High Stakes Cash Games - Q&A

[Jean-Guy]

Hello.

I play high stakes 6-handed cash games and have done this for many years. Due to certain none disclosed reasons I only play online.
I don’t play the Nosebleed levels though since there are none at pokerstars. High stakes is a different beast than low stakes.
Feel free to ask me anything about gambling at the more demanding stakes. There are two things that I won’t reveal - my alias and my revenue. But anything else - cool.

 

[GarotoMaroto]

How to make it to high stakes winning if iam losing money at micro stakes? XD
God bless

 

[Tammy]

This is great! Looking forward to seeing some interesting discussion.

 

[Station_Master]

What counts as high stakes?
NL1000+? NL5000+?
Would you consider NL500 high stakes? (ZOOM pool on PS is going to run soon BTW as legendary fish Bean is making an appearance tonight)

 

[Station_Master]

How did you start playing high stakes, did you work through the stakes? And are you playing professionally?

What would you say the biggest differences are v mid stakes (NL50-200)?

 

[Jean-Guy]

How to make it to high stakes winning if iam losing money at micro stakes? XD
God bless

Perhaps think of it as a ladder. Learn by playing and plugging your leaks by reviewing hand histories. There is also a fine book on microstakes by Alton Hardin: Master Micro Stakes. I do believe this give you good opportunities to beat the micros and go to the next step of the ladder. Patience is adviced though.

 

[Jean-Guy]

What counts as high stakes?
NL1000+? NL5000+?
Would you consider NL500 high stakes? (ZOOM pool on PS is going to run soon BTW as legendary fish Bean is making an appearance tonight)

I would say NL1000+ It is only at peak hours on PokerStars you might find action on NL5000. But not always.
Thanks for the tip.

 

[Jean-Guy]

I started at $50. Read many books whilst playing. Took a span of time to slowly - very slowly - climb the ladder, always having a conservative BRM. I found that a 70/30 model suits me best. The 30% studying is very important.
The biggest difference comparing mid- and high stakes is primarily the level of aggression. With some exceptions you basically only find default TAG+ and LAG players high stakes. The higher stakes the more LAG playing you see.
Another difference is the GTO. The midstakes players are off course well versed in GTO. At the high stakes you see more deviation - and thus exploitable - moves from GTO. GTO simply isn’t treated with the same respect at the high stakes.
If you can expect 7-8 BB wins pro hour midstakes 4-6 BB are more likely at the high stakes. So is the volatility. There can be huge swings. This makes tilt management even more important.
I spent many years getting a ph.d and have a fullfilling job. I have never aimed to be a pro. I know some, and they say it is a very lonely job. Most quit after some time. All the glamour you see in the poker shows on TV has very little resemblance to a typical pro.

 

[Jean-Guy]

Another very important aspect of high stakes poker is trust. Over the years several pokerrooms have gone broke or otherwise vanished, i.e. Full Tilt, Ultimate Bet, T6. And the defunkt Absolute Poker even had super users. Full Tilt was essentially a Ponzi Sceme. Since then poker has been more regulated. Especially in The EU. In my country poker sites must apply for a licence to be legal. And they must pay 17% in taxes. GG Poker won’t pay this tax and thus they can’t operate in my country, where poker winnings by the way are tax free.
If you have, say $200,000 at a poker site, it is off course über-important that your money is safe and secure. To me only PokerStars feels safe. For twenty years I’ve had zero negative issues with Stars. Withdrawals are smooth and fast. Sweat the game, don’t sweat the payout. There are other sites I simply don’t trust. The biggest is the iPoker network. Here, several skins - typically those with a sportsbook section - has dropped poker from their portfolio. It seems like Bet365 is in the process of a hostile take over. They are private owned by a woman who is said to be the most greedy person in England. You could call it prejudice but I also have no faith in Asian pokersites.

 

[Station_Master]

I started at $50. Read many books whilst playing. Took a span of time to slowly - very slowly - climb the ladder, always having a conservative BRM. I found that a 70/30 model suits me best. The 30% studying is very important.
The biggest difference comparing mid- and high stakes is primarily the level of aggression. With some exceptions you basically only find default TAG+ and LAG players high stakes. The higher stakes the more LAG playing you see.
Another difference is the GTO. The midstakes players are off course well versed in GTO. At the high stakes you see more deviation - and thus exploitable - moves from GTO. GTO simply isn’t treated with the same respect at the high stakes.
If you can expect 7-8 BB wins pro hour midstakes 4-6 BB are more likely at the high stakes. So is the volatility. There can be huge swings. This makes tilt management even more important.
I spent many years getting a ph.d and have a fullfilling job. I have never aimed to be a pro. I know some, and they say it is a very lonely job. Most quit after some time. All the glamour you see in the poker shows on TV has very little resemblance to a typical pro.

Yeah i think that's not too surprising that LAG is the best strategy as nit style will only get so far and rake is lower. Surprised what you say on GTO, but certainly it is easier to deviate with more theoretical knowledge.

In terms of winrates though, I am pretty sure no mistakes pros are making 7-8bb/100 and 4-6 at high stakes sounds way too high - 2-3bb/100 is way more realistic.

 

[Jean-Guy]

Yeah i think that's not too surprising that LAG is the best strategy as nit style will only get so far and rake is lower. Surprised what you say on GTO, but certainly it is easier to deviate with more theoretical knowledge.

In terms of winrates though, I am pretty sure no mistakes pros are making 7-8bb/100 and 4-6 at high stakes sounds way too high - 2-3bb/100 is way more

Well, if you think 4-6BB/100 is way too high that is your assumption. So you think I’m wrong and I mean - based on millions of hands played - that you are wrong. Disagreements can be good.
Please note that I write 4-6BB pro hour and not per 100 hands.

 

[Suns of Beaches]

Giving his posting history the chance that this guy Jean is a huge troll is very very high. I doubt any successful highstakes player just randomly pops in a forum full of freerollers writing the stuff he does.

He basically gave it away now with the unrealistic winrates.

Just no way...no way.

And otherwise post Screennames or other evidence of u being a successful highstakes-player @Jean-Guy

Thanks.

 

[Suns of Beaches]

You should ask admin. I would disregard your comment as envy. And why should you not be frustrated about something you seemingly know nothing about. Cheer up mr.

Strange that in all these years reading pokerforums, u are the first (online)-Player I ever saw mentioning BB/hour as Winrate and not BB/100 hands 🤔

U might fool some here but to me. I read basically all ur posts so far and there is no way u are some winning highstakes-player, lol.

 

[Jean-Guy]

When to play and how long to play? And how many at the tables? And what about multi tabling?
Most high stakes action on PokerStars is generally in the evening Central European Time. This suits me fine. But you should be up for the challenge and this is not always the case. After a stressfull day at work I don’t play since this may have a negative impact on my game. You have to be able to play your A-game. Otherwise you’re toast.
As for the lenght of a session, I prefer to play two hours. Nothing more, nothing less. This can be contra-productive if you are running hot. So be it. There is one exception though. If there is a live one at the table I linger on.
At a 6-handed table there often are 3-5 players. This off course means that you have to adjust your play in the game accordingly. If there are two players and it’s Heads-Up I’ve found that the Nash Equilibrium often kicks in making no player having a real edge.
The results in the single session don’t mean much. It is just a snapshot of a never ending session. As for multi tabling this is what pros must do to pay their bills. I do not play poker for a living and only play one table. With no exceptions.