Hello all, quick question.

[Markulous]

Hey, I'm a new guy to these forums. I've pretty much got BS down(I'm practicing every day) and I'm getting better at Hi-Lo. I've made a little money in the past just kind of half-assing it but until recently I've never really practiced and used a science to win. So if I was winning back then I would think I'd at least continue that with what I know now.

Anyway enough about me. My question was this: If someone were to pursue playing cards as a career or a serious hobby which would be more lucrative: BJ or Texas Hold Em? I'm a little bit better at BJ but I'm okay at Hold Em too. Just wanted some opinions. Thanks.

 

[moo321]

Hey, I'm a new guy to these forums. I've pretty much got BS down(I'm practicing every day) and I'm getting better at Hi-Lo. I've made a little money in the past just kind of half-assing it but until recently I've never really practiced and used a science to win. So if I was winning back then I would think I'd at least continue that with what I know now.

Anyway enough about me. My question was this: If someone were to pursue playing cards as a career or a serious hobby which would be more lucrative: BJ or Texas Hold Em? I'm a little bit better at BJ but I'm okay at Hold Em too. Just wanted some opinions. Thanks.

Depends on the games available. Multi-tabling online poker with a bonus is the best of all, but very few can do it effectively. Otherwise, double deck blackjack is very good, back-counting good shoe games is pretty good. Live poker games can be good, but it's very dependent on the players.

A better question to ask may be: using the bankroll I have, what game offers the best return per hour at an acceptable level of risk?

 

[shadroch]

I'd say that top-tier poker players make much more than the top-tier BJ players. Poker players get endorsements,write best selling books.BJ players need to shun publicity so they get no endorsements and BJ books sell a fraction of what poker books do.

 

[moo321]

I'd say that top-tier poker players make much more than the top-tier BJ players. Poker players get endorsements,write best selling books.BJ players need to shun publicity so they get no endorsements and BJ books sell a fraction of what poker books do.

That's true. That's partly because you can play $1k-2k limit poker in live games, whereas it's hard to get above mid black chips in blackjack without attracting a lot of attention. But again, it all comes down to bankroll and what games are available. Also depends on how good you are at poker...

 

[Markulous]

So essentially, assuming you're skilled enough, poker has the higher possible payout?

I'm newer to poker but I can usually do pretty good(even though my Mouse strategy annoys some people). I think I'll learn both pretty well and see how I do. I really don't know if I'll ever be good enough to make a career out of it but if I am I'd be more than willing to practice hard to do so.

 

[zengrifter]

So essentially, assuming you're skilled enough, poker has the higher possible payout?

No, BJ is still better IF you know what you are doing. zg

 

[shadroch]

There seem to be an awful lot more millionaire poker pros than BJ pros out there.But its two entireley different skills and games.
People will happily lose money just to sit in on a game with Doyle Brunson.
No casino is willing to part with money just to get Ken Smith to play in their casino.

 

[RenoRenagade]

Anyway enough about me. My question was this: If someone were to pursue playing cards as a career or a serious hobby which would be more lucrative: BJ or Texas Hold Em? .

Both ...

Thats the way I like it . And even more specific , master 1 poker game and be the 1 trick pony and use this to build your bankroll. I mastered 7 card stud as I found most amatures make way to many costly mistakes in stud. I mean texas holdem is common and there is always a game out there but you are years away from considering a it a serious hobby. It took me like 4 years to get to the point where I can consistantly make it into the money in tournaments(at least 75%) and understand the complexity of NL cash games. And most importantly an ability to read other players. I dont even tell anyone about the reads Ive made where I won hundreds in a hand and the ability I have to call out someones bluff. because its the I made the read that saved me hundreds because I was able to fold and understand I was beat.

But I like Blackjack for its complexity, only difference is I have to try and bluff at the house and lead them to think im a sucker when indeed they are the sucker . Its also more relaxing as you will not lose hundred in one hand to a bad beat. I mean you know how much you are betting and risking. Unlike poker where if you got 1k in front of you in a NL game then your entire stack is at risk at any given time. You can lose your entire stack with AA in holdem and lose huge chunks of your stack when you have a huge + count. Sometimes the dealer gets the Blackjack and you the hard 16. and AA isnt always going to win. So all in all their one in the same. As long as you tune your skills you will win in the long run and thats all that matters.

 

[moo321]

So essentially, assuming you're skilled enough, poker has the higher possible payout?

I'm newer to poker but I can usually do pretty good(even though my Mouse strategy annoys some people). I think I'll learn both pretty well and see how I do. I really don't know if I'll ever be good enough to make a career out of it but if I am I'd be more than willing to practice hard to do so.

IF you can multi-table online, then that's both the highest earning potential, and the best leverage of a bankroll. But it's EXTREMELY difficult to have the discipline to play at a high enough level. Running a blackjack team would be a very strong leverage of a bankroll, as well.

 

[Kasi]

A better question to ask may be: using the bankroll I have, what game offers the best return per hour at an acceptable level of risk?

But poker doesn't have an EV or stan dev stuff, I don't think anyway. So you have nothing to measure it against.

Not saying there may not be an advantage in poker with it's popularity and, I gather, maybe an awful lot of truly bad players that make a ploppy look like a genius lol.

 

[Chapel]

But poker doesn't have an EV or stan dev stuff, I don't think anyway. So you have nothing to measure it against.

I poker playing friend of mine has a saying (which I am sure he stole from somewhere): "In poker you don't play your hand, you play the person across from you."

You would have to basically construct a probabilistic analysis of a person's reactions to specific events (pretty much impossible unless you have hour of their play on tape) in order to calculate an EV for a specific strategy.

 

[Kasi]

I poker playing friend of mine has a saying (which I am sure he stole from somewhere): "In poker you don't play your hand, you play the person across from you."
y.

Exactly lol. I guess it wouldn't hurt to at least spend some time and try to learn some basic probabilities of cards. Then you know it's 1 in 500, call his bluff and get screwed lol.

 

[Chapel]

Exactly lol. I guess it wouldn't hurt to at least spend some time and try to learn some basic probabilities of cards. Then you know it's 1 in 500, call his bluff and get screwed lol.

Oh yeah, there is definitely math involved. Especially if you want to know what the odds are of you improving your hand or figuring out the probabilities of higher hands (in something with visible cards like Texas Hold'em). But the psychology is the real science behind it.