i have officially jumped the shark...poker

[Flasch186]

After an initial deposit of $400 (which I was able to remove later making my $ house $) I was able to play for quite some time. I was able to finish 65th in that one poker tourney wining 1800 which I pocketed 1250 of via check. However since pushing my bankroll all the way up to almost 2K it has been nothing but bad beat after bad beat after marginal playing until it is now all gone It just seemed I was too tight at the wrong times and too loose on hands where I got beat by hands with 3-5% possibilities. So basically when I won a big hand it was for anywhere between 40-120$ but when someone sucked one out on me it was for 350-650$. This wrapped up today with my big flush being sucked out by 55 which eventually became a 5's full of A's full house (hit at the same time as my flush). SO Other than free player points its going to be awhile before I reload. Luckily I was able to pull all of the startup money out on the run up.

just venting.

[Pumpy Tudors]

What stakes were you playing when you went busto?

[Flasch186]

3/6

the entire trip up and always, I had my best successes statistically at that level, although I mixed in some lower stakes here and there.....at least it seemed to me my best results (lol) were at 3/6

[DeeBrownforPresident]

You're putting yourself at risk playing 3/6 NL with a 2k roll, check out
http://www.pocketfives.com/5C57520F-...240CB3E59.aspx, talks about some general bankroll management guidelines.

[Jas_lov]

Yeah, you generally don't want to risk more than 5% at one time. So playing 3/6 with only $2,000 you were way over this which makes the bad beats hurt even worse.

[Flasch186]

So lets say in a few months I put in another 400$ with all the intention of doubling up to take out the original 400...thus meaning Ill be at $400 than up to $800 where I will immediately drop back down to $400. What should I be playing? 1/2? I see a lot of "sucking" out at 1/2 and a ton of looseness, which can be very good but exaggerates your ups and downs.

[stevew]

Honestly, if you want your money back fast, you should move up to 5/10, and if that fails go to 10/20, and so on. Keep doubling the stakes until you get ahead.

[k0ruptr]

Originally Posted by stevew

Honestly, if you want your money back fast, you should move up to 5/10, and if that fails go to 10/20, and so on. Keep doubling the stakes until you get ahead.

thats a great way to lose your house. lol

[stevew]

Originally Posted by k0ruptr

thats a great way to lose your house. lol

it was an homage to the advice of a local FOFC gambling great actually.

[GoldenEagle]

Flasch,

If you are really serious about learning and playing poker then you have to start now. Poker is a game that takes a few minutes to learn but a lifetime to master. For starters, you need to play within your bankroll. That takes discipline, which is a good thing. You need to study the game for at least the amount of time that you play it. If you play for 10 hours a week, then you need to put in at least 10 hours studying that week. There is so much good info out there waiting to be found on any poker game. Bad beats are one thing, but losing your entire bankroll is whole other ball game.

[primelord]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

So lets say in a few months I put in another 400$ with all the intention of doubling up to take out the original 400...thus meaning Ill be at $400 than up to $800 where I will immediately drop back down to $400. What should I be playing? 1/2? I see a lot of "sucking" out at 1/2 and a ton of looseness, which can be very good but exaggerates your ups and downs.

The general concensus is you should have 20-40 buy ins in your bankroll (assuming you are playing in 100 BB capped buy in games). $400 is not nearly enough to play 1/2. $400 isn't enough to even be properly rolled for .10/.25.

If you want to be playing properly rolled you would need to play in a .05/.10 game with a bankroll of $400. If you played 1/2 and bought in for the max buy in you would have half your roll on the table. That is suicide.

[CleBrownsfan]

I've been playing online poker for about 4 years now and I've never played within a bankroll. Of course I play to win $$ and like getting checks from Neteller but I feel the limits I play at it's 1st and foremost just for fun. I usually have between $200-$300 in my bankroll and play the $23+2 or $35+3 6 person table S & G's or .25/.50 NL ring games. Now if I was playing poker for a living I understand the need for bankroll management but when your a casual player does bankroll management really matter? Just my 2 cents...

[Flasch186]

GE

While I like more knowledge and no one wants to get into Poker to lose $$, I think the fact that I yanked my startup $ out ASAP is a sign that I wasn't really in it as a supplemental income Sure I want to win, who doesnt, but there is/was the fun factor. It was an enjoyable ride and I never viewed the bankroll as my bankroll but always as bonus $$, which perhaps is part of the problem...you could say. ..Maybe next time, Ill do better at smaller rated tables

[Pumpy Tudors]

Originally Posted by CleBrownsfan

I've been playing online poker for about 4 years now and I've never played within a bankroll. Of course I play to win $$ and like getting checks from Neteller but I feel the limits I play at it's 1st and foremost just for fun. I usually have between $200-$300 in my bankroll and play the $23+2 or $35+3 6 person table S & G's or .25/.50 NL ring games. Now if I was playing poker for a living I understand the need for bankroll management but when your a casual player does bankroll management really matter? Just my 2 cents...

Well, when it comes to bankroll management, the consensus (20-40 buyins for NL) is to have enough buyins assuming that you can't reload. If you only have $200 in your account, but you're playing NL25 ($25 buyin), you're stretching yourself with only 8 total buyins. If you could just re-deposit another $200 if you lose, though, then it doesn't matter as much.

The bankroll guidelines are generally based around the assumption that you've got your entire bankroll at risk, and you can withstand the downswings to avoid going broke. It's risk of ruin. If you could just drop a little more money in whenever you feel like it, then you're not really going broke.

What's important in your case, though, is variance. You could be the best player in the world, but if you're only playing with 6 buyins, you could lose it all in one or two sessions (especially if you multi-table). Why would you play NL50 instead of NL10 with only $200-$300?

[CleBrownsfan]

Like I said playing poker more of a hobby to me. I do dedicate a lot of my time reading forums/books, ect that is dedicated to poker. Got to love a hobby that actually makes you money

I've been rolling pretty well online for the past 6-8 months and havne't re-deposited in my streak. I'll play the $23 or $35 and when my account gets passed $400 I'll withdraw $200. When I lose a couple of the 23/35's then I'll go back to the $12+1 to get my bankroll up again. So far it's been working very well for me. Last time I checked my ROI is @ 20 something % so I can't complain to much.

[Pumpy Tudors]

Originally Posted by CleBrownsfan

Like I said playing poker more of a hobby to me. I do dedicate a lot of my time reading forums/books, ect that is dedicated to poker. Got to love a hobby that actually makes you money

I've been rolling pretty well online for the past 6-8 months and havne't re-deposited in my streak. I'll play the $23 or $35 and when my account gets passed $400 I'll withdraw $200. When I lose a couple of the 23/35's then I'll go back to the $12+1 to get my bankroll up again. So far it's been working very well for me. Last time I checked my ROI is @ 20 something % so I can't complain to much.

It's good that this is working out for you so far. Here's hoping that it continues to be profitable.

[CleBrownsfan]

I'm sure eventually I'll go broke but this stretch sure has been nice...