Poker Challenge for the year

This thread really intended for people that play poker or know poker on a more than casual basis.

The Game: 1-2nL Texas Hold'em. 50$ minimum buy in, 200$ maximum buy in.

The Challenge: To profit 200$ per week for a year. The idea is 50 weeks x 200$ = 10,000$

The Rules: Can only buy in for 120$... If chip stack falls below 30$.. cash out and leave. Can not reload during session. Can play 7 days per week. Can leave at any time. Play one pot, win 40$.. can leave.

The Hit and Run is the greatest play in poker. My idea is to have player play extremely tight. Once holding the nuts... or am at least 80% sure that you have your opponent(s) beat get maximum value.

Can it be done?

Ok heres my two cents.

I am not the greatest poker player in the world. If you exclude the $11k WPT seat I won, I am surely a losing player, but then I am ok with that. My work pays well, so its an outlet for me. But I live and breathe poker, and read so much on it, play 4 hours most nights, and 20 hours over the weekend on-line (remember on-line poker?).

I would say your plan is flawed. Any time you buy-in for less than the max your losing value. What happens if first hand in you flop quads and the other fills up his full house? Sure you win a $240 pot, but it could of been a $400 pot.

Why have a stop loss at $30? Why not buy-in for the max, and leave if you drop below $100. This way you get maximum value if you make the nuts, but also have a point you can leave if your card dead and bleed to death.

Failing that, buy in for the minimum and adopt the short stack strategy :- Only playing pocket pairs, and AQ+. 3Betting preflop with the intention of getting it all-in on the flop. You could have 4 shots at this strategy for your $200. Plus your less likely to get get credit for a monster with a short stack, and more likely to get called and double up.

1. "Hit and Run" is not a play, it's a chicken bankroll management method. That said, it's a useful method for novice players who can't handle play with rapidly changing number of players and essentially play two games at once after gathering a longer stack than max buy-in. But it is not a play. And a skilled player gains an advantage once his stack exceeds max buy-in.

2. If you're worried about losing too much in one go, why not play Pot Limit? That way you won't be forced to go long-in on questionable odds against players with a longer stack.

3. If playing extremely tight, why would you even consider limiting your stack or quitting? Extremely tight play means you fold unless you have the nuts. If you do have the nuts, go for it. Short stack is only good for loose players.

Quote: minnesotajoe

Can it be done?

Yes. It is possible. I echo the previous poster's concern that walking away from a winning session leaves the potential for big stack intimidation on the table. That being said, locking up winnings appears to be the goal, so don't be afraid to get up, cash-in and put your name back on the board for a fresh start.

It is difficult to set your stop loss at $90 when you are playing NL. Assume your stack is down to $60... there is a big difference between raising "all in" vs. "I hope the bet is no more than $30 or I will have to fold."

I do not think this strategy would work on a limit game, as stack size plays a significantly smaller role and luck a significantly larger one. Limit players chase many more marginal hands.

Quote: Ayecarumba

Yes. It is possible. I echo the previous poster's concern that walking away from a winning session leaves the potential for big stack intimidation on the table. That being said, locking up winnings appears to be the goal, so don't be afraid to get up, cash-in and put your name back on the board for a fresh start.

Actually, most poker rooms have a 2-hour waiting period before they will allow you to enter the same game without the same sized chip stack. Some poker room don't enforce this, but if you find a jerk like me at your table (jokingly, kind of), I will make sure you put the EXACT amount you left with back on the table. Dealers will probably hold you to that too.

I don't think the scenario you provide will have you be a winner in the long-run. More money on the table allows you to make plays you can't make with a smaller stack. When I get up about 300-400 on a table, I make the correct betting moves against certain players, and unless my reads are wrong (which they are about 15% of the time), I can get players to fold, sometimes big hands.

Here is my take. I just turned 24 years old in December. I am a poker dealer. All the time, I see people get huge stacks, never leave.. then dump it all. I learn from my personal experiences.

I was 21 years old playing 20-40 limit Hold'em. I bought in for 1,000$ (which is the norm at this game). I ran it up to 1,995$ so naturally, I wanted to get a 2,000$. Trying to win 5$, I lost 1,995$. --- That night.. I decided to never cash out for even amounts, unless it is by chance. That was really foolish of me to not cut my losses... but I always learning.

I see people on 1-2 nL buy in for 200$.. sitting on a stack of 650$+.. UTG raise to say 10$ with AK. get callers. Flop comes A93 rainbow. If an opponent has say 50-150$... the player with AK 99% of the time is going to get it in with a player that has A9 suited, A3 suited, 99, 33 .... Yes, it is somewhat of a cooler.. but that player is just giving away 150$
-------
I feel there are flop scenarios where.. the money is going in.
1. Set vs two overs and flush draw
2. Set vs straight and flush draw
3. Set vs Set
4. Two pair vs Set
5. Two pair vs Two Pair

My hit and run idea is to prevent getting into a cooler hand once you have a nice profit.
---------
Also with the 120$ buy in, I am willing to lose the entire 120$
If I start the hand with 80$... 10 preflop. 25 on the flop... that puts my stack at 45$ .. I'm not going to say to myself, Any bet over 15$ and I will fold.... no what I'm saying is... I start hand with 85$. 10 preflop. 15 on the flop. call a players all in for 35$ and lose... I now only have 25$... I would take that 25$ and cash out.

The problem with your hit and run is if you only play the nuts and never splash around with poor hands it is very hard to get paid when you do finally get a great hand as any decent player will know you have the nuts. The old poker saying "You have to give action to get action" is true.

Quote: minnesotajoe

My hit and run idea is to prevent getting into a cooler hand once you have a nice profit.

Also with the 120$ buy in, I am willing to lose the entire 120$
If I start the hand with 80$... 10 preflop. 25 on the flop... that puts my stack at 45$ .. I'm not going to say to myself, Any bet over 15$ and I will fold.... no what I'm saying is... I start hand with 85$. 10 preflop. 15 on the flop. call a players all in for 35$ and lose... I now only have 25$... I would take that 25$ and cash out.

Sounds like a solid bankroll management strategy, but you will, on occassion, have some very short sessions. If your skills are such, consider moving up to the 5/10 and buying in for at least $500. After you hit your profit goal, or lose $90, walk. It is more likely that bigger money will get into the pot when you have solid hands vs. grinding then getting out drawn in the 1/2.

Quote: Ayecarumba

Sounds like a solid bankroll management strategy,

Thanks.. Bankroll management is the main key for me.

I can take the time to shower, get dressed, drive to the casino, sit down.. play only one hand.. win 45$ get up and drive back home. I would go to the gas station, fill up my tank and be happy. The 1-2 games that I play at... nobody pays any attention to how tight or loose a player is. No lie. A Player can sit down and literally fold EVERY SINGLE HAND for an hour... Then open a pot for 25$ and get called by at least 1 player.
---------
Here are perfect examples...
Last week, I bought in for 90$.. (You don't have to post when you enter table).. I folded first hand. Next hand I was Big Blind. I had 72 off (ironic, I know)... five limpers.. I check. Flop comes J72 with two hearts. I check.. my immediate left leads out 8$ .. two callers.. I look. I saw there was 36$ in the pot. (12 pre, 8+8+8) so I raised to 40$.. just want to take it down... the guy that led out for 8$ raises all in for 400$ (he really only made it 88$ the other two players had less)... one guy folds.. Button Calls for 60$.. I call for 88... Turn River come Q4 no hearts.... the guy that shipped it had JK.. dude with 60$ had A-10 hearts. .. I took down 248-5 rake-1 promotion dollar- 10 tip - 90 buy in = 142$ profit in one hand... I racked up and left.

Had I bought in 200$

Flop Jh 7h 2c
I check..
KJ bets 8
XX calls 8
A-10hh calls 8
I raise to 40
KJ calls 40
XX folds
A-10hh raises only 20 more closing the betting.
I call
KJ calls

Turn Queen
I ship all in for 138$
KJ folds.

Instead of taking down a 248 pot.. I take down 192$ pot

How can you say a table where nobody pays attention to how loose and tight you are, that a player will not go all-in for $400 based on your chip stack??? Hes shoving (10x the current bet) because he thought he had the best hand. I think you missed out on a much bigger pot, I think the hand might of played out slightly differently, but the end result is the same. And to be fair, if a pot is limped 5 times I am raising nearly my whole range on the button or blinds, possibly not with 7-2, but it has been known.

This is a very isolated occurance in any case, and I can assure you that buying for less than the max will always cost you in the long run. If you want to take it seriously, and make some money you have to take every edge you can, $15 in rake and tips will make any edge you think you might have even smaller. There are big debates on the 2+2 forums about wether the the rake on a 1-2 cash table is beatable, and they dont even have to tip and play in a totally transparent arena, where everyone knows exactly how many hands you have played, and how you often you raise etc.

I think the problem here is sample size, you have experienced some good fortune in the short term with this style/strategy but its not optimal.

Quote: WizardofEngland

I think the problem here is sample size, you have experienced some good fortune in the short term with this style/strategy but its not optimal.

Since conditions are constantly changing in poker, I don't thnk it is possible to determine whether or not the OP's style/strategy is optimal. That is the beauty of this game. The human element challenges players to change gears and constantly adapt. Granted, a max buy-in allows the widest range of betting options, but by definition, precludes the deceptive betting options available to a smaller stack.