Texas Poker Supply banner Poker DIY banner Home Poker Tourney Forums
* How To Host a Poker Tournament
Welcome, %1$s. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email? Sep 20, 2017 at 03:39
Welcome, %1$s. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
:
:

^ 

Use the arrows at the
top to close this sidebar

: [1]
: Good arguments to play cash over tourney  ( 10541 )
kimert
Regular
***
: 804



« : Apr 01, 2009 at 18:22 »

I`m trying to get a cash game going, but the group I`m playing with always turn the idea down in favor of playing tourney.

I'm trying to convince them that it will be fun. No one is eliminated, blinds stays the same and we can play a more "proper" poker not having to be forced to play hands we wouldn't normally do due to the blinds eating our stacks.
( and i want to put my Noir cash set into play ^^ )

I must have the worst salespitch ever cause I`m always turned down.

Anyone have some excellent sales arguments for the idea of a cash game over a tourney / sitngo?


pauld22
Regular
***
: 2631



« #1 : Apr 01, 2009 at 18:26 »

The group I play with always hated waiting around for another tourney to start.  I pitched the idea, they agreed to give it a shot as a side game after players bust out of the tourney, and it has evolved into mostly cash games now.

Some people are like slinkies.  Not really good for anything but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs.
Martini
Regular
***
: 9999



« #2 : Apr 01, 2009 at 18:38 »

Advantages:

* Everyone can come and go whenever they want. No need to wait around for so-and-so to show up so you can start.
* Someone can take a break at any time without worry of having huge blinds taken out of his stack.
* Anyone who is serious about poker would be well served to know how to play both cash games and tourneys well.
* No one needs to leave empty handed like in a tourney. Someone could basically tread water all night and cash out a few bucks up or down from where they started. Not a bad price for a full night of entertainment.
* Players who play tight can take advantage of the cash game format by being patient, posting blinds, and picking their spots.
* Players who play loose can take advantage of the cash game format because they can just rebuy and still play if they get felted.
* Cash games allow for things that tournaments don't like not showing your cards at showdown of an all in hand, running the board twice, showing cards during a hand (if the house rules allow it), etc.

The biggest complaint is generally that tourneys cap your losses for the night whereas a cash game could continue to draw money out of your wallet. This can be mitigated by setting the stakes properly.

(not a real alcoholic beverage)
Detroitdad
MTPL
Regular
***
: 13474



« #3 : Apr 01, 2009 at 18:50 »

What martini said

and torneys suck ads

The Lions will be the death of me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Wedge Rock
Global Moderator
Regular
****
: 9545


CC&GTCC # R-7604


« #4 : Apr 01, 2009 at 18:58 »

Advantages:

* Everyone can come and go whenever they want. No need to wait around for so-and-so to show up so you can start.
* Someone can take a break at any time without worry of having huge blinds taken out of his stack.
* Anyone who is serious about poker would be well served to know how to play both cash games and tourneys well.
* No one needs to leave empty handed like in a tourney. Someone could basically tread water all night and cash out a few bucks up or down from where they started. Not a bad price for a full night of entertainment.
* Players who play tight can take advantage of the cash game format by being patient, posting blinds, and picking their spots.
* Players who play loose can take advantage of the cash game format because they can just rebuy and still play if they get felted.
* Cash games allow for things that tournaments don't like not showing your cards at showdown of an all in hand, running the board twice, showing cards during a hand (if the house rules allow it), etc.
* kimert can get his Noir cash set into play.

The biggest complaint is generally that tourneys cap your losses for the night whereas a cash game could continue to draw money out of your wallet. This can be mitigated by setting the stakes properly.

FYP.

Wedge Rock (not a real rock)



Guilty of over-using ellipses...
links_slayer
Regular
***
: 3492


« #5 : Apr 01, 2009 at 18:58 »

Also, you can buy in for as much - or as little - as you like provided it's within any minimum's or maximum's set by the house.  A $100 buy-in tourney might turn some people away but a $0.25/$0.50 NL cash game w/ $20-$100 buy-in might appeal to a wider audience.
Klobberer
Regular
***
: 131


« #6 : Apr 01, 2009 at 19:05 »

My regulars feel the same way, they don't mind losing $20 as long as it takes 3 hours and they have a chance to win $120...I like both formats, but small stakes cash can get real boring if your goal is to play well and win money.

He he he...
kimert
Regular
***
: 804



« #7 : Apr 02, 2009 at 05:24 »

Good stuff. Ill just print this thread and hand it over when the guys and girls arrive!

Thanks allot!
Blaster
Regular
***
: 1170



« #8 : Apr 02, 2009 at 11:27 »

 You might want to "ease them in" to the idea of a cash game, by Hosting a Tourney, & having 90 -120 mins or so of a cash game before it starts.
 Invite everyone over at, say, 5PM, & start the Tourn at 7PM. Even the most vocal naysayers should tolerate the "warm up" game & will probably be more open to it once they get their feet wet a couple of times. A better idea than trying to convince them right away to do a cash game "instead" of a tourney, as the tite of the thread suggests.
 If people are concerned about the no limit/money, you could , for example, have a .25/.50 NL game, $40 buy in, but cap each betting round at $2 or $2.50 max.

 PS: I would Not suggest you print this thread & hand it over to them, as your post above suggests.
 Some personalities that have already shot your ideas down may not want to be "served" with papers trying to prove your point. Use your best judgement.

 
 
« : Apr 02, 2009 at 11:36 Blaster »
kimert
Regular
***
: 804



« #9 : Apr 02, 2009 at 16:26 »

Thanks Blaster, a warn up cash game is a god idea, ill try that. And I will be editing the thread before handing it over hehe.
R-Ho
Regular
***
: 2839



« #10 : Apr 02, 2009 at 17:36 »

I`m trying to get a cash game going, but the group I`m playing with always turn the idea down in favor of playing tourney.

If you are hosting this game, you don't have feel obligated to 'sell' everyone on the idea and bring it to a vote.  Announce that "this Friday I'm hosting a cash game, stakes are X". You'll get takers.
« : Apr 02, 2009 at 17:47 R-Ho »
R-Ho
Regular
***
: 2839



« #11 : Apr 02, 2009 at 17:49 »

You might want to "ease them in" to the idea of a cash game, by Hosting a Tourney, & having 90 -120 mins or so of a cash game before it starts.
 Invite everyone over at, say, 5PM, & start the Tourn at 7PM. Even the most vocal naysayers should tolerate the "warm up" game & will probably be more open to it once they get their feet wet

There's a good chance when 7 PM comes you'll have people arguing that they'd rather keep the cash game going...
kimert
Regular
***
: 804



« #12 : Jan 10, 2010 at 18:06 »

OK, so, 11 months later...
Last night we had our first all night cash game, woot!
Everyone sent me messages today saying they had a great time, and wondering why we havent played cash before..

Anyways, thank you all for great tips!
I`m already looking forward to the next game, and it wont be a tourney:)

luckystraights
Regular
***
: 3161



« #13 : Jan 10, 2010 at 22:27 »

Just quote Tod Brunson who say's something along the lines of "real poker players play in a cash game", they won't want there ego's insulted and will probably be more willing to play, see HSP [ can't remember which season].

EDIT: If u host, just announce that your playing a cash game next w/e and don't run a tourney, or refuse to host / play a tourney until your group have a cash game.

My few friends who play poker, pretty much refuse to play tourney's now, we play 5c/10c and a game just before Christmas had over $200 on the table and there where only 4 of us lol.
« : Jan 10, 2010 at 22:34 luckystraights »
luckystraights
Regular
***
: 3161



« #14 : Jan 10, 2010 at 22:41 »

but small stakes cash can get real boring if your goal is to play well and win money.

explain please?
stooks99
Regular
***
: 1485



« #15 : Jan 10, 2010 at 23:27 »

While I have no real contribution to this thread, I would like to add that I hate when people make references to cash poker as "real" or "more proper" poker vs tournaments.

When you kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.  -- Winston Churchill

www.deadmoneypoker.webs.com
luckystraights
Regular
***
: 3161



« #16 : Jan 10, 2010 at 23:34 »

While I have no real contribution to this thread, I would like to add that I hate when people make references to cash poker as "real" or "more proper" poker vs tournaments.

Technically I agree with you, in reality I disagree.
kimert
Regular
***
: 804



« #17 : Jan 11, 2010 at 00:17 »

My few friends who play poker, pretty much refuse to play tourney's now, we play 5c/10c and a game just before Christmas had over $200 on the table and there where only 4 of us lol.

That must have been quite a lively game lol

While I have no real contribution to this thread, I would like to add that I hate when people make references to cash poker as "real" or "more proper" poker vs tournaments.

I still think that the increased blinds at some point makes you play bingo more than "proper" poker.
On the other hand, tournament poker is as real as it gets.
Nerre
Regular
***
: 1126


« #18 : Jan 11, 2010 at 04:52 »

I think it depends on your stakes.

In cash game with blinds like 5c/10c I think many players have problems folding ("You raise 10BB? One dollar, it's just peanuts, I'll call"). That makes the game very different, you may have to raise like 15-20 BB pre flop to avoid the whole table calling you. Som people will play one hand, end up all in on river and then make a new buy in.

So, low stakes cash game can become more of an all in fest than a tourney.

sunderB
Regular
***
: 2387


« #19 : Jan 11, 2010 at 12:42 »



I still think that the increased blinds at some point makes you play bingo more than "proper" poker.

Not with a good balanced blind structure.  I actually have (at times) had complaints from the heads up players at my games that there is too much room for play when it gets to heads up.  I personally prefer this over forcing the play too quickly.

That's a different discussion though.  Congrats on bringing the group around to the idea.
Detroitdad
MTPL
Regular
***
: 13474



« #20 : Jan 11, 2010 at 14:47 »


[/quote]

Not with a good balanced blind structure.  I actually have (at times) had complaints from the heads up players at my games that there is too much room for play when it gets to heads up.  I personally prefer this over forcing the play too quickly.


[/quote]

I wish our league games would adopt this philosophy

The Lions will be the death of me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
kimert
Regular
***
: 804



« #21 : Jan 11, 2010 at 15:05 »

Not with a good balanced blind structure.  I actually have (at times) had complaints from the heads up players at my games that there is too much room for play when it gets to heads up.  I personally prefer this over forcing the play too quickly.

That's a different discussion though.  Congrats on bringing the group around to the idea.
Ty sir, and I agree, sadly more often than not, that is not the case with the tournaments I`m playing in.

Don't get me wrong though, I absolutely love to play tournaments, for my home game on the other hand cash is better, everyone gets to play the whole night instead of watching the game after they busted out. (not enough people to start a side cashgame).
stooks99
Regular
***
: 1485



« #22 : Jan 11, 2010 at 15:12 »

While I have no real contribution to this thread, I would like to add that I hate when people make references to cash poker as "real" or "more proper" poker vs tournaments.

Technically I agree with you, in reality I disagree.


Agree/disagree with what?  You disagree that I hate when people say that?

Again, as I've stated before, the idea of "better" "real" or "more proper" anything is just an issue of how snobby we are allowed to be.  I will wholeheartedly agree that cash poker and tournament poker are very different.  However, that doesn't make one of the more "real" than the other one.  One of them is cash, and one is tournament....thats really it.  It's almost like assuming that one sport is more of a "real" sport than  another.

When you kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.  -- Winston Churchill

www.deadmoneypoker.webs.com
Detroitdad
MTPL
Regular
***
: 13474



« #23 : Jan 11, 2010 at 15:21 »

While I have no real contribution to this thread, I would like to add that I hate when people make references to cash poker as "real" or "more proper" poker vs tournaments.

Technically I agree with you, in reality I disagree.


Agree/disagree with what?  You disagree that I hate when people say that?

Again, as I've stated before, the idea of "better" "real" or "more proper" anything is just an issue of how snobby we are allowed to be.  I will wholeheartedly agree that cash poker and tournament poker are very different.  However, that doesn't make one of the more "real" than the other one.  One of them is cash, and one is tournament....thats really it.  It's almost like assuming that one sport is more of a "real" sport than  another.

Football is more of a sport than speed skating

The Lions will be the death of me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
luckystraights
Regular
***
: 3161



« #24 : Jan 11, 2010 at 15:39 »

While I have no real contribution to this thread, I would like to add that I hate when people make references to cash poker as "real" or "more proper" poker vs tournaments.

Technically I agree with you, in reality I disagree.


Agree/disagree with what?  You disagree that I hate when people say that?


to me poker is more a game of "utilizing strategy to out play your opponent for money" then it is a game of cards and hands, with such a definition shoving every hand until u win or bust can be considered poker, I did such a thing in a sat, as one player was sitting out and I just bled the 3rd guy until I won, but in reality you need some depth to the game and playing something like 20bb short stacking in cash or shove / folding in tournaments isn't poker, its just a variation on what is, that being 100bb+ cash games (for nl anyway).
kimert
Regular
***
: 804



« #25 : Jan 11, 2010 at 16:25 »

While I have no real contribution to this thread, I would like to add that I hate when people make references to cash poker as "real" or "more proper" poker vs tournaments.

Technically I agree with you, in reality I disagree.


Agree/disagree with what?  You disagree that I hate when people say that?

Again, as I've stated before, the idea of "better" "real" or "more proper" anything is just an issue of how snobby we are allowed to be.  I will wholeheartedly agree that cash poker and tournament poker are very different.  However, that doesn't make one of the more "real" than the other one.  One of them is cash, and one is tournament....thats really it.  It's almost like assuming that one sport is more of a "real" sport than  another.

Football is more of a sport than speed skating

Dont make me bring chess into this.
pathand
Regular
***
: 1872



« #26 : Jan 11, 2010 at 16:27 »

Dont make me bring chess into this.

...or beer pong.

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"If you wanna make me happy, pour me bourbon on the rocks and play every sad song on the jukebox.\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"
Blaster
Regular
***
: 1170



« #27 : Jan 11, 2010 at 16:43 »

I agree that it' basically snobish to try and claim cash NLHE is better or worse than tornament NLHE.
  I would tend to agree that tournaments ( Those that have a decent structure), tend to require a more varied pallette of "moves" , or poker playing over their course ...
Someone, for example, could sit regularly  at sessions of casino cash games as a one syllable solid rock, only play his unraised blinds, pocket 8's, A/j suited or better, the whole time start to finish,  & come out a winning player in the long run.
 That same strategy would  be next to worthless /not fly at tournaments beyond the first couple of levels...
stooks99
Regular
***
: 1485



« #28 : Jan 11, 2010 at 17:41 »

I agree that it' basically snobish to try and claim cash NLHE is better or worse than tornament NLHE.
  I would tend to agree that tournaments ( Those that have a decent structure), tend to require a more varied pallette of "moves" , or poker playing over their course ...
Someone, for example, could sit regularly  at sessions of casino cash games as a one syllable solid rock, only play his unraised blinds, pocket 8's, A/j suited or better, the whole time start to finish,  & come out a winning player in the long run.
 That same strategy would  be next to worthless /not fly at tournaments beyond the first couple of levels...

Wow, I dont get many people to agree with me, so I'd better run with it.

The problem with someone saying that tourney poker is not as pure or good as cash is this:  that idea implies that there is little to no skill in most tournament situations.  I hate to break ot to you folks, but just because 4 people are left in a SnG, and the average stack is 11 BB, that doesn't mean there is no skill involved.  The best SnG players online are the guys who know thos perfect spots to move in, stop and go, fold ace highs, etc....


IMO, the whole idea of tournaments not being "real" poker started right after the poker book, when the top pros weren't winning every tournament anymore.  So, since their skills dont necessarily translate into winning every other tournament, it was touted as being that cash poker was "real" and tournaments were for people who couldnt handle  cash.









When you kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.  -- Winston Churchill

www.deadmoneypoker.webs.com
kimert
Regular
***
: 804



« #29 : Jan 11, 2010 at 17:56 »

This thread was kinda about how to get my homegame to swap from tourney to cash play, with the goal that everyone got to pay the whole evening instead of watching from the side line, after they bust.
luckystraights
Regular
***
: 3161



« #30 : Jan 11, 2010 at 18:51 »

I agree that it' basically snobish to try and claim cash NLHE is better or worse than tornament NLHE.
  I would tend to agree that tournaments ( Those that have a decent structure), tend to require a more varied pallette of "moves" , or poker playing over their course ...
Someone, for example, could sit regularly  at sessions of casino cash games as a one syllable solid rock, only play his unraised blinds, pocket 8's, A/j suited or better, the whole time start to finish,  & come out a winning player in the long run.
 That same strategy would  be next to worthless /not fly at tournaments beyond the first couple of levels...

compare high stakes tournament players to high stakes cash game players, then you get to see where the talent sits.
stooks99
Regular
***
: 1485



« #31 : Jan 11, 2010 at 19:12 »

I agree that it' basically snobish to try and claim cash NLHE is better or worse than tornament NLHE.
  I would tend to agree that tournaments ( Those that have a decent structure), tend to require a more varied pallette of "moves" , or poker playing over their course ...
Someone, for example, could sit regularly  at sessions of casino cash games as a one syllable solid rock, only play his unraised blinds, pocket 8's, A/j suited or better, the whole time start to finish,  & come out a winning player in the long run.
 That same strategy would  be next to worthless /not fly at tournaments beyond the first couple of levels...

compare high stakes tournament players to high stakes cash game players, then you get to see where the talent sits.

again, that statement doesn't pose a good arguement.  What does "where the talent sits" even mean?  My argument is that there isn't a tunnel of one type of talent, that maybe, just maybe, there are a lot of different skills involved in the game of poker ad a whole.

Assuming that all high stakes cash players are generally the best in the world might even be correct, but there is no way to know.  There has to be a defining line between all sorts of different aspects.  Is a guy who plays high limit stud better or worse than a guy who plays high limit hold em?  How can you know?

And before we hear that most high stakes players play them all, remember that for the sake of this topic, it doesn't matter.  Saying that admits that you have to take all types of cash games into consideration, which is probably true. 

So, if we admit that, then we have to admit that you can't exclude tournaments, and all their facets, from the equation of who is better at poker.

When you kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.  -- Winston Churchill

www.deadmoneypoker.webs.com
luckystraights
Regular
***
: 3161



« #32 : Jan 11, 2010 at 19:40 »

I think it comes down to skill edge, the skill edge in STT is very small out of the very lowest of stakes and is apparently so small at mid stakes and higher they are not profitable anymore. Notable STT pro's have been moving away from the format for this reason. In contrast a deep cash game either live or online will offer a very large skill edge, the better players will utilize this the weaker players will suffer for it. MTT's will be somewhere between the too, and with stack size fluctuations offer unique areas for the tournament pro to increase his edge, but by the nature of the format a tournament pro's skill edge is still going to be a lot smaller then a pro in a deep cash game.

Consequently the players who have really mastered a game rather then a format will gravitate towards deep cash games, as they offer the largest potential edge.

Blaster
Regular
***
: 1170



« #33 : Jan 11, 2010 at 20:31 »

 Cash is simply Different.
 I'm sure many top cash game players would admit that their tournament play experiences made them the success they are as cash players .. (Negraneu, Greenstein, Ivey ect )...
  Some top players feel tournament is where the Skill comes in & prefer that format ( Fergeuson, Hellmuth, Raymer) .... Fergeuson until very recently only played tournaments & nothing else, now he'll be seen in an occasional televised cash game ...
  I can see where Cash could be a better measure of monetary "Success" ... You can decide to have a system where you get up & leave if you are up a certain amount , or simply just cash out & leave.. Something that can't be done in a tourney...
  I Like both, but I feel however that you need a better "overall & varied" game for tournament play , you can be successful at cash with a more one-track play style..  When refering to Tournaments, BTW, I  do mean deepstack long rounds games, where even the final few players have plenty of stack size, not 2 to 3 hr Saturday nite kitchen table tournaments ...
luckystraights
Regular
***
: 3161



« #34 : Jan 11, 2010 at 20:44 »

Cash is simply Different.
 I'm sure many top cash game players would admit that their tournament play experiences made them the success they are as cash players .. (Negraneu, Greenstein, Ivey ect )...

True perhaps with DN, but unlikely with Barry as he gets all his income from cash games, which makes your statement sound a little illogical imo. Also all of these guy's where grinding before nlhe tournaments became the big thing, when nlhe was mostly a cash game.

I think Chris F, doesn't play cash games much cause he'll get owned when he does, he's a nit and will get run over.

Most tournament pro's win cause they play against huge fields mostly filled with donks and weak players, in contrast a high level cash game is typically filled with some of the very best players at that level, all competing for 1 or 2 weaker players per table.
« : Jan 11, 2010 at 20:47 luckystraights »
stooks99
Regular
***
: 1485



« #35 : Jan 11, 2010 at 22:44 »

Just a reality check.  Let's not let ourselves get dilluted into the idea that we have any clue what any of these guys really play like.

When you kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.  -- Winston Churchill

www.deadmoneypoker.webs.com
luckystraights
Regular
***
: 3161



« #36 : Jan 11, 2010 at 23:44 »

Just a reality check.  Let's not let ourselves get dilluted into the idea that we have any clue what any of these guys really play like.

You have a point, ldo, but I'm not pulling something out of my arse either, pretty much every video clip of Chris I've ever seen has him both playing nitty and his legendary cash game nittyness being commented on, maybe he's a different guy in a non televised or non high stakes event though, but if judgments are being made, I think its fair to put him in camp de nit, more then cap de durr caliber.
Jambine
Global Moderator
Regular
****
: 5574


My Passion


« #37 : Jan 11, 2010 at 23:49 »

This thread was kinda about how to get my homegame to swap from tourney to cash play, with the goal that everyone got to pay the whole evening instead of watching from the side line, after they bust.

Indeed.  I'll re-thread-jack and return to the OP question.

Martini said it all above (reply #2)

Cash game at Three Creek Ranch
james777
Player
**
: 13


« #38 : Jan 13, 2012 at 05:32 »

In cash games you do not get penalized for winning all the chips. 

In tournaments (unless it is winner takes all) the winner has to win all the chips and also give away the largest percentage of the prize pool to the other cashed finalists.  You are better off just cashing.  The closer to first you finish the more you are penalized.  It takes the purity out of the game IMO.
Martini
Regular
***
: 9999



« #39 : Jan 13, 2012 at 11:02 »

In cash games you do not get penalized for winning all the chips. 

In tournaments (unless it is winner takes all) the winner has to win all the chips and also give away the largest percentage of the prize pool to the other cashed finalists.  You are better off just cashing.  The closer to first you finish the more you are penalized.  It takes the purity out of the game IMO.

If you end up heads up in a tournament I'm sure you could work out a deal where you just forfeit and take second place money so you don't have to give as much of it away. I doubt the other player would have an issue with that.

(not a real alcoholic beverage)
Wedge Rock
Global Moderator
Regular
****
: 9545


CC&GTCC # R-7604


« #40 : Jan 13, 2012 at 11:41 »

Yeah, apples and oranges.

You can't sit down at a cash table and expect to walk away with every chip on the table.

And there are no multi-table cash tables which allow for huge prizes.

Wedge Rock (not a real rock)



Guilty of over-using ellipses...
Captain Pedro
Regular
***
: 181


« #41 : Jan 14, 2012 at 05:54 »

In cash games you do not get penalized for winning all the chips. 

In tournaments (unless it is winner takes all) the winner has to win all the chips and also give away the largest percentage of the prize pool to the other cashed finalists.  You are better off just cashing.  The closer to first you finish the more you are penalized.  It takes the purity out of the game IMO.

If you end up heads up in a tournament I'm sure you could work out a deal where you just forfeit and take second place money so you don't have to give as much of it away. I doubt the other player would have an issue with that.

I like....  :->>>>

"If you've got something to say, keep your mouth shut...and open it again when you have something to HEAR."
: [1]
Home Poker Tourney Forums  |  General Poker Discussion  |  Poker Ring Games (Cash Games)  |  Topic: Good arguments to play cash over tourney
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!


nutN2Lewz image
Copyright © 2017 HomePokerTourney.com