paddyswarrior
Visionary
Bronze Level
I much prefer tourneys, however I do like to play cash games sometimes because you can play in them for as long or as little as you want. But cash games can clean you out in one hand if your not careful enough
YLAN
Sida Nga Taraki
Platinum Level
You could get bored if you play tight. I cannot say cash games are boring since you could loose as much as a tourney buy- in (which could be played for hours) in just minutes after seating. I rather play tourneys too because I would like to enjoy the gameplay.
F
fundiver199
Legend
Loyaler
This is a fair argument, which Nathan Williams AKA "Blackrain79" have also made in a recent video. The counter argument is, that tournaments offer more variation in stack sizes and tactical considerations about outlasting other players, taking advantage of risk aversion as the big stack, and so on and so forth. In short one can say, that cash game players need to be extremely good at one specific situation, which is 100BB poker played in chip EV, whereas tournament players need to be reasonably good at a variety of different situations.
I started out with cash games, and one of the things, I got tired of, and which contributed to my decision to move to tournaments, was the whole table and seat selection process. At their core cash games are all about bum hunting and in particular getting the "jesus seat" to the direct left of a loose bad player AKA "fish". You can ignore this of cause, but then you will constantly end up in bad seats on bad tables, and this will seriously hurt your results.
What made it especially tiring for me was the fact, that 6-max tables in particular often run around a single "fish". So when the "fish" leave, then within the next orbit or so everyone else leave as well, and the table simply break down. After which you need to go on a new waiting list again. Or jump onto a table with a vacant seat, where it then usually turns out, the fish just left, so that table breaks down as well. Or you have the fish to your direct left, and thats why the seat got vacant.
Then you can play the Zoom format, but that has other severe disadvantages. For me its almost not even real poker, because there is no such thing as table dynamics, when you face new opponents every hand, and its very difficult to get a read on anyone. In my experience Zoom games are also very reg infested and difficult to beat, and for me at least the format can almost be tilting in itself. But again everyone should play, what they enjoy most. So this is just my personal opinion
dreamer13
Legend
Platinum Level
Poker players always have one main choice: to devote their careers to cash games or tournaments. It is rare to find poker players who are equally well versed in both disciplines at once. The cash game is fundamentally different from tournament poker. The number of chips is equivalent to real money. In a tournament, chips are conditional. They are bought for a buy-in (fee). In the cache, the denomination of chips is equivalent to the amount of money. Session duration. Sitting down to play MTT, you never know exactly how long the game session will last, because in the case of a deep pass, the game will drag on for many hours. In the cash game, you can leave the table with chips at any time.
F
fundiver199
Legend
Loyaler
This is true, but there are also faster tournaments like SnGs or even hyper turbo MTTs, where you dont risk having to play for many hours. SnGs are not as popular, as they used to be. But the format still offer advantages for both recreational players and grinders
Aballinamion
Dark Lord of the Sith
Bronze Level
Yes, cash games can be very boring, there’s no emotion involved, you play like you are in a home office job.
Tournaments are full of emotion, the bubble, the jammings, the final table, people praying for you and cursing you...
Cash games are more Boureau-cratic, and I second what fundiver had just said, find a style where you feel comfortable and confident.
S
Station_Master
Legend
Platinum Level
This is a fair argument, which Nathan Williams AKA "Blackrain79" have also made in a recent video. The counter argument is, that tournaments offer more variation in stack sizes and tactical considerations about outlasting other players, taking advantage of risk aversion as the big stack, and so on and so forth. In short one can say, that cash game players need to be extremely good at one specific situation, which is 100BB poker played in chip EV, whereas tournament players need to be reasonably good at a variety of different situations.
I started out with cash games, and one of the things, I got tired of, and which contributed to my decision to move to tournaments, was the whole table and seat selection process. At their core cash games are all about bum hunting and in particular getting the "jesus seat" to the direct left of a loose bad player AKA "fish". You can ignore this of cause, but then you will constantly end up in bad seats on bad tables, and this will seriously hurt your results.
What made it especially tiring for me was the fact, that 6-max tables in particular often run around a single "fish". So when the "fish" leave, then within the next orbit or so everyone else leave as well, and the table simply break down. After which you need to go on a new waiting list again. Or jump onto a table with a vacant seat, where it then usually turns out, the fish just left, so that table breaks down as well. Or you have the fish to your direct left, and thats why the seat got vacant.
Then you can play the Zoom format, but that has other severe disadvantages. For me its almost not even real poker, because there is no such thing as table dynamics, when you face new opponents every hand, and its very difficult to get a read on anyone. In my experience Zoom games are also very reg infested and difficult to beat, and for me at least the format can almost be tilting in itself. But again everyone should play, what they enjoy most. So this is just my personal opinion
All good points, there are certainly lots of different spots in tournaments which is interesting, but I prefer cash games overall.
One thing I would suggest for cash tables is trying 9 handed games as they tend not to break quite so often and you may find 2 or 3 fish or weaker regs, so 1 leaving doesnt necessarily break the table.
rafcio20p
Rock Star
Bronze Level
That's true. If you win then it's ok, keep playing.
D
dregan
Legend
Platinum Level
Whether cash games are boring I never thought. For me, cash games are not suitable. For me, in most cases, they are in the red. Here the tournament is another matter. You can take nothing several times in a row and then win a good amount.
F
fundiver199
Legend
Loyaler
When I played cash, 9-max was my favourite format, and yes that does solve the problem with table breaking a lot. The most crazy was 888 Poker 6-max, before they changed to their current random seating. It might have 15 people on the waiting list (likely using scripts), but when a seat got vacant, because the fish had left, all 15 did not want it, and the table went from 15 players waiting to breaking down. Experiencing that a few times was the final nail in the coffin for me