Home Articles Books Coaching Free Stuff About

Does Poker Keep Getting Harder and Harder?

Don't miss one article! Subscribe to the Full Feed RSS or get NPA in your inbox.

Recently a few players took issue with something I said in a recent interview. The controversial question and answer are:

Bernard Chapin: Do you think that with each passing year, the game gets tougher and tougher due to poker players sharing all their secrets with readers?
Ed Miller: No. My sense is not that the games do not get harder and harder. What the instructional stuff does is keep the marginal players interested. Without the instructional literature, they’d be more likely to simply give up. You have to remember that not everyone learns how to play well by studying. Often, they’ll try to apply proven concepts and then fail miserably. That is what keeps the games good.

The responses went along the lines of, “Of course the games are getting harder. Ed doesn’t know what he’s talking about.” I figured I’d write a little more about it.

First things first. Clearly online games have gotten tougher over the last couple of years, especially the limit games. Guys that made $100k or more playing limit in 2004 can’t come anywhere near that number now. Virtually all the guys I know who played limit online for a living have now moved to no limit games, even though they play limit better. Home is where the money is, and they’re making more playing no limit, a game they play ok, against bad players than playing limit, a game they play great, against other great players.

The remainder of this article is insider content available to premium members only. Log in to your account or become a premium member and get instant access.

Tags: , , , ,

22 Responses to “Does Poker Keep Getting Harder and Harder?”

Daniel Porter
@ Sun Jan 07, 2007 11:30:33 PM
1

Ed, are you suggesting that it would behoove pros or serious recreational players to invest the time to learn No Limit? Do you know many pros who have attempted to convert? If so, what would the breakdown be of successes/failures?

Ed Miller
@ Sun Jan 07, 2007 11:43:27 PM
2

Most pros I know have converted from limit to no limit. Or at least semi-converted, playing no limit for much of the time now. Most have been successful, as the no limit games are, IMO, clearly softer overall than the limit games at the moment.

If you are serious about playing poker for a living, you have to adapt. Adapt to different games and playing conditions, different fashions and obstacles to success. Picking up no limit is just one such adaptation.

Mark Gritter
@ Mon Jan 08, 2007 01:23:58 AM
3

Ed, thanks for sharing your insights.

Why, do you think, it was limit poker that gained from the influx in 2004? Why didn’t the focus start and end with NL, instead of the shift you perceive?

Jarno Virtanen
@ Mon Jan 08, 2007 02:09:40 AM
4

This might sound somewhat naive, but I sometimes find this strategy of “just-find-the-fish” a bit short-sighted. I do realize that, at certain level, professionals depend their living on playing against weak players. But, nevertheless, isn’t the goal of any serious hobby to become the best player possible? (Ie. not everyone has the potential to become the best player, just like you stated in your interview.)

In this sense, it doesn’t matter whether the games are getting tougher or not. If one has the potential to learn, can’t you just become a better player than most? The fact that games are tougher is just more incentive to learn faster.

Of course, margins and rakes are of concern here. The differences might become too narrow for the game to be profitable enough for the better players. But still, better players should eventually be more successfull than worse players, right?

Poker does have a special relation with money as compared to other games, ie. it is played for money and with money, but I feel as though poker players could learn from other games: the objective would be to become a better player and regard any financial rewards to be a beneficial side-effect.

So, winning money, in the (very) long run, should be the goal of a serious player, but mostly in the sense that money is the measure of success in poker. Just like a tennis player would be satisfied with the number of games she has won.

(Note too that I myself don’t automatically assume that I necessarily have the potential to become a decent player. Some level of optimism is needed, of course, but it seems that everyone believes they are better than “the average”. Actually, what I personally worry most, is that I don’t become a good player and fail to notice that.)

Matthew Maroon
@ Mon Jan 08, 2007 04:27:43 AM
5

Well, I don’t think that limit games have gotten that much harder, but they certainly aren’t as good as they were two years ago. I expect the process will happen much faster at no-limit too.

PeterL
@ Mon Jan 08, 2007 05:20:39 AM
6

Hi Ed

I am as you know a limit player and was wondering why you think NL attracts the fish more. I would have thought they would go where they percieved the lowest risk to be,
i.e. you have mentioned before that they like shorthanded as they think they stand more chance there.

I can’t help thinking that the reason NL is getting the fish is because of the publicity and over time this will die down as fish who get beaten at NL move to limit to try and mitigate there losses.

It may be naive of me but I can’t help thinking that if I was a losing player I would move to somewhere taht sounded less risky than something called No Limit.

by the way Microlimits on line are still swarming with fish (-; and probably always will be.

Peter

My Blog

@ Mon Jan 08, 2007 07:50:04 AM
7

[...] Are games getting tougher with all the great instructional books out there? Ed Miller agrees that they might get tougher, but it’s not because of books. His post is well worth reading, but you get to decide for yourself if you agree with him or not. [...]

rasta
@ Mon Jan 08, 2007 09:11:36 AM
8

Couple of weeks ago there was a on two+two from someone asking for advice on the most profitable way to play $3/$6 live. Interspersed between the several recommendations to read SSHE were these gems:

“Don’t expect pockets to do much.
Play every suited connector you get.
You make money in that game by hitting your draws.”

“The most profitable way??? Don’t play. Find a better game where players will actually fold.”

“If the game is loose passive like you say you shouldn’t raise much before the flop at all.

There are two reasons to raise pre-flop 1) build the pot 2) get others to fold. If nobody will fold anyway and big pairs rarely stand up when 4 people cold call a raise then why raise at all before the flop. I know this is highly controversial but in the loose/passive live games I play in it has worked for me. See the flop and go from there.”

“If you can’t adjust your play in these types of games you will loose [sic] when you raise from early position with TT and get four callers.”

“I actually muck AKo and AQo under some circumstances in this type of game (heresy!), because these hands DO NOT play well in loose multiway pots (also: if you’re dealing with a player who relies on average raising-hand distributions, you need to bias the distribution away from AK/AQ so that he’s more likely to be making an error by calling you down).”

This advice is being given on two+two, where the penetration of the Ed Miller methods ought to be multiples higher than it is in the general poker playing population. I read this thread and thought to myself if Ed saw it he would be cringing that his books and his and many other good players contributions to the Small Stakes forums on two+two were so easily overlooked or discounted.

But it sure does buttress Ed’s point that neither his nor anyone else’s writings are changing the character of the games.

PeterL
@ Mon Jan 08, 2007 11:15:05 AM
9

Hi Rasta

Well I play 15/30 c and 25/50c and have made $2000 in 3 months playing aggressively preflop and after the flop so I totally agree with you.

I am pleased however that not everyone is taking on Ed’s ideas the less of us the better, hopefully they will buy his books, so as he makes a living and can keep giving advice, and then ignore that good advice.

It is since reading SSHE that I have become a winning player and I look forward to his NL book next year as I am still a complete fish at NL.

Anyway I think we should question all advice whether from Ed Sklansky or a 2+2 forum member and hopefully improve.

What Ed has that no other author I have come across seems to have is humility and connection with his audience, he is always learning and questyioning and wants to hear from others. He may not agree but he will think about it.

I look forward to learning more from this site and trust the advice on it, I hope one day to graduate to $3/$6 games and I won’t play weak tight as 2+2 ers seem to be suggesting

Peter
My Blog

SIF
@ Mon Jan 08, 2007 04:26:25 PM
10

Ed, as someone who works at his day job in a key role in the Open Source and Free Software Movement who also happens to be an avid poker player, I found it absolutely wonderful to read someone like yourself coming “out” about your views on the freedom of generally useful technical information. Thanks for not hiding your views about that! I can tell you there’s a least one other person floating around the poker world who agrees with you on it!

Ed Miller
@ Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:46:38 PM
11

Mark,

The influx started with limit because the large majority of games in existence were limit games. New player walked into poker room, said, “I want to play some poker,” and got sat in a limit game. I had never even seen a live $1-$2 blind no limit cash game until the 2004 WSOP. New players weren’t demanding to play no limit. Most of them probably played for 10 hours before they figured out they weren’t playing the game they saw on TV.

Online players filtered into both limit and no limit games, but eventually began filtering more over to the no limit ones.

Ed Miller
@ Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:50:32 PM
12

Jarno,

While I definitely appreciate your sentiment, many people approach poker with a very short-term “How much money can I make this month?” perspective. Some do that delusionally, and some do it (and have been doing it) for a living.

If you depend on that monthly withdrawal, and you play ok poker, but have a lot of room to improve, you’d better damn well find the soft game that you can pound into submission or you’ll be getting a job right quick.

I definitely agree with you that those who play recreationally and as a personal challenge shouldn’t worry quite so much about “game selection” and instead should play in the game they enjoy the most. If that’s a tough game, and they want to prove that they can beat the tough game, more power to them. :)

Ed Miller
@ Wed Jan 10, 2007 12:04:17 AM
13

PeterL,

I think most “fishes” play whatever they please and don’t think too much about where their chances will be best. They play whatever game they played at home or saw on TV or whatever. Anything they’re familiar with. Not to say they don’t think. They certainly do. I just doubt most of them compare one game to another and determine which game carries less risk.

I think the pendulum may swing back a bit to limit after the TV craze dies a bit. Or it could stay swung on NL. I don’t see NL losing much market share any time soon. Or hold ‘em may go the way of the dodo and some other game might become the hot game. That’s a long way off, though, if that happens.

Ed Miller
@ Wed Jan 10, 2007 12:16:44 AM
14

rasta,

I don’t cringe when I read stuff like that. Honestly, it just tells me that I’m still somewhat useful and relevant. :)

Really, if there’s one thing I’ve learned without question about poker, it’s that poker screws with people’s brains and drives them batshit. There’s this unholy mix of ego, hubris, insecurity, and almost total lack of control that festers in lots of people’s brains and turns otherwise lucid thinkers into paranoids.

“OMFG my kings just lost AGAIN! Let’s toss everything I know out because it’s obviously total bullshit. I know. I’ll never raise again. That way when the fuckers draw out, they’ll have less to win. That’ll show em. Better yet, that $200-$400 2-7/Badugi game looks juicy. I’ve never played either game before, but those five Vietnamese dudes look like total donkeys. Daddy’s gonna have a new roll by the end of the night!”

It’s pokerthink. I think beating pokerthink (or at least getting some semblance of control over it) is maybe the most important step any semi-serious poker player can make.

And if you learn nothing from this blog, learn this. If you are in a game, and it’s five Vietnamese dudes and you, get the fuck up immediately. Even if you’re Vietnamese too.

AKQJ10
@ Mon Jan 15, 2007 10:58:50 PM
15

rasta,

That is an excellent point. I think I jumped in that thread (and hopefully gave better advice than mucking AK because it can’t win multiway) so your sample isn’t representative. :-P

People oddly forget that big preflop hands are allowed to make big postflop hands. They can explain why 33 is great seven ways, but but are somehow unable to apply that thinking to QQ! I’m endebted to SSHE for really understanding this concept, even though I hardly play limit ever now.

Wow, a post with both the old open-source “free beer” saw and an apt crypto comparison. Given Ed’s IT background that shouldn’t be surprising, i suppose. Do you give career advice for jaded ex-techies, Ed?

jamleeco
@ Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:48:55 AM
16

Damn but I love reading Ed’s posts. Learning and smiling at the same time is a great combo.

For my $.02, besides tv, one of the main reasons a multitude of players went to nl is because they were losing at limit. This was often detected at the limit tables when I heard such idio-logic as (when their A’s or K’s were cracked) ” That’s why I hate limit, that doesn’t happen at no limit where I can protect my hand !”

But at least now when i’m at the nl table with the same players and they “get ‘em cracked” they can rant for an hour how the idiot wasn’t getting the odds. Or complain when they overbet the pot about how they can’t get action on their good hands…..Don’t ya just love it !

I would follow these guys to 3-card monty if that’s what tv fires up next. ( I have no idea about this game, so I will be expecting a book from Ed )

Pawel
@ Sun Apr 08, 2007 03:24:52 PM
17

Hi everybody!
Reading through some poker forums I noticed many fresh posts by people who seem to having read at least a few good poker books with questions about hands… and well, I am a novice, but often I can see why their plays were bad. So no need to worry about too much of education in books!
PeterL, I play mostly .10/.20 and .05/.10 limit games (but have a full time job so I’m short on time to spend at tables). What should be my hour winning rate? I’m a winning player but I don’t win that much as you mentioned.
Regards,
Pawel

Alamedamike
@ Mon Aug 13, 2007 03:22:55 PM
18

Love the comments – I play low limit loose passive and loose aggressive games. Ed gave me some great advice and I have been following most of it (I would be lying if I said different).

rasta – Turning passive since your KK gets beat is not the way to go. My KK got beat so much that I started tracking AA-TT live. 135 of the last PP won AA-70%,KK-37%,QQ-52%,JJ-42%,TT-25%.

So, I raise with AA-QQ everytime and JJ-TT most of the time and take my chances. Since my KK win 1/3 of the time I think I am ahead since I will lose 2-6 BB 63% and win 8-12 BB 37%. Know when to dump them.

Blog Comment Poster
@ Fri Aug 31, 2007 08:58:08 AM
19

This comment was posted automatically using Blog Comment Poster. Check out its site to learn more and start building backlinks to your websites today.

Steve Hamilton
@ Tue Oct 30, 2007 03:13:49 PM
20

Great site Ed, some of the best articles I have seen – a great sanity check. Many thanks, Jazz Poker!

vipin
@ Tue Nov 06, 2007 12:45:43 AM
21

Poker for the Beginner 2

Asides looking out for websites with weaker opponents. You should also be on the look out for websites with favorable bonuses, deals and promotions. Signing up with websites that give you signup bonuses and/or loyalty bonuses should be foremost on your agenda. A very good way for you to quickly access these websites in other to determine which is most favorably to you, you should use one of the many poker rating websites available. Use a search engine to find the url’s of these websites and to avoid being a victim of favoritism on the part of the rating sites, make sure to consult with more than one website so as to get the best possible ratings.

The software to be used by the poker room is also an issue to be looked at. Software used by poker rooms differ from one room to another. Having good background information on the playability and speed of the software to be used would be to your advantage. In addition, some software gives you the capability of playing at more than one table at the same time. If you are going to be spending hours staring at your computer screen, you have to be sure that the software to be used is very comfortable and has good graphics.

LP
@ Wed Feb 27, 2008 10:25:26 AM
22

In blackjack and counting, the casinos realized that even with the information out there on how to beat the game, they finally decided not to be scarred about it.

They realized a couple of things:
1. Most players will not count perfectly.
2. Most players will not play perfect stragedty.
3. Most players will not have the proper bankroll to survive the swings.

To beat blackjack, a player must do the above three things perfectly. Casinos, relying on human nature know that most people will not meet all three requirements.

Leave a Reply




You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>