An established winning (recreational) player doesn't need a B/R

[codewarrior]

Discuss.

You are a recreational player. You proven you are a winning player. You can afford to pop money into your account if necessary. B/R requirements do not come into play for you. Play as you like, when you like.

[lastchance]

You've got to make sure you're not playing too high. A bankroll is a very good idea, IMHO.

[ilya]

Yeah, I agree. I don't even understand how anyone could disagree.

[YourFoxyGrandma]

I don't think there's even an arguement to be made here.

[codewarrior]

[ QUOTE ]
You can afford to pop money into your account if necessary

[/ QUOTE ]

Not busting your balls. Just interested in opinions. Thanks for the response.

[lastchance]

Aite. But you've really got to at least keep track of how much you lose. If you can afford to drop 200 buyins without worrying about it, then fine. :P

[The once and future king]

But in a sense the money that they keep in there Bank Account is there BR they just havnt deposited it.

This is what keeps them from playing the 1000+50 SNGs.

[codewarrior]

200 buy-ins is alot. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

More to the point of what I'm getting at - you are an established winning player. Now you play for relaxation only, but still have some semblance of sanity in your game selection. i.e., I want to slum 20 $6 turbos tonight, or I'm going to sweat out 5 $215's... The hypothetical player has a winning expectation at either, one more than the other.

[maddog2030]

They do come into consideration depending on your goals.

To get to the main point though, you're playing in semantics. There's a distinction to be made between your actual bankroll and your immediate working bankroll. Money doesn't necessarily have to be in your poker account (or even your bank account, for that matter) for it to be considered part of your bankroll. If you're willing to spend it on poker, it's your bankroll.

Look up Aleomagnus' (sp?) thoughts on the subject.

[codewarrior]

Never played the guy. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[durron597]

[ QUOTE ]

You proven you are a winning player.


[/ QUOTE ]

How did you do this without a BR?

[maddog2030]

Haha, well I assume that means you're probably good friends with him and are already fully aware of what he has to say. Or maybe you ARE him. Stop confusing me.

[codewarrior]

The plot thickens... No, I'm not AM. Have I been away that long?

[codewarrior]

I wasn't a "recreational" player before, and followed the B/R guidelines, moving up the levels in the "accepted" 2+2 manner?

Discuss.

[Mr_J]

"Re: An established winning (recreational) player doesn't need a B/R"

Any money they are willing to spend on poker is BR.

[codewarrior]

By definition, a B/R is that money set aside, such that, a winning player will never get broke by statistical corrections.

Discuss.

[Moonsugar]

BGO

[Mr_J]

"By definition, a B/R is that money set aside, such that, a winning player will never get broke by statistical corrections."

Money set aside in the future is still BR. He won't go broke. If he has 1k for poker this week and loses it, he hasn't lost his true bankroll. He has only lost his 'session' bankroll.

If a nine-to-fiver can put 1k a week towards poker every week for as long as he works, his bankroll is 1k x # of weeks he works.

[AleoMagus]

Maybe you ARE me and just don't know it. Ever see fight club?

And yes, I agree with the concept put forth in this thread.

Regards
Brad s

[Slim Pickens]

As soon as a proved it to myself that I am a winning player [albeit a modest (ROI-wise anyway) winner], I reverted to the AleoMagus method of bankroll management. I don't advocate anyone not proven to be a winning player try it.

Slim

[hesbala]

tHIS IS a good topic.

[jj_frap]

I'm an SnG player and deposited $100 into PokerStars less than a week ago...I've had a moderate amount of success at the $5 + $0.50 level, and I've decided that my formula for moving up will be:

1. 20 x (buy-in - registration fee)
2. Sustaining that amount for 1 - 2 weeks at the lower level before moving up.

I'm currently playing $5 + $0.50, and I will move up to $10 + $1.00 once I have $200 and decide that the calibre of my play is too high to justify staying at the lower level.

I don't play turbos though: I like having a good 30 minutes of playing tight and moderately weak poker so that I can get a feel for the table, the exception being when I hit a monster or run into a real fishcake (i.e. Somebody dumb enough to call my TPPK down with middle pair or worse the majority of the time...They're common at low levels, even on a reasonably strong site like PokerStars). As I believe that the most important skill to master in low buy-in SnGs of 1 to 3 tables is pre-flop bubble play in latter rounds, the main thing that I look for when I scout out my opponents in the early round is whether or not they are aggressive enough in their play to defend their blinds with mediocre to average holdings so that when the blinds reach a significant level, I can determine whom I should steal against, from what position I can steal from them, what holdings can I salavage if I get cold-called or re-raised (Not that the former is very scary when you have position), how much I have to raise to steal from them (Typically, I'll raise between 2 - 4 times BB in later rounds, regardless of whether I'm stealing or raising for value, unless I'm making a move with a marginal holding or pushing a premium hand against an aggressive player willing to double me up or sacrifice their tournament on my altar. (There's nothing better than getting a player who will play hands like AT or KQ against just about any raise to call your pushes when you have something like QQ or AKs.)

[Ogre]

[ QUOTE ]
You can afford to pop money into your account if necessary.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is pretty much an extention to your BR.

[tjh]

If you are a proven winning player then your online account keeps growing and growing right ?

Why then would you ever need to put more money in there ? Maybe you take some out to go on trips or something.

[Stoneii]

To me it depends IF your session bankroll at any one time affects (effects?) how you play. Although I qualify as that recreational player who has both a session bankroll and the ability to add more to it if required, and is a (very) modest winning player, I think I play much better when my online(session) bankroll is in a healthier state than when I feel I'm dropping in funds too regularly.

Now I know the prerequisite is that I've to be a winning player and to suggest regular top-ups isn't the action of a winning player, however, we've all walked the variance tightrope.

stoneii