Its been a long day

I've written before about how I got to be playing the Party Poker $3/6 hold'em game. The key point is that over a couple months I averaged $90/hour of winnings by playing 4 tables at once in that game. While I knew that my "true" winrate over a larger number of hands wouldn't end up that high, I still fancied myself quite a success in that game.

When I found myself playing poker full time, I figured I'd start with that game as my bread-and-butter and go from there. I started to get frustrated with that game, made fun of my opponents, wallowed in some introspection, and eventually decided to try $5/10 instead.

So that gets us to yesterday. If you asked me 2 days ago, I'd tell you my main game was playing 4 tables of Party $5/10 full-handed tables. But after losing 73 big bets ($726.50) in 2 hours late Thursday/early Friday, I started to wonder if that was really my best choice of game. I've played almost 30,000 hands, and I'm winning a mere 0.37BB/100 hands, which translates to less than $10 per hour. That's no way to pay my bills while building a bankroll. So something has to change. What should I change?

Here are the variables: hold'em, cash game, limit, $5/10, full-handed, Party Poker, 4-tabling.

1. Hold'em: While I enjoy dabbling in Omaha and a little 2-7 Triple Draw, I'm sticking with Hold'em. This is the hottest game in the country, and if I can't make it as a hold'em player right now, I need to stop playing poker.

2. Cash Games: In my experience so far, I suck at tournaments. I'm good at the 1 table quick ones, but that's about it. I don't have what it takes to win these big online multitable tournaments. I'll still enter a few of them for fun, but I'm sticking with cash games mostly.

3. Limit: From time to time I've given serious consideration to moving to the no-limit side of the world. Everyone sees tournaments on TV and wants to go all-in. I have to imagine there are tons and tons of awful players playing no-limit these days. My first poker experiences were playing no-limit games with my buddies in college. I regularly destroyed those games, so I have to believe I've got some no-limit talent.

But I'm not comfortable making this switch yet. There are still lots of awful limit players all over the place, and I have a lot more experience with the limit game. II feel better playing no-limit when I can see my opponent. Limit hold'em is a lot more mechanical, and I can pick up very good reads based on betting patterns without seeing the players. So for now I'm sticking with limit.

4. $5/10: To pay the bills and try to build my bankroll to move up in limits, I need to be playing at least $5/10 most of the time. I'll play $3/6 if it is shorthanded or heads-up because I can get a lot more hands in, but for the most part I need to be looking to play higher.

5. Full-handed: This one is tricky. I've written a bit about the short-handed vs full-handed struggle. Playing poker live and at limits below $5/10 online I've always been very strong at shorthanded play. But that damn Party $5/10 6-max game is my master. I just can't beat it for some reason. I crush the $3/6 5-max on Paradise. So I'm not sure what my problem is with shorthanded play. I know I'd like to be able to play short, because you get in so many more hands. I don't know what to do here. This leads us to...

6. Party Poker: Party is my favorite online cardroom, and you've seen me pimping it from time to time. There are tons and tons of bad players, more than any other site. But since I've decided so far that I want to play $5/10 and higher, and I'd like the option of playing shorthanded (and winning), I have to look at the results. And the stats say that I'm just not winning enough in Party's limit hold'em games, full or short at $5/10 or higher.

So I'm starting to sniff out games at other sites, and I have noticed very distinct differences in playing styles at different sites. It is entirely possible that my playing style and strengths just don't work well against the games at Party. I'm a marginal winner at Party, but maybe I could be a big winner somewhere else.

Why would this be? A factor is that 6-max tables at Party are available most only at $1/2, $5/10, and $10/20. Those games are very popular, as are the $3/6 and $15/30 full-handed games. I have to think that the play in the full-handed games at the $5/10 and $10/20 levels is heavily influenced in some way by the abundance of short-handed games. I don't know exactly how it is influenced, but I definitely notice a difference in play when I go to other sites with different limit offerings.

Luckily, I'm not writing a thesis, so I don't have to figure out all the reasons. And I'm not trying to prove my skills to anyone, so I don't feel like I have to beat whatever game I play. I just have to make money. So I'm going to try to find games I can beat, which might mean less playing at Party, at least at these limits.

7. 4-tabling: I've been 4-tabling $5/10 because I 4-tabled $3/6. But as I was moving up from $1/2 to $2/4 to $3/6 I dropped some tables when I moved up, then gradually added them back. I never did that for $5/10. I probably should have.

I'm playing on a 17" monitor, so there is overlap for more than 2 tables at once. Maybe being able to see all of the players on every table all the time would help. I'll get a 21" monitor once I'm sure that 4-tabling is profitable for me.

But I read this guy's story. And some analysis of my results suggests that I do a lot better with fewer tables. So I'm going to try playing 2 tables for a while instead of 4.

So there it is. I decided to stick with limit hold'em cash games, and try playing 2 tables on various sites at $5/10 to $10/20 limits. In the 24 hours since the disastrous session that made me rethink things, I've won $1200 with my new approach. Its been a long day.