JMoney2681 0 Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 No, I've never played out of my roll... ever....Playing out of your roll, and playing out of your roll with less than 5 buy ins, is totally different. Especially if you're moving UP in limits beacuse the players are "more profitable" at those levels.The reason this all came about is because I had a false perception that the players in thsoe games were a lot tougher than the limits below. I discovered this may not be the case by actually playing in the game.It just so happens the reason that i stumbled into the game was because of a steam/donk incident where improper BR management, and a couple of bad hands sent me on path where I ended up with my last $100 on a 1-2 table. I'm aware of how dumb that course of events was, and the continuation of it may be.The problem is that the people who read this and respond (JMoney) jump on that issue because it can be easily criticized. In turn, the real question I was looking for answers to gets pushed by the wayside.Frustration ensues.Oh, okay then, well, good idea. GL at the 200NL tables...I'm sure you have a better chance making $$$ there than those stupid 50NL tables. Link to post Share on other sites
Actuary 3 Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 Frustration ensues.leave out BankRoll next time then and just ask the other question.And when we say "BankRoll" here among serious players,We are implying that one cannot easily replenish the funds.Otherwise, why limit it to $X.Like now I have $120 on Stars total Poker funds online.And play $11 180 Man Mtt's.But I don't consider that my roll.Not sure forum wide; but in here, you're looking like the retard and Jmoney looks pertey smaht. Link to post Share on other sites
navybuttons 15 Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 in here, you're looking like the retard.maybe to you. but no one in here looks like a retard to me. redpill was probably the most metally challenged person this forum had, and cuin4 had some serious social issues, but other than that all i see are really capable people who have not yet achieved his or her goals and are on the path to doing so. Link to post Share on other sites
antistuff 0 Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 maybe to you. but no one in here looks like a retard to me. redpill was probably the most metally challenged person this forum had, and cuin4 had some serious social issues, but other than that all i see are really capable people who have not yet achieved his or her goals and are on the path to doing so. group hug guys Link to post Share on other sites
JMoney2681 0 Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 maybe to you. but no one in here looks like a retard to me.What a nice, gracious way to say something good about the OP. You little angel, you. Link to post Share on other sites
Actuary 3 Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 JMoney, my opinion, based on reading a large number of posts you've made, is that you are not very intelligent and enjoy using your own arrogance, backed by a false self-perception that you know what your talking about, to boost your own ego.I thought this and his general mis-application of the term Bankroll was not too bright. my sis-in-law has downs-syndrome. I know retarded.And I like NavyButtons.so hugs all around. Link to post Share on other sites
JMoney2681 0 Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 So you're telling me you're not a retard?Ok, you caught me...I'm retarded. And I play 200NL with $900. Happy now? Link to post Share on other sites
BWToth 0 Posted October 20, 2006 Author Share Posted October 20, 2006 leave out BankRoll next time then and just ask the other question.Not sure forum wide; but in here, you're looking like the retard and Jmoney looks pertey smaht.How about next time people just answer the question or don't respond at all.I thought you were one of the good ones Actuary.What is it that makes JMoney look smart? Link to post Share on other sites
JMoney2681 0 Posted October 21, 2006 Share Posted October 21, 2006 How about next time people just answer the question or don't respond at all.I thought you were one of the good ones Actuary.What is it that makes JMoney look smart?Well you certainly aren't acting like you know what you're talking about, and I certainly am. And the stupid fact that you jump into other threads and call me "an idiot" because I told you you're wrong, speaks volumes about your character. Link to post Share on other sites
tallytownFSU 0 Posted October 21, 2006 Share Posted October 21, 2006 maybe to you. but no one in here looks like a retard to me. redpill was probably the most metally challenged person this forum had, and cuin4 had some serious social issues, but other than that all i see are really capable people who have not yet achieved his or her goals and are on the path to doing so. Let's hug it out, *****! Link to post Share on other sites
BWToth 0 Posted October 21, 2006 Author Share Posted October 21, 2006 Well you certainly aren't acting like you know what you're talking about, and I certainly am. And the stupid fact that you jump into other threads and call me "an idiot" because I told you you're wrong, speaks volumes about your character.Um, for the record, i called you a retard.Also, I was referencing the inane remark you made calling that particular OP stupid for his play, which most everyone else actually thought was a good play, i must not have quoted what you actually said, i can find it if you like.Since when are these forums a showcase for people's character? Link to post Share on other sites
JMoney2681 0 Posted October 21, 2006 Share Posted October 21, 2006 Since when are these forums a showcase for people's character?All I'm saying is you're doing a mighty fine job in the Strategy section of the forum. Do what you want. Link to post Share on other sites
Actuary 3 Posted October 21, 2006 Share Posted October 21, 2006 How about next time people just answer the question or don't respond at all.I addressed what I understand. Bankroll managementI don't play $200 NL.I thought you were one of the good ones Actuary.oh don't worry, I amWhat is it that makes JMoney look smart?He's giving good advice and appears more willing to learn and take in other ideas. I basically meant relative to how you are acting in here. No big deal. Carry on. Link to post Share on other sites
BWToth 0 Posted October 21, 2006 Author Share Posted October 21, 2006 He's giving good advice and appears more willing to learn and take in other ideas. I basically meant relative to how you are acting in here. No big deal. Carry on.I'm so oblivious to your underlying insult. Link to post Share on other sites
Zach6668 513 Posted October 21, 2006 Share Posted October 21, 2006 I'm so oblivious to your underlying insult.He does actually give good advice, and he is less annoying that he was as Corp...lol Link to post Share on other sites
BWToth 0 Posted October 21, 2006 Author Share Posted October 21, 2006 He does actually give good advice, and he is less annoying that he was as Corp...lolless being the operative word. Link to post Share on other sites
qyayqi 11 Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 And since i dont' play for a main source of income, why would I want to have a hobby that was boring and had the tendency to piss me off? Jmoney...i've seen some of your other posts and I know we are not going to see eye to eye on thisyour "bankroll" isn't just the money you have online at a specific moment. it is the disposable income you are willing to put up in any given month/year. if you are playing for fun, i assume this means that you can lose your online cash & reload it without much of an effect.if you enjoy the higher level AND your specific bankroll management means not having to worry about losing it all, then i say enjoy yourself. a person can easily spend thousands on any given hobby, so reloading a few times a month to enjoy the level you wish to play at isn't the end of the world as we know it.watch HSP. the amateurs that sit in do it as a hobby. they are overall down in the game, but they enjoy matching wits with a certain level of player. you may have a short-term upswing. you may even have a long-term one. if you're 100% sure you can keep reloading $200-$900 each month to play the level you most enjoy, then go for it. at the end of the day, the people who play seriously will thank you & you will have some great poker anecdotes.the advice here had assumed that the $900 was in fact your entire bankroll. it obviously isn't. go forth and be datamined. Link to post Share on other sites
JMoney2681 0 Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 less being the operative word.You just can't stop, can you? So anyway, how's the 200NL with $900 going for you? Since the 200NL is such a softer game and all, how ya doing? Link to post Share on other sites
BWToth 0 Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 You just can't stop, can you? So anyway, how's the 200NL with $900 going for you? Since the 200NL is such a softer game and all, how ya doing?i'm enjoying this childish game, as well as the $2-2 tables, thanks for asking. Link to post Share on other sites
JMoney2681 0 Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 i'm enjoying this childish game, as well as the $2-2 tables, thanks for asking.I find it funny that the people who often start any form of this so called "childish" game are quick to say, that it is, in fact, a "childish" game. I have never openly insulted you for no reason at all. I came into this thread to try and help you out with poker and maybe you'd learn a thing or two, or maybe you wouldn't. Obviously, you haven't. This page is fairly deep now, and still, you have learned nothing. GL to you and your future poker endeavors. Link to post Share on other sites
BWToth 0 Posted October 23, 2006 Author Share Posted October 23, 2006 I find it funny that the people who often start any form of this so called "childish" game are quick to say, that it is, in fact, a "childish" game. I have never openly insulted you for no reason at all. I came into this thread to try and help you out with poker and maybe you'd learn a thing or two, or maybe you wouldn't. Obviously, you haven't. This page is fairly deep now, and still, you have learned nothing. GL to you and your future poker endeavors.May be, however, the reason I first was frustrated was because people such as yourself immediately attacked a different issue, one that i was well aware of, instead of answering the actual question I was asking, Maybe I should have just left the background story out, but I thought i was more interesting that way.And it takes two to continue these games, and I, for one, refuse to be the more mature party, so until you do, you're just like me. Link to post Share on other sites
JMoney2681 0 Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 May be, however, the reason I first was frustrated was because people such as yourself immediately attacked a different issue, one that i was well aware of, instead of answering the actual question I was asking, Maybe I should have just left the background story out, but I thought i was more interesting that way.And it takes two to continue these games, and I, for one, refuse to be the more mature party, so until you do, you're just like me.Ok let's see here..."Is 200NL easier to beat than 50NL?" Is that your question?NO, it isn't, don't make excuses for not being able to beat smaller games. If you cannot beat 50NL, 200NL is out of the question, period. Link to post Share on other sites
Actuary 3 Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 Anyone have any thoughts about the validity of these ideas? yeah, you don't have a good understanding of Poker, nor short run good luck vs skill.I'm sure you'll think that's a bad answer because it doesn't support you desire to play $200NL. Link to post Share on other sites
BWToth 0 Posted October 24, 2006 Author Share Posted October 24, 2006 yeah, you don't have a good understanding of Poker, nor short run good luck vs skill.I'm sure you'll think that's a bad answer because it doesn't support you desire to play $200NL.Whoa, Whoa, Wait...My question is not about whether the players are better at $200 NL than $50 NL. It is whether is it possible, based on a variety of factors, for me personally, that the $200 game is easier to beat.You, Actuary, are always one of the people that says you need more information about a situation and that there are many many variables that come into play under different cirumstances.So...my question is not as simple as it appears, i'll restate it here, minus that bankroll stuff since no one is able to see past it.First assumption: whether or not the players at $200 or $50 are better, they aren't THAT much better, so the difference can be marginalized based on the following factors:"At the $50 full table patience is a key factor and if you aren't getting cards, it becomes easy (for me) to get sucked into a big pot with marginal holdings. Also it seems that most of the other players at the table are usually waiting for a big hand to try and double as well. In turn it follows that a) you get a big hand and play it aggressively and win only a small pot b ) you get a big hand and get it all in with the best and double up c) you get a big hand and someone else who has been waiting around gets a bigger hand and adios amigod) you get a big hand, someone else gets a big hand, the money goes in and you get sucked out on.e) this based on the idea that it is not smart to bluff or do anythnig stupid at this level. The idea being make a hand and go for it since the players at this level are harder to read because they are more erratic unpredictable, eg. 'there is no way he is holding j4 off suit (he called 8x bb out of position) the only hand that could beat me here, that would be insane, i have to call' boop...turns over j4 off. The up and down swings and stress (granted only $50) generally take a lot of the fun out of the game for me. In turn I lose more going on tilt than winning while playing solidly.However, at the $200 shorthanded table, most people seem to be aggresive all of the time, playing more marginal hands, trying to 'make moves' etc. It turn big hands get paid off on a more consistent basis. Most importantly, personally, it becomes easier to lay down a big hand when I need to because: the money at stake is more valuable to me, I'm seeing and playing tons more hands shorthanded instead of sitting there for an hour and a half waiting for Aces at a full table $50 game.This, in turn, has led me to minimize losses while at the same time winning bigger amounts when i do make a hand. I've haven't completely worked out the intricacies of this idea yet."This still generalized but its more than just: 'are the players better or not?'.I'm not looking for someone to tell me "yes go play at the $200 game, you're awesome". But does any of the above make any sense at all, I think it does. Link to post Share on other sites
Actuary 3 Posted October 24, 2006 Share Posted October 24, 2006 yes, some of it makes sense. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now