, and greenstein rarely make any mistakes.

qft. i remember thinking wow farha is horrifyingly bad at this game during hsp lol. i also remember being pretty impressed by antonio and that alaei (sp?) kid seemed decent also.

Originally Posted by nutsinho

on hsp, elezra and negreanu (surprisingly) are the huge fish...chamanarra, nasseri, farha, and sheikhan are just bad...

laak, esfandiari, the brunsons, and greenstein rarely make any mistakes.

negreanu is a poor nl cash game player? that's upsetting to hear. i thought he was one of the only good players at the table. especially with his huge stack in front of him!

i also thought farha and sheikan looked bad. i saw farha make a rubbish call against negreanu that not even i would have made. i'm surprised farha came 2nd in the 2003 wsop main event. must be better at tourney play.

shiek just seems like some rich asian that plays poker for fun. but apparently he's a pro.

and buss looks amateur too but he's had some tourney success i've heard.

negreanu makes a lot of good plays postflop but is really really loose preflop, calling reraises very light, etc., to the point where even with perfect play after the flop he'd still be a loser. on top of that he's made some really rotten river decisions (namely betting 2/3 pot and calling a large push from lindgren with T9 on QJ88A board).

Originally Posted by nutsinho

negreanu makes a lot of good plays postflop but is really really loose preflop, calling reraises very light, etc., to the point where even with perfect play after the flop he'd still be a loser. on top of that he's made some really rotten river decisions (namely betting 2/3 pot and calling a large push from lindgren with T9 on QJ88A board).

i think daniel def tilted last season. he started to become a calling station on the river. also, i think i could have folded when gus had quads and c/r'ed all in on the river.

Originally Posted by martindcx1e

Originally Posted by nutsinho

negreanu makes a lot of good plays postflop but is really really loose preflop, calling reraises very light, etc., to the point where even with perfect play after the flop he'd still be a loser. on top of that he's made some really rotten river decisions (namely betting 2/3 pot and calling a large push from lindgren with T9 on QJ88A board).

i think daniel def tilted last season. he started to become a calling station on the river. also, i think i could have folded when gus had quads and c/r'ed all in on the river.

i agree with that but you cant really fault him for calling vs gus
if he called there against greenstein or doyle, you could complain

Originally Posted by martindcx1e

Originally Posted by nutsinho

negreanu makes a lot of good plays postflop but is really really loose preflop, calling reraises very light, etc., to the point where even with perfect play after the flop he'd still be a loser. on top of that he's made some really rotten river decisions (namely betting 2/3 pot and calling a large push from lindgren with T9 on QJ88A board).

i think daniel def tilted last season. he started to become a calling station on the river. also, i think i could have folded when gus had quads and c/r'ed all in on the river.

o kl. you think you could have folded? nice
i think possibly that he had a really good read on gus and just couldn't see where he was at because he had such a hidden hand. i think if he had a bigger full house (and had played it like a bigger house that he could have folded). but because he had quads he didn't understand what was going on in the hand. it's so hard to put a player on quads.

dan's look after the hand is a look of - i don't know what you've got - unless it's some mental hands like quad 5s.

but what hand do you put gus on in that hand? maybe 55 was the only hand that dan could put him on that beat him. he probs couldn't have put him on bigger boats because of how the hand was played.

anyway, i'm not arguing with you. but what would your thought process be on that hand so that you could lay it down?

also, maybe gus has made plays like that before and that's the reason dan called.

this is the hand:
gus raises to 2100. dan raises to 5000 behind.
flop is 569rainbow. gus checks, dan bets 8k, gus raises to 26k. dan calls.
turn is the 5 (no possible flush now). gus bets 24k. dan calls.
turn is the 8. gus checks. dan bets 65k. gus raises 167k. 400k in the pot. dan calls.

maybe you coulda layed it down. i couldn't have

i think alot of the play is above your heads to the point where its not even worth talking about

Originally Posted by gabe

i think alot of the play is above your heads to the point where its not even worth talking about

lol. thnx. gd advice

Originally Posted by pokerroomace

Originally Posted by martindcx1e

Originally Posted by nutsinho

negreanu makes a lot of good plays postflop but is really really loose preflop, calling reraises very light, etc., to the point where even with perfect play after the flop he'd still be a loser. on top of that he's made some really rotten river decisions (namely betting 2/3 pot and calling a large push from lindgren with T9 on QJ88A board).

i think daniel def tilted last season. he started to become a calling station on the river. also, i think i could have folded when gus had quads and c/r'ed all in on the river.

o kl. you think you could have folded? nice
i think possibly that he had a really good read on gus and just couldn't see where he was at because he had such a hidden hand. i think if he had a bigger full house (and had played it like a bigger house that he could have folded). but because he had quads he didn't understand what was going on in the hand. it's so hard to put a player on quads.

dan's look after the hand is a look of - i don't know what you've got - unless it's some mental hands like quad 5s.

but what hand do you put gus on in that hand? maybe 55 was the only hand that dan could put him on that beat him. he probs couldn't have put him on bigger boats because of how the hand was played.

anyway, i'm not arguing with you. but what would your thought process be on that hand so that you could lay it down?

also, maybe gus has made plays like that before and that's the reason dan called.

this is the hand:
gus raises to 2100. dan raises to 5000 behind.
flop is 569rainbow. gus checks, dan bets 8k, gus raises to 26k. dan calls.
turn is the 5 (no possible flush now). gus bets 24k. dan calls.
turn is the 8. gus checks. dan bets 65k. gus raises 167k. 400k in the pot. dan calls.

maybe you coulda layed it down. i couldn't have

i know gus has a wild reputation, but in a cash game i can't see him (or any decent player/pro) c/r'ing all-in on the river for that much money w/o the nuts or friggin close to the nuts. daniel had about the lowest "great" hand for that board. i know it wouldn't have been an easy fold - i'm def not saying that. when i first saw the hand i thought there was no way daniel could've gotten away, but after some thought i changed my mind. i think daniel started tilting after this hand.

Man, I am by no means a high stakes player, but I think I know enough that Negraunu should never be folding that boat to Gus Hansen pretty much ever. Coolers are coolers are coolers at any level... Add in Negraunu and Hansen's images, and the hand plays itself.

I also don't think you can make judgements on a lot of the players in these games from one episode. Just like if someone watched you play one session that you lost money in, or make one bad play, they shouldn't necessarily peg you as a fish. But yeah, a couple people named seem to be real bad that were in a lot of the episodes and make lots and lots of bad decisions.

Originally Posted by pokerroomace

this is the hand:
gus raises to 2100. dan raises to 5000 behind.
flop is 569rainbow. gus checks, dan bets 8k, gus raises to 26k. dan calls.
turn is the 5 (no possible flush now). gus bets 24k. dan calls.
turn is the 8. gus checks. dan bets 65k. gus raises 167k. 400k in the pot. dan calls.

maybe you coulda layed it down. i couldn't have

What hand did dan have btw?

Originally Posted by jackvance

Originally Posted by pokerroomace

this is the hand:
gus raises to 2100. dan raises to 5000 behind.
flop is 569rainbow. gus checks, dan bets 8k, gus raises to 26k. dan calls.
turn is the 5 (no possible flush now). gus bets 24k. dan calls.
turn is the 8. gus checks. dan bets 65k. gus raises 167k. 400k in the pot. dan calls.

maybe you coulda layed it down. i couldn't have

What hand did dan have btw?

66

Originally Posted by gabe

i think alot of the play is above your heads to the point where its not even worth talking about

Maybe, but some of the players are calling huge re-raises pre-flop with such garbage hands that they're not going to come out ahead no matter how well they play post-flop. I hope you're not implying that these guys are amazing just because they won a donkament and are on TV a lot, I'd be surprised to hear that coming from you of all people. For example, this hand sure isn't over anyone's head.

lindgren got 145k, elezra has him covered.

forrest raises to 1.8k in EP, lindgren raises to 6k in MP, elezra calls with K J in one of the blinds, forrest folds.

flop: J 3 2

elezra checks blind, lindgren bets 10k, elezra raises to 45k, lindgren calls. (leaving him with 95k)

turn: 4
elezra bets 60k, lindgren moves all-in, elezra calls the remaing 35k.

yea elezra sucks PERIOD

but, in general, you have to be willing to make alot of tough/thin calls to survive in these games

Originally Posted by gabe

i think alot of the play is above your heads to the point where its not even worth talking about

do you watch this show much? play is really really straightforward imo.

if you could see all the cards in the high stakes games online you might say it looked straight forward too

that is laughable. probably in PLO but definitely not in SHNL games.

whatever you say

Originally Posted by nutsinho

on hsp, elezra and negreanu (surprisingly) are the huge fish...chamanarra, nasseri, farha, and sheikhan are just bad...

laak, esfandiari, the brunsons, and greenstein rarely make any mistakes.

farha is bad??? I thought it was recognised that he was just about the best player in the world??!! Maybe we in the UK just don't get the same coverage as you guys. I've only seen him for like 2 hours during the aussi millions so I can't comment. Just quoting books and mags.

do none of you guys here think that it takes a tonne of skill to win wsop or wpt event? i know that there are a lot of them to win, but any player that wins 2 or more must be quite decent. would you not agree?

they may suck at ring though. but these players are on tv for a reason.
eli has got $1.3mil in tourney winnings btw and has won a wpt event. not bad. he did win $1 mil in one event though.
anyway, eli's israeli - so i'm always a fan of his!

Originally Posted by pokerroomace

do none of you guys here think that it takes a tonne of skill to win wsop or wpt event? i know that there are a lot of them to win, but any player that wins 2 or more must be quite decent. would you not agree?

they may suck at ring though.

ive played with some a WSOP winner and a EPT winner, and both are huge donators in cash games. i'm pretty sure everyone saw how bad hellmuth plays cash games when he played 50/100 on UB.

Originally Posted by gabe

Originally Posted by pokerroomace

do none of you guys here think that it takes a tonne of skill to win wsop or wpt event? i know that there are a lot of them to win, but any player that wins 2 or more must be quite decent. would you not agree?

they may suck at ring though.

ive played with some a WSOP winner and a EPT winner, and both are huge donators in cash games. i'm pretty sure everyone saw how bad hellmuth plays cash games when he played 50/100 on UB.

o kl. who are the top players you have played with live/online?

i dont want to say in case it gets back to them, but they aren't top players....they are just tourney donks that won big events

Originally Posted by gabe

i dont want to say in case it gets back to them, but they aren't top players....they are just tourney donks that won big events

ok. gabe, are you a pro poker player? have you won millions playing poker?

have you finished really high in a world famous "donkament"?
have you ever played poker on tv?

which players do you consider to be the best in the world?
phil ivey? chip reese? doyle brunson?
do you respect negreanu and hellmuth as tourney players?
what do you think of allen cunningham?

Originally Posted by pokerroomace

Originally Posted by gabe

i dont want to say in case it gets back to them, but they aren't top players....they are just tourney donks that won big events

ok. gabe, are you a pro poker player? have you won millions playing poker?

have you finished really high in a world famous "donkament"?
have you ever played poker on tv?

which players do you consider to be the best in the world?
phil ivey? chip reese? doyle brunson?
do you respect negreanu and hellmuth as tourney players?
what do you think of allen cunningham?

You cant compare people who won a big event to winning high stakes cash players. Winning a big tourney involves playing decently over a long stretch and a very large amount of luck. Being a winning HS cash game player requires that you bring your A game 24/7 365. There are tourney players that are good at cash games and vice versa, but simply winning a tourney or two with a large field does not imply any competence in the big cash games.

btw based on the episodes I've seen (just to add one more meaningless opînion post)


Daniel Alaei (spelling?) is unrealf

Phil Laak is awesome

Brunson is good (never makes big mistakes it seems)

Estfandiari is awesome too

Harman is fine (lol @ her being a nit)

Originally Posted by gingerwizard

farha is bad??? I thought it was recognised that he was just about the best player in the world??!! Maybe we in the UK just don't get the same coverage as you guys. I've only seen him for like 2 hours during the aussi millions so I can't comment. Just quoting books and mags.

farha sucked in the hands that were shown during high stakes poker on gsn. we aren't talking about tourneys.

Originally Posted by pokerroomace

Originally Posted by gabe

i dont want to say in case it gets back to them, but they aren't top players....they are just tourney donks that won big events

ok. gabe, are you a pro poker player? have you won millions playing poker?

have you finished really high in a world famous "donkament"?
have you ever played poker on tv?

which players do you consider to be the best in the world?
phil ivey? chip reese? doyle brunson?
do you respect negreanu and hellmuth as tourney players?
what do you think of allen cunningham?

chill out ace. there's no need to get all pissy about this. poker pros and players who win big tourneys are not exempt from criticism.

Originally Posted by pokerroomace

Originally Posted by gabe

i dont want to say in case it gets back to them, but they aren't top players....they are just tourney donks that won big events

ok. gabe, are you a pro poker player? have you won millions playing poker?

have you finished really high in a world famous "donkament"?
have you ever played poker on tv?

which players do you consider to be the best in the world?
phil ivey? chip reese? doyle brunson?
do you respect negreanu and hellmuth as tourney players?
what do you think of allen cunningham?

obv the tourney winners im talking about arent on the level of ivey, reese, brunson, etc. i'm playing in my first WPT event in january and ill be sure to let you know how i do. i haven't won millions, yet.

seriously, i assumed gabe wasnt even 21 yet-how is he supposed to be an experienced successful tourney player?

PRA, youre really in love with the folks you see playing donkaments on tv. Truth is, a lot of the top players on this site are better than a high percentage of the players in the wsop, at least at cash games. Gabe is certainly better than a VERY high percentage of tournament pros imo.

the online shark is superior to the live shark

i understand that the tournament pros aren't great at cash games! i know! i know!

my question was: who do you think the top MTT players in the world are?

i realise that these players probably suck at cash and i'm fine with that!

do you respect the top MTT players? or do you only respect the cash game players?

hellmuth, doyle and chan have won 10 wsops and have all won the main event at least once. don't tell me that's luck. i definitely have massive respect for hellmuth even though he may be an awful, tilty cash game player.

Originally Posted by pokerroomace

hellmuth, doyle and chan have won 10 wsops and have all won the main event at least once. don't tell me that's luck. i definitely have massive respect for hellmuth even though he may be an awful, tilty cash game player.

no one is saying those are all nothing but luck

Originally Posted by nutsinho

do you watch this show much? play is really really straightforward imo.

Really?

I'm not much of a NL player at all.... but I think this says it best:

Originally Posted by gabe

i think alot of the play is above your(our) heads to the point where its not even worth talking about

There are always edges to be found. Unless you can both see each other's cards people will not make the correct play all the time, its pretty effin simple. This isn't even mentioning the fact that there are donators.

farha played well in season 1 of HSP, and was the top money winner. in season 2, he just looked tired. definitely two different people.
lol @ harman being a nit. she was THE most impressive person in season 2 imo, completely running over anybody she played with.

Originally Posted by "NWNewell

I'm not much of a NL player at all.... but I think...

lol ok thanks

Originally Posted by homeboy604

farha played well in season 1 of HSP, and was the top money winner. in season 2, he just looked tired. definitely two different people.
lol @ harman being a nit. she was THE most impressive person in season 2 imo, completely running over anybody she played with.

Farha played okay, but wouldnt have been near top winner if not for KK>AA vs Greenstein.

Harman is good but Esfandiari has impressed me the most.

SEASON 3 2 months away!%$)@)@)!!!!

she owned antonio at every turn.
raped him real good.

Originally Posted by nutsinho

Originally Posted by homeboy604

farha played well in season 1 of HSP, and was the top money winner. in season 2, he just looked tired. definitely two different people.
lol @ harman being a nit. she was THE most impressive person in season 2 imo, completely running over anybody she played with.

Farha played okay, but wouldnt have been near top winner if not for KK>AA vs Greenstein.

Harman is good but Esfandiari has impressed me the most.

Lol at Matusow being paid $4k to stay another 4 hours. He was playing beautifully up until then as well.

Can I stream this from somewhere or is it just on tv?

I downloaded a bunch of them off bittorrent (www.torrentspy.com)

youtube yo

Originally Posted by jackvance

I downloaded a bunch of them off bittorrent (www.torrentspy.com)

or better yet, join thepokerbay.org

EDIT: they are offline right now due to relocation of servers so give it a few days

Aba20/sbrugby, one of the best online NL players in the world posted his notes on Gus Hansen after playing high stakes cash games with him:

here are my notes non him followed by ther meaning

Notes: DNB, CS, leads weak, PWHOP, NSOP, VB

DNB: Do not bluff
CS: calling station
PWHOP: Plays weak holdings out of position
NSOP: no sense of position
VB: value bet him
leads weak: Leads into preflop raisers with marginal holdings

Whoa, link please.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...Number=6969514

nice thread

that aba20 thread is awesome.