Q&A #76: Stop Waiting For “Better Spots” To Get Your Money In!

I would just say to the poster, If you cant rebuy into the cash game, it still wouldnt change the way I played. if i bought in for 100 in a 1-2 game, I would play the same whether or not I had 0 left, or 4 more “bullets” in my pocket. The stack size on the table is important, not whats in your pocket.

It may be a bit of a mistake to play in those games, because you might essentially be playing 50-100 per hand show down, and you only get one shot. Its a bad position to be in. of course, if thats you’re only option as far as game wise, then its tough.

When I was fist playing 1-2 live, that was what I was doing, and in a fast game, i was just roadkill, as I waited for great hands, by then had lost some from blinds, get called by 4 people, and get cracked. I quit playing in the game until I had enough money to rebuy if I wanted and more importantly, wasnt playing with scared money.

My advice would be to find tourneys to play instead, I dont see a profitable way to play in small stakes NL cash games with one buy in.

JMO..

Just a quick question, you said that you weren’t a winning no-limit player before you worked on your next book but yet you helped write a book on NL theory and practice with David Sklansky? I’m a little confused. Sorry if I sound rude but that just sounds odd.

Ed,

it’s kind of consoling to see that you had the same problems (i.e. feeling emberassed etc.) as I am still having. Of course I ordered your new book already a while ago and now I am very curious how it will (hopefully) help me to overcome this mindset.

I also appreciate the comments that the (blind-)level of the game is rather the point to consider.

I am not sure if the following is too theoretical to be of any value during a hand, but maybe someone is interested in discussing this a bit further:

What lead me to the original question is something I read about changes in basic strategy in Blackjack when playing for a bonus with a wagering requirement (the article is here: http://www.blackjackforumonline.com/content/Correct_Blackjack_Basic_Strategy_On_Internet_Casino_Bonuses.htm).

The idea is that you can either DOUBLE DOWN (and thereby meet the wagering requirement) or just HIT (and then need to play an additional hand). Hitting in itself has a higher +EV than doubling down, but the additional hand has a -EV (and you must play it to meet the wagering requirement). So you actually have to look at the combination of TWO hands when comparing it to doubling down.

I sort of reversed this idea and applied it to the situation described in the hand:
a) either move all-in (but risk being out of a +EV game against worse players) OR
b) pass up on this SLIGHTLY +EV situation and “live to fight another day” in a game where you have an edge over the other players

From a strictly mathematical point of view there should be a borderline, where even though pushing is profitable in itself, the risk of being out of the game outweighs it. So the higher your win rate (BB/100) the more of a favourite you should be when you decide to push all-in. At least that was my idea.

I don’t know if anyone can draw any practical conclusions from this thought that one could actually use while playing a hand. I’d be happy to hear that I tickled somebody’s brain enough to come up with something surprising.

[...] money management is to play in a game where the stakes don’t affect your marginal decisions. Check out this recent article from Ed Miller on this topic. If you agree with Miller, you get it. If you don’t agree with him, your thinking is flawed. [...]

Wow, I wish I’d seen this post earlier. I’ve had almost this same conversation with people on 2+2 Beginners who erroneously talk about passing up “small” 5% edges because they’d rather wait for a better spot to get all the money in. Ed’s psychological diagnosis is spot-on.

I agree that although there can be a theoretical justification for that view, and Sklansky even mentioned it in his tournament book (back in the days where there weren’t 100 online tournaments every hour!), it’s greatly misused. In fact, I agree it’s so greatly misused that the phrase “wait for a better spot” should just be banned from the poker beginner’s vocabulary.

Finally, I’m glad Ed co-wrote NLHE:TAP regardless of his level of poker knowledge, because I prefer poker books in English to books in Sklanskyese.