Jump to content

With The Bankroll On The Line


Recommended Posts

your dad knows how much you love to play poker and gives you $2,000 to enjoy yourself. you have dreams of becoming a pro and this is your last chance to build a bankrollhmmm.read comprehend much?
This fight is stupid. Mostly because the concept is incredibly dumb. How can anyone never have money for poker again? That's just absurd in the extreme. There are always ways to save and scrape together a couple hundred dollars and try to rebuild a bankroll. Now, if you're wife is going to ban you from playing poker again if you lose, then maybe there's an argument here. But, let's face it, if you're a winning player you're probably gonna need to divorce the ***** anyway for being irrational.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 223
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It really depends on your preferences/attitudes towards risk. There's no right or wrong answer.Personally, I would fold since $1200 is my entire bankroll but feel really sick for giving up so much +EV on the table.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Part of being a good poker player is eliminating situations that will put a hard decision on you. You did not do this.You not only should excersize good bankroll management to deal with downswings, but you do so so that you can play your best game at all times.If at any time any decision you make in a single hand takes your bankroll into account, you have done something wrong.I know the OP said "given that you've done this..." but I just can't sympathize. It's like saying, "Given that you've shot yourself in the arm, can anyone recommend a good way to grow it back?"It's kind of why you don't play cappers with any regularity because if you make your straight there is always a possibility for someone to have a better straight. Avoiding tough situations is +EV.
Are we in General where people answer "Bankroll management" to every question asked? It's a fun hypothetical question, and as I posted in another thread yesterday it all depends on how much utility we gain from playing poker. The fun of the game can not be ignored in this process, nor can the utility gained from having money our **** of a wife doesn't have access to. At the end of the day I gotta think this is an easy laydown. While it may be a +EV decision in poker terms, it's -EV in life terms.
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're going to re raise to 900, you are positioning yourself for the call of your entire stack.That's the flaw in the situation I see. If I'm scared money I'm not re re raising w/ half my stack and then laying down when the odds are correct for a properly bank rolled call. Call/fold the initial re-raise. Pumping to 900 *45% of your FINITE bankroll* and then dumping you're definitely never going pro.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But since we're heads up against the worlds tightest player, we should always raise because he'll fold anything less than top set. Or at least that's the impression im getting from the OP.But then... we dont really know what his betting range is since tight doesnt say anything about how aggressive he is.And similarly, how the hell is it that we managed to get heads up on an extremely coordinated board with a table full of super loose players?

Link to post
Share on other sites
now a hand comes up where everyone folds to you in the small blind. you raise the tightest player in the world to 120 with K :club: Q :D .the flop comes J :D 10 :D 2 :) . you bet 120. he raises to 300. you raise to 900 and he shoves all in.
This question is silly, lol. First off, why reraise the flop, I like to call.
Link to post
Share on other sites
This question is silly, lol. First off, why reraise the flop, I like to call.
Because our equity is through the roof.However, since we are playing scared poker, we should call, probably.
Link to post
Share on other sites
you're out of college and can get a job as an accountant making 40K a year. unforunately your wife has expensive tastes and 40K after taxes gives you just a bit more than ramen every night. if you get a raise she'll just spend more. ...how do you play it?
I divorce the ***** now, because in 7 years, you're going to be "that piece of **** that can't do anything" in your own house. Oh, and the poker thing, ****in call. Losing the 2 grand is going to be a lot less painful than your ****ing marriage. But you know this; this is why you mentioned her.
Part of being a good poker player is eliminating situations that will put a hard decision on you. You did not do this.
Bingo. Why the re-raise? Moron.
Link to post
Share on other sites

This call is -EV for the same reason the Martingale betting system is a poor one.You are going to go broke here more often than not. Once you hit that wall it's all over and you just have a big loss with no long-run to realize your theoretical profit.Of course, playing short-rolled in the first place is -EV for the same reason because if you get it all in enough times you are likely to lose at least once no matter how big a favorite you are.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This call is -EV for the same reason the Martingale betting system is a poor one.You are going to go broke here more often than not. Once you hit that wall it's all over and you just have a big loss with no long-run to realize your theoretical profit.Of course, playing short-rolled in the first place is -EV for the same reason because if you get it all in enough times you are likely to lose at least once no matter how big a favorite you are.
Did you not see the graph on page 1 we have 47% equity. Half that money is ours, if you want think this is a fold you should not be playing NL poker.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Did you not see the graph on page 1 we have 47% equity. Half that money is ours, if you want think this is a fold you should not be playing NL poker.
Did you not see the graph on page 1? We lose this hand 57.88% of the time. Only 42.12% of the time will you continue to play poker beyond this hand if you call. Your equity is only theoretical and can only be realized over the long run. If you make this call consistently you won't have a snowball's change in hell of realizing a long-term anything. In fact if you make this call 5 times you have only about a 1.3% change of still being able to play poker.Under the martingale betting system if we had an infinite bankroll and someone to take bets of unlimited sizes, theoretically, we would have an infinite +EV, however, we have to consider the actual conditions and realize that all those times we cannot place the next bet in the sequence we lose big time. It's pretty much the same principle at work in the OP. We don't have only theory to consider, which is why bankroll management is so important.The only +EV decision is to fold and cash out.That being said, I probably call if I got myself into this mess. The odds are good enough to warrant risking not playing poker again. It's just not a +EV decision.
Link to post
Share on other sites

for anyone seriously trying to answer this and sticking to the implied parameters, calling here is most assuredly the dumbest play you could make.IF WE LOSE..WE HAVE NO MORE MONEY FOR POKER!!!EVER! that's the implicationnow, you can talk all you want about divorce, and about +EV, and the raises being a bad idea, etc...Why is this so tough for some of you to understand?Quit trying to put your own solutions and alternatives in.thanks!************************************

That being said, I probably call if I got myself into this mess. The odds are good enough to warrant risking not playing poker again.
wowyou must not expect to make much playing poker over your lifetime of poker playing, if you'd trade like one pot for all other future earnings in a 42% scenario.
Link to post
Share on other sites
wowyou must not expect to make much playing poker over your lifetime of poker playing, if you'd trade like one pot for all other future earnings in a 42% scenario.
Hey, I'm only working within the parameters of the OP. I'm not going to defend that it's a good call but If I had $1,200 left and could risk it with a 42% chance of winning $2,640 I'd probably make the call. It's a gamble, not a smart decision. Then again, sitting 20/40 with my last 2k wasn't a smart decision either.I still maintain that call or fold, the only smart thing to do is walk away after this hand. You have no +EV in this situation, period.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why risk 1200$ to win 2,640$ in one hand for %42 chance while we are guaranteed(sp?) to win that 2640$ and a lot more on the long run if we play in our bankroll.(He is a winning player)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why risk 1200$ to win 2,640$ in one hand for %42 chance while we are guaranteed(sp?) to win that 2640$ and a lot more on the long run if we play in our bankroll.(He is a winning player)
Not in this game he isn't. You have no chance of beating this game. If he folds, stands up and drops down to about $50NL then yes, folding is correct.Is it still inconceivable to take a big risk here for a big reward? If we win this hand we could then drop out of this game and start at $100NL.To answer your question, if I got myself into the exact situation from the OP, I would see that I have over 1k in the pot so I might as well call off another $1.2k with great pot odds to have over $3,600 or go broke. I understand why this is a bad call but that doesn't mean qualitative factors can't suggest a call.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Not in this game he isn't. You have no chance of beating this game. If he folds, stands up and drops down to about $50NL then yes, folding is correct.Is it still inconceivable to take a big risk here for a big reward? If we win this hand we could then drop out of this game and start at $100NL.To answer your question, if I got myself into the exact situation from the OP, I would see that I have over 1k in the pot so I might as well call off another $1.2k with great pot odds to have over $3,600 or go broke. I understand why this is a bad call but that doesn't mean qualitative factors can't suggest a call.
I understand.What you are saying is if we decided to play outside of our bankroll and sat down on this game we have to take this chance.What i am saying is if its all about money then folding,standing up and finding a game suitable for our bankroll and winning unlimited money on the long run is more +EV than calling and expecting to double up on a %42 chance.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand.What you are saying is if we decided to play outside of our bankroll and sat down on this game we have to take this chance.What i am saying is if its all about money then folding,standing up and finding a game suitable for our bankroll and winning unlimited money on the long run is more +EV than calling and expecting to double up on a %42 chance.
I think we are in complete agreement then.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand why this is a bad call but that doesn't mean qualitative factors can't suggest a call.
only if you are a losing player who would just as soon never play again.***************8
finally, people start understanding the question.
you're preaching to the choir :club:
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...