PokerStars homepage
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.


No announcement yet.

I finished 3rd in the 20.00 League game but....

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I finished 3rd in the 20.00 League game but....

    Hello all,

    Yesterday I played 5 league games. Limped into cash and the points in the first with very conservative play. In the next three I changed my tack and went for my decisions when I knew they were right but knew I was risking losing my stack if I got sucked out. Sucked out three times but still very happy with my plays.

    20.00 EST and it is 1am here. Four bottles of Augustiner (optimally fueled with the best beer in the world), ten hours in but feeling confident that I can get to at least the money. I weigh up the options, decide I can reach the cash in two hours. Two hours later I am close to the bubble but very short stacked. I make two good plays and get into the money.

    At this point I figure I am around 1800 points, maybe just around the throttle, but if I can get a top finish I can score big points. I think I will blog about the roller coaster ride later but at after 6am here I am crawling into bed, elated with a third place finish and 15 hours solid poker playing. In fact I end up talking to the better half for another hour about my success.

    Log on about 1pm here expecting about 90 points for over 5 hours work and I see 36 points. 36 points!!! I note that I had just started this tourney at over 1800, 1800.69 if memory serves me correctly. I smile to myself and think well at least we are all in the same boat.

    So, I check a few other players stats who were above and around 1800. A few finished low in the money. Net points gain 21 points!!!

    It is simply not worth playing another three or three and a half hours to gain 15 points if you finish third and I can understand people playing the system and sitting out or just dumping their chips with any two cards, when they have high points in the league already. Crucially, however, it does not provide an incentive for playing your best poker because the gain is so minimal points wise and that is a shame when the school is trying to promote improving play.

    I really believe the points system is due an overhaul that rewards not only consistent play, but the play that gets you to the final table or the top 20.

    The experience was worthwhile though in a few respects: I meet some really nice people, some really good poker players whom I might have otherwise put down as donks and others who see that finishing lower than you are capable of is not giving your best. With a few notable exceptions, most of these players were outside the top 200 and even the top 2000.

    Lessons there for all of us I think, and a clear indication that the points scoring system needs changing. Now I realise no system is perfect but his one can certainly be improved to get itself in line with the objectives of the site. Rewarding robotic play does not help anyone, even the robots, and I list myself in that category sometimes as well.

    Thanks for reading


    I will be back in about 10 hours to see if there is any feedback
    Last edited by topthecat; Sat Mar 19, 2011, 04:27 PM.

  • #2
    you already have a number of throttles in effect. If no throttles, then 3rd is worth about 60 pts. A win is worth 90... if no throttles.
    The numbers that you got sound correct to me.

    6 Time Bracelet Winner


    • #3
      Interesting read and well done. But again and again I see people making this basic error.

      Originally posted by topthecat View Post
      Now I realise no system is perfect but his one can certainly be improved to get itself in line with the objectives of the site.
      Except in one or two specific areas, the league is not to help you improve your play. It is to keep you logging on and away from the competitors. Other aspects of the school will assist you more, but even they are limited. The true learning here comes from studying the more insightful forum posts of some of the experienced members and playing with them in a few of the high profile home games.

      A big thumbs up for your enthusiasm and commitment though. We could do with a few more members like you.


      • #4
        Thanks for the replies both JWK and Darkman.

        My return is an hour and a half later than I expected but I was happy to see some feedback on this post.

        JWK: I am not disputing the scoring at all, I am just saying that the scoring system itself is inept if the real purpose of PokerSchool owners is to be there to witness one of their members take down the WSOP, as I have read in many threads on this site.

        Darkman: Insightful as always and I have great admiration for your poker skills as well as your upfrontedness (is that a word?) as a person. No back doors as they would say at home in Ireland. As a limited player I think the site still has more to offer me and I think I have something to offer the site as well so I hope the relationship will continue to be mutially beneficial for some time to come. As you say there is a lot to be learnt from the posts of some of the more experienced members including your good self and I have already started to incorporate that into my game with positive success.

        I do feel I owe the site a debt of gratitude for allowing me to identify some of the major leaks I had before and I certainly hope that my bankroll will grow enough to allow me to participate in the high profile home games.

        Maybe my background in live games where I come from was my biggest leak. Long before Texas holdem became popular I was playing illegal cash games like Southern Cross(five community cards but you could only use three in the down or across of the five cards displayed, and your own cards were first down, then three up and final card down) or Pudley with five community cards of which you could use three along with your own cards, again first down, thee up and the last card down. Often these games had a wild card like twos or sometimes twos and sevens. You always had to show your hand, even if you bluffed someone off the pot, and bluffing the wrong person in these games could have terminal consequences. Enough said.

        No wonder I ended up trying to win every hand in holdem like the eternal donk. The biggest lesson I have learnt playing on the internet is that you are playing your opponent in a lot of cases and that your cards in comparison to his are only one of the factors that can take the pot down. I have this site to thank for that.

        I still have lots more to learn. I hope though that the site/s can see, that getting a one off WSOP winner every year because of the law of averages means not a lot. The winner of the main event has changed every year since Moneymaker and off course these winners have never made any other great impact than just that one win; they do not compare to Hellmuth, Negreanu, Ivey, Brunson or even Bill Boyd, if you want to go back later.

        If they are really looking for a Pokerstar then they are not looking for someone who can finish just consistently in the money, they are looking for an outstanding individual who will get to the last 20 or the final table in the majority of tournaments they participate in. Someone who will combine consistency , not mediocrity, at the highest possible level like a Carl Lewis or Tiger Woods or Roger Federer of poker.

        That is what the game needs to move to the next level. Why should the genius not come from here?





        X Cookies Information

        We have placed cookies on your computer to improve your experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.