He recommends 10-15 buyins to play PLO for a living (2 Viewers)

Anthony Martino said:
I don't think she thought she was bluffing. You really think she called off half her stack OOP trying to hit a Q, J or T (which she blocks) to run a river bluff?

Nah, she was going to pay me off if the board paired K, 7 or 5 on the river
Click to expand...
On the one hand, these livestreams are great learning/teaching tools.
On the other hand, too much information equals too much analysis equals insanity.
You booked a win.
Also fuck her.
 
Anthony Martino said:
But if we abuse casino comps roulette is better!
Click to expand...
There are reasonable strategies just for this type of play. I love roulette, it has the highest vig in the place but I can't get enough of it, abet I play dollars in side mostly, and for fun, with a typical stop loss @ 300, last time I played (last weekend) I won 150! and that was exciting and or enough fun for me.
 
Machine said:
There are reasonable strategies just for this type of play. I love roulette, it has the highest vig in the place but I can't get enough of it, abet I play dollars in side mostly, and for fun, with a typical stop loss @ 300, last time I played (last weekend) I won 150! and that was exciting and or enough fun for me.
Click to expand...

Back when I was still in Tampa and just starting out on this PLO journey, the Tampa Hard Rock allowed poker to count towards earning their higher tier rewards cards still (they stopped it the year after I got it)

But I had only started playing in late September so was going to be short a little bit before the cutoff to earn their Elite membership (which was the highest tier you can have except for invite-only X-Card for the high rollers)

So I went to their electronic roulette game (because they didn't have actual tables) and just kept putting it on black and spinning a bunch so I could earn enough points to qualify for the Elite card.

It gave me some discounts at the buffet, various giveaways/freebies, hotel rooms plus access to a special parking level. And because of Covid they wound up extending my card for another year (at that point, poker no longer earned points towards the tiers so I wouldn't have qualified otherwise)
 
Anthony Martino said:
I don't think she thought she was bluffing. You really think she called off half her stack OOP trying to hit a Q, J or T (which she blocks) to run a river bluff?

Nah, she was going to pay me off if the board paired K, 7 or 5 on the river
Click to expand...
I guess that's benefits of being a donkey...
 
Anthony Martino said:
I'm $1.2 billion short. Guess no 12-hour drunken headsup 1/2 sessions for me vs Ivey

Also, dnegs saying 20 buyins applies to NLHE. Generally PLO has higher recommended bankrolls due to variance
Click to expand...

But variance cuts both ways and in most cases you are getting two to one on your money in Omaha, which is not the case with NLHE. Because of the greater disparity in equity between the games, bluffs are easier to get through in NLHE.

I am not sold that one requires a much bigger bankroll than the other. The swings due to variance over the course of a six hour session are arguably greater in PLO, as there is a greater opportunity for drawing hands, but that shouldn't impact the profitability of the game any more than NLHE over the long term.

If I am wrong, wouldn't it be wiser to play NLHE for a living?
 
Mojo1312 said:
But variance cuts both ways and in most cases you are getting two to one on your money in Omaha, which is not the case with NLHE. Because of the greater disparity in equity between the games, bluffs are easier to get through in NLHE.

I am not sold that one requires a much bigger bankroll than the other. The swings due to variance over the course of a six hour session are arguably greater in PLO, as there is a greater opportunity for drawing hands, but that shouldn't impact the profitability of the game any more than NLHE over the long term.

If I am wrong, wouldn't it be wiser to play NLHE for a living?
Click to expand...


I'm no expert on it, but everything I've read from people I think know what they're talking about generally suggest that PLO requires a larger roll to handle the swings than Hold Em does.

In addition, I know from what I've read and experienced that a PLO game at a certain stake level plays bigger than the same stakes of NLH. And I believe PLO provides a larger hourly earn rate than Hold Em, given there's less study material out there and it's a more complex game than Hold Em.
 
Anthony Martino said:
In addition, I know from what I've read and experienced that a PLO game at a certain stake level plays bigger than the same stakes of NLH. And I believe PLO provides a larger hourly earn rate than Hold Em, given there's less study material out there and it's a more complex game than Hold Em.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%. on the profitability margin. The equities are much different in PLO versus hold-em, which as you alluded to, which is why PLO is much harder to solve. On the other hand, players today are much more adept at NLHE. That is why, having played a considerable amount of both at home games and in casinos, I am questioning whether one needs to have a much deeper bankroll for PLO versus NLHE at stakes below $5/$10. I can't speak to larger games.

Interesting subject.
 
Last edited:
Anthony Martino said:
I'm no expert on it, but everything I've read from people I think know what they're talking about generally suggest that PLO requires a larger roll to handle the swings than Hold Em does.

In addition, I know from what I've read and experienced that a PLO game at a certain stake level plays bigger than the same stakes of NLH. And I believe PLO provides a larger hourly earn rate than Hold Em, given there's less study material out there and it's a more complex game than Hold Em.
Click to expand...
0vbcn1uk7v571 (1).jpg
 
Anthony Martino said:
And he recommends someone with a 1k bankroll just go play 1/2 or 1/3 NL Hold em and "win a few hundred bucks"

Uh, no. If you have 1k in your roll you can't play for a living, you need a fucking job

And to play PLO you need 30-60 buyins to play for a living

How does this guy have 2x my sub count???

Click to expand...
OP:
so you hired this guy to generate dead money and posted this to cover your ass?
well...nothing wrong with that ;)
& the rest: I love this tread (and OP)! :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:
 
EmptyPocs said:
OP:
so you hired this guy to generate dead money and posted this to cover your ass?
well...nothing wrong with that ;)
& the rest: I love this tread (and OP)! :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

He's helping to send underolled people to me so I can bust them and send them to KFC for a job app

And now I have a hankering for fried chicken...
 
Anthony Martino said:
And he recommends someone with a 1k bankroll just go play 1/2 or 1/3 NL Hold em and "win a few hundred bucks"

Uh, no. If you have 1k in your roll you can't play for a living, you need a fucking job

And to play PLO you need 30-60 buyins to play for a living

How does this guy have 2x my sub count???

Click to expand...

What an absolute joke. If I only had a 1k bankroll to play 1/3 NL I'd probably just try to run it up on blackjack. Ace from space baby!!!
 
Mojo1312 said:
It is a little irrational to feel the need to have such a large bankroll, but in part, we are irrational creatures. How many of us have gone on a losing streak where we have blown through 30 to 60 buy-ins? Seriously.
Click to expand...
I don't think the idea of having a 50 buy in bankroll is to anticipate a 50 buy in downswing, but instead an opportunity to survive a significant downswing, perhaps of half of that, without being scared money. Also, for example if for example one goes through a 20 buy-in downswing to 30 buy ins, one could choose to raise the bankroll in terms of buy-ins by downstaking instead of playing scared money. I imagine if one goes through a 20 buy-in downswing it gets psychological, what's to stop me from going down another 20 buy-ins from here if it just happened. Then I have to get a real job.

FWIW, I have never played long enough or consistently enough to be a "pro." Frankly, I make more as a computer guy than I ever could in any poker game around here. I have a couple friends and family members that are pros (one living in Vegas), so I understand their thinking, and this is how I would approach having a large bankroll if it were my living.
 
Last edited:
Does this growth to his channel look natural to you guys? I think the Professor is buying subscribers to make himself appear more legitimate, as his growth defies logic and despite his doubling in subscriber count in just a handful of days his views don't match up with these new subscribers (his videos get equal or less views than my own with 4x the sub count?)


He had 3K subs last I checked, now he has almost 7k, all gained within the past few days lol

1.png



2.png
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

Anthony Martino
Want To Play On A PLO Livestream In Austin With Me?
Replies
6
Views
652
Goldfish
Goldfish
navels
Looking for NL/PLO players for our unraked online home game
Replies
0
Views
354
navels
navels
GreekRedEye
He Checked All the Way to the River. What Would You Do?
Replies
22
Views
1K
GreekRedEye
GreekRedEye
3
How do you explain to someone why they weren't invited to a game?
2 3 4
Replies
112
Views
4K
doctorchips
D
Anthony Martino
My First Time Ever On A Livestreamed PLO Game
2 3
Replies
65
Views
3K
Anthony Martino
Anthony Martino
Back
Top Bottom