forget the bankroll play...

[cliffk110 0]

I am contantly hearing that everyone will go broke if they play outside of their bankroll. allbeit most will. but my situation is this. i have cut my self off from playing a 3-6 game ever again at a casino, even though my bankroll says stay there. i always end up playing the no limit game where everyone usually buys in with 200, and i more often than not come out ahead. so why play at the 3-6 game where most will call a raise with a k-3 offsuit and draw out to beat AA. it just seems like it makes more sense to protect your hands at higher limits where people often only call with strong hands. what is yall's opinion.

[econ_tim 0]

I am contantly hearing that everyone will go broke if they play outside of their bankroll. allbeit most will. but my situation is this. i have cut my self off from playing a 3-6 game ever again at a casino, even though my bankroll says stay there. i always end up playing the no limit game where everyone usually buys in with 200, and i more often than not come out ahead. so why play at the 3-6 game where most will call a raise with a k-3 offsuit and draw out to beat AA. it just seems like it makes more sense to protect your hands at higher limits where people often only call with strong hands. what is yall's opinion.

Your post contains two main ideas. 1) people can play outside of their bankroll2) it is better to play against good players than bad playersthe first idea is OK. it is your money, so as long as you aren't a poker pro play whatever stakes you want.the second idea is stupid.

[zimmer4141 0]

I find it easier to beat competition who has a slight clue what they are doing, as opposed to completely oblivious competition at the 3/6 tables. However, it is usually a good idea to play against weaker competition and inside your bankroll.

[justblaze 0]

I am contantly hearing that everyone will go broke if they play outside of their bankroll. allbeit most will. but my situation is this. i have cut my self off from playing a 3-6 game ever again at a casino, even though my bankroll says stay there. i always end up playing the no limit game where everyone usually buys in with 200, and i more often than not come out ahead. so why play at the 3-6 game where most will call a raise with a k-3 offsuit and draw out to beat AA. it just seems like it makes more sense to protect your hands at higher limits where people often only call with strong hands. what is yall's opinion.

by this logic, you couldnt lose at $4000 - $8000 because the higher you go, the easier it is? i think you should put all your money on a roullette wheel.

[Kendren 1]

I am contantly hearing that everyone will go broke if they play outside of their bankroll. allbeit most will. but my situation is this. i have cut my self off from playing a 3-6 game ever again at a casino, even though my bankroll says stay there. i always end up playing the no limit game where everyone usually buys in with 200, and i more often than not come out ahead. so why play at the 3-6 game where most will call a raise with a k-3 offsuit and draw out to beat AA. it just seems like it makes more sense to protect your hands at higher limits where people often only call with strong hands. what is yall's opinion.

by this logic, you couldnt lose at $4000 - $8000 because the higher you go, the easier it is? i think you should put all your money on a roullette wheel.

Keno. More fun to watch it all go.This could lead to another limit vs NL argument, and I'm not starting it. Suffice it to say if you feel you have a better chance of winning against better opponents, good luck to you. See ya at the soup kitchen.

[cliffk110 0]

no, i am just saying a bunch of scrubs play 3-6 and will not fold their hand till the river. they dont understand the concept of folding if you have bottom pair and someone raises and reraises before your play.

[Pupsta 0]

try playing at the 'casinos' here in fla....the straight $2 holdem, you'll often see family pots, even in raised pots...people call their 59o if they have a backdoor gutshot draw...much worse than the 3/6 i've seen in any casino, but still profitable as hell if you use some semblance of hand selection.

[Governator 54]

...so why play at the 3-6 game where most will call a raise with a k-3 offsuit and draw out to beat AA. it just seems like it makes more sense to protect your hands at higher limits where people often only call with strong hands. what is yall's opinion.

pinch pinch.. muhahaha.

[jsull 0]

no, i am just saying a bunch of scrubs play 3-6 and will not fold their hand till the river. they dont understand the concept of folding if you have bottom pair and someone raises and reraises before your play.

And you still think that's a bad thing? :?

[Erik67 0]

I find it easier to beat competition who has a slight clue what they are doing, as opposed to completely oblivious competition at the 3/6 tables. However, it is usually a good idea to play against weaker competition and inside your bankroll.

I do as well. Chan, Ivey and Brunson have also said that they do better against good players, but they are stupid and don't know anything. :roll: I make more money in 6/12 and 8/16 than in 3/6 or 4/8. Even though I don't have a sacred 300BB bankroll, I don't see the point in playing lower stakes than I can beat. If I lose all my poker roll, so what. I have this thing called a career that provides expendable income.

[Kendren 1]

no, i am just saying a bunch of scrubs play 3-6 and will not fold their hand till the river. they dont understand the concept of folding if you have bottom pair and someone raises and reraises before your play.

And you're not thanking God everyday that they're trying to give you their money? And if you're raising and reraising and losing to bottom pair, what does that say for you?

[justblaze 0]

no, i am just saying a bunch of scrubs play 3-6 and will not fold their hand till the river. they dont understand the concept of folding if you have bottom pair and someone raises and reraises before your play.

ok, you obviously missed the point. i'll try to explain it: GOOD PLAYERS ARE HARDER TO BEAT. YOU WANT TO PLAY AGAINST THE WORST PLAYERS POSSIBLE. IF YOU CANT BEAT BAD PLAYERS, YOU WONT BEAT GOOD PLAYERS. want proof: its called math. that 'scrub' calling 3 cold with bottom pair is making a mistake. the reason its a mistake is that he will lose more money than he will win, based on the mathematical probabilies inherent in the game. Every time he does this, he is losing money. Even when he wins the pot, he is losing money. This money has to go somewhere. This is how you make money. you make money from the money other people lose by committing mathematical errors. The fewer errors being made, less money being lost, means less money for you to win. I dont know why i bother to explain this crap over and over again...

[LuckyMcCatcher 0]

no, i am just saying a bunch of scrubs play 3-6 and will not fold their hand till the river. they dont understand the concept of folding if you have bottom pair and someone raises and reraises before your play.

You are a scrub f you think you can make money from opponents who don't make mistakes. I hear this horrible argument all the time. It always comes from losing players. If you cant beat the 3/6 gme play 2/4. Its simple math. If you make more +ev decisions than your oppnnets than you have to win. You obvioulsy either have not been plying long enough to know whether you cn beat the 3/6 game or you just plain cant beat it. NL is an entirely different game than limit. Just because you can sometimes bet people out of the pot does not make NL a better or easier game for you. Think about it. How can you make money with big hands if noone pays you off? If someone calls these huge bets you are usually beat (remember you think the players are better). Trust me no winning layer thinks your theory holds water. In fact it is the opposite of what is true.

[justblaze 0]

I do as well. Chan, Ivey and Brunson have also said that they do better against good players, but they are stupid and don't know anything.please, show me where this was said. please. I reeeeeeeeeally would like to read this. I make more money in 6/12 and 8/16 than in 3/6 or 4/8. gee, i wonder why that is? could it be that the stakes are larger? Can you tell me what your winrate is in the higher games as compared to 3-6? I doubt it. Let me give you a hint: its probably worse.

[cliffk110 0]

i will be more than happy to prove to anyone here than i am a winning player. i have a excel spreadsheet that has the limits i played, what night, how much i won/loss, avg. win per night, hourly winnings, and total winnings. now i am clearly not the best player and i am not a great player. i am just saying why play the low limits and get called with scrub hands when i have great hands and get called down to the river and get just that rivered. much rather play 6/12 and win.

[Kendren 1]

I do as well. Chan, Ivey and Brunson have also said that they do better against good players, but they are stupid and don't know anything.please, show me where this was said. please. I reeeeeeeeeally would like to read this. I make more money in 6/12 and 8/16 than in 3/6 or 4/8. gee, i wonder why that is? could it be that the stakes are larger? Can you tell me what your winrate is in the higher games as compared to 3-6? I doubt it. Let me give you a hint: its probably worse.

Actually, blaze, I saw on that Fox Beyond The Glory thing Brunson did say he did better agianst better players than not so good ones. So it has been said. But he also said it in the context that they were more predictable, thus making them beatable. JOhnny Chan said in an interview on Poker Superstars II that he does better against the guys he's played against for years, because he knows what they're going to do, it just takes him longer to figure out the strangers. But people take that to mean "Wow, the bet players are the easiest to beat! I need to move up to 100/200, I'll make a killing!"

[Jeff 0]

no, i am just saying a bunch of scrubs play 3-6 and will not fold their hand till the river. they dont understand the concept of folding if you have bottom pair and someone raises and reraises before your play.

wow. you are a newbie. by SSHE and be done with it.

[chuckf410 0]

I make more money in 6/12 and 8/16 than in 3/6 or 4/8. Even though I don't have a sacred 300BB bankroll, I don't see the point in playing lower stakes than I can beat. If I lose all my poker roll, so what. I have this thing called a career that provides expendable income.

Well this is where the bankroll issue comes into play. I like having a large bankroll for playing poker so that I don't have to go into 'career' money to support my hobby of playing poker. Now if you don't mind putting in more money when you lose it, ignore the bankroll rules. 300bb is the optimal that people shoot for overall. For me I've found that ~225 works well enough for me on a regular basis. I'll move up when I feel comfortable that I think I can play there and have the 300bb for the initial transition period. But once I'm comfortable playing there even if I lose down to ~225bb I don't panic as that's part of the swings. But the nice thing is, having a roll for playing I don't have to bring in extra cash that can be spent on other hobbies that don't have an income stream.

[Dweebles 0]

if you are a good player, you will adjust to your opponent whether they are good or bad.

[justblaze 0]

if you are a good player, you will adjust to your opponent whether they are good or bad.

if you are a good player you will avoid other good players. Game selection is a tool in the skilled players toolbox. (shutup, i know that was awkward.)

[HangukMiguk 8]

i'll say this one time and one time onlymake sure you let us know when you go broke.

[Socrates 0]

I am contantly hearing that everyone will go broke if they play outside of their bankroll. allbeit most will. but my situation is this. i have cut my self off from playing a 3-6 game ever again at a casino, even though my bankroll says stay there. i always end up playing the no limit game where everyone usually buys in with 200, and i more often than not come out ahead. so why play at the 3-6 game where most will call a raise with a k-3 offsuit and draw out to beat AA. it just seems like it makes more sense to protect your hands at higher limits where people often only call with strong hands. what is yall's opinion.

I'm not singling you out, I just have to tell you as well.If you can't beat bad players, you'll never beat a good one.My advice would be to become a good player at 3/6 before you continue to venture into 1/2NL. While you are probably better than most at a 1/2 table, you will eventually run into 1 or 2 players that will crush your roll becasue you don't have the skills to play with them. If you're not crushing a 3/6 game where you're getting rasies called with K3, then you need to go back and re-evaluate your game.

[alf13 0]

Some of you don't seem to live in the real world.....Here in Florida in the straight $2 games......they are populated by the worst players on the planet.....Now..you would think that a good player can beat that game in the long run...right?Well....what do you think of a game that is capped every single hand pre-flop with 8 to 10 players going to the flop?It is a slot machine game......Good Hand Selection is the only way to beat that game and you end up beating it for so little money that it's not worth it.....So yeah.....I will tell you this...play the level that you feel you play best at....I could probably beat 2/4 Limit like a drum but I won't play there because the stakes bore me....and by being bored...you might stray from proper hand selection....BTW...screw that 300bb bankroll requirement....about 80% of the pros you hear about have never even given that a thought....Do what you feel...fuk it.

[awnex 0]

i will be more than happy to prove to anyone here than i am a winning player. i have a excel spreadsheet that has the limits i played, what night, how much i won/loss, avg. win per night, hourly winnings, and total winnings. now i am clearly not the best player and i am not a great player. i am just saying why play the low limits and get called with scrub hands when i have great hands and get called down to the river and get just that rivered. much rather play 6/12 and win.

haha just wait until u hit a bad streak and lose most of ur BR if not all of it... ur playing out of ur BR right now and just because u have been on a run doesnt mean its going to last for ever... the 300BB is just cushioning to when u hit those bad constant beats... and if ur BR doesnt support those bad losses your done... and even if u do have a 'career' to deposit more... thats not the point... the point in this game is to win to come out ahead but sure if u want to keep losing ur entire BR in the long run evertyime and can afford to put more into later... then go right on ahead... have fun losing

[Kendren 1]

Some of you don't seem to live in the real world.....Here in Florida in the straight $2 games......they are populated by the worst players on the planet.....Now..you would think that a good player can beat that game in the long run...right?Well....what do you think of a game that is capped every single hand pre-flop with 8 to 10 players going to the flop?It is a slot machine game......Good Hand Selection is the only way to beat that game and you end up beating it for so little money that it's not worth it.....So yeah.....I will tell you this...play the level that you feel you play best at....I could probably beat 2/4 Limit like a drum but I won't play there because the stakes bore me....and by being bored...you might stray from proper hand selection....BTW...screw that 300bb bankroll requirement....about 80% of the pros you hear about have never even given that a thought....Do what you feel...fuk it.

Really? Link 2. Give me direct quotes.