I read a post yesterday that I found hilarious.

The thread was discussing different books and one of the posters indicated that you should be an “experienced” Hold’em player, with 100+ hours of play, before you start reading Sklansky, because his books were just too advanced. Now I happen to agree that most of Sklansky’s books to require experience. I’m just not sure that 100 hours should be considered experienced. Actually, I’m not sure 1000 hours should even be considered experienced.

Let’s break down 100 hours, at 10 hours of play per week that’s 10 weeks, or 2.5 months. Ten hours per week might be a bit low. When I started, I played 2 days a week about 8 hours per day or 16 per week. So I guess I would have been experienced after 6 weeks. With online poker now I probably play 30 hours per week. I could be experienced in only 4 weeks. A month that is real easy. Even at 1000 hours of play, it would take less than a year.

Maybe we should look at it from the hands you played. After all quality does mean more than quantity. On line play is quite quick, and you can realistically be expected to play 50, or 60 hands per hour. So, 100 hours equals 6000 hands. If we break that down a little further, since 62% of all starting hands are absolute garbage. That means that we could have played 3800 hands if we play all suited cards, any two connectors, any two paints, any pair, and of course any ace regardless of kicker. Of course most of those hands are actually quite marginal. We have had pocket aces 27 times. That would mean we have improved those aces to trips are better, what, 3 times? Definitely experienced. One Thousand hours makes so much more sense. Shot by then we will have improved our pocket rockets 30 times. That is plenty of time to explore all of the possible situations that might occur with trip aces or better.

Of course our 100 hours of play involve all sorts of games. 25c/50c Limit, No-Limit. Shucks I’ve even played in a $5/10 Limit game for a couple of hours and a $2/4 No-Limit game. I’ve played in lots of freerolls, and I try to play one or two $20+1 singles everyday. I’ve sat at tables with nothing but fools and once even played against a guy who bet or raised every time the action was on him. I played a FullTilt last week and we went for over 10 minutes and only played for the blinds. That was the tightest table I have ever seen. I had been playing for about a week and I won a pot with over $100 in it, the biggest pot ever. Most importantly, I win all the time. I’ve never had three losing sessions in a row. I’ve got to be experienced.

Okay guys, now that I’ve got your attention. I’m not making fun of the limits that anyone plays. You’ll find me at any limit from time to time, and I have no problem with play money. The limit you play is a function of your bankroll not your skill. I often spend time on the play tables with friends or working on a particular poker problem. I know that you are all, brilliant but spend a little time to consider what you are saying. Your “worst bad beat ever” isn’t. Your evaluation of Super System isn’t that valid if it is the only book you have read. Do you know how foolish it sounds when someone posts? “I’ve only been playing Hold’em for 6 months but Hellmuth’s book, Play Poker like the Pros is the best ever.” Before you post, take a little time to consider what you are about to say.

GL

Sarge

Editors Note: Sarge has written articles for me for over two years now, and has his own poker information site at www.bestpokerguide.net