$2,000-$4,000 game

[andyfox]

For those of you in Southern California, there has been a mixed $2,000-$4,000 game going on at Commerce of late. Plenty of open seats.

I'll take 1% of any regular 2+2 poster who wants to buy in for $50,000. Now you only need 99 others.

[Phat Mack]

I'll take 1% of any regular 2+2 poster who wants to buy in for $50,000.

How much do the players have in front of them? It seems to me that a $50,000 buy-in would be scared money - It's only 12 BB's. Do you really want to put me in that short? /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

[B-Man]

I agree with Phat that $50k isn't nearly enough to sit at that table. Are the players in this game maniacs, or just wealthy? The biggest game that goes on any regular basis at Foxwoods is $150 - $300, though sometimes it goes higher (especially during the World Poker Finals).

[andyfox]

$50,00 is 12.5 big bets, exactly the amount I buy into a 20-40 game for.

4 handed game I saw had about half a milliion on the table.
The $5,000 chips are a pretty color.

[andyfox]

I don't know enough about the poker world to have recognized the players. Maybe someone else saw the game or heard about it and can help us out.

[Zeno]

I'll go 2% but Andy has to play. And he has to raise with a pair of duces. /forums/images/icons/wink.gif At 4-handed the variance will kill you with only 50k. Better to take the 50k and invest in the 5/10 and sometimes 10/20 pot-limit games at the commerce. /forums/images/icons/grin.gif

-Zeno

[J.R.]

Reports indicated that Ted Forest and Gustavo Hansen (your 10K no limit winner) were playing, amongst others.

[D.J.]

Alright Andy, I'll volunteer to play, I'll put up $10K, now all we have to do is find out who wants to put up the other $39,500, I've already got you penciled in for $500. Also, it'll be fun having the hundred people that staked me sweating the action.

-D.J.

[Glenn]

I don't know why I know this but I think I read it was the two you mentioned, Chip Reese, and Todd Brunson. Not exactly your dream game. But who knows maybe Johnny World, Chau Xiang, and Howard L. will show up and soften things up /forums/images/icons/smirk.gif .

[snakehead]

curtis bibb has been there, too. I think they're playing a little too high for flakes. jennifer passed on the game as well. I think these guys are in town for the $125k tourney at the hustler a week from sunday.

[mike l.]

if someone of snakehead's caliber was going to play then id more than match andy's stake.

im wondering though: how's your omaha or stud games snake? seriously. i would think you would be tempted to play some mix games since you regularly play higher than all of us. you play those anywhere as sharp as your hold em skills?

[PokerBabe(aka)]

Well Andy, since the chips LG, let's do it. At that level, style clearly matters /forums/images/icons/wink.gif . Babe /forums/images/icons/heart.gif

[snakehead]

I usually play in mix games these days. that's all there is in az, and the mix games at the lapc were better than the holdem games (they were also higher limits). I even got to play in a half-holdem half-lowball game with gabe kaplan.

and I've been playing stud for longer than I've been playing holdem. my weakest games are lowball and 2-7 triple draw (which I'm pretty sure was designed to give the money back to the live ones).

[Tommy Angelo]

Let's say that the minimum buy-in for the monster game is the usual ten-times-the-big-blind: $20,000. And let's say our hero plays $20-40 for a living and he has a comfy but not overly so $40,000 to his name. Hero could reason that he has too much -- yes, a bankroll too big -- to play in the big game.

He reasons thusly:

My risk of ruin with $40,000 is many times less than it is with $20,000. So if I had only $20,000, I'd buy into the big game because what the hell, I'm going broke anyway, might as well take a shot. But because I have $40,000, it would be crazy to take half (or more!) of that and pretty much play craps with it in the big game, and take an essentially 50-50 risk of dropping all the way down to the ruin-risking $20,000.

(If it sounds like I'm throwing a dart at the theoretically-inflated difference between 20K and 40K, that's only because I am.)


Tommy

[Clarkmeister]

Caro wrote something similar that I always thought was spot on. I think it went something like "A big bankroll is worth protecting, a small one isn't."

[Phat Mack]

The $5,000 chips are a pretty color.

That's talked me into it! (That, and Clarky.) Now all I need is another 99 backers, plus one more to lend me bus fare to L.A.

[andyfox]

You'll definitely be the only player who arrived at the game by bus. /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

[mike l.]

first im not full time pro like dynasty. i have decent income coming in from home business. i do like having extra money though and i do like staying in action. but i just dont see my bankroll thinking as i did a year ago.

before when i won a lot in a short period of time i would think oh good now all this money is my bankroll and im gonna start playing higher and push push push. and play like constantly and irritate my wife and irritate you all with a bunch of fancy play posts and on and on. well no more.

i still play a lot sometimes, but what i would rather do is SPEND my bankroll as i win more and more. spend spend spend. wife and i left the kids with grandma (theyre finally old enough) for the first time in 9 years to go up to san jose to watch agassi play voltchov and have a nice time: a few hundred out of the old bankroll stack. wife wants to paint and redecorate our humble little cabin: several more hundred come out of the stack. arent we carrying a little heavy on the old credit cards: several thousand outgoing! my 5 year old is being good and helping mommy by cleaning his room: "here's a $100 bill son"!

and i still have a bankroll! and im playing better and less frantic and scared and weird and restless and tilted than ever! and i book a loss and dont feel so bad!

and i still think buying into a 30-60 w/ $300 or 20-40 w/ $200 like i see so often is ridiculous and ill never do it. what does make me a little upset is all those times i had so much dough and i never enjoyed it before going bust and struggling and feeling crazed cause oh my god ive only got $2000 (or $3000 or $1000 or $500) left and should i sit in this 20-40 game and oh boy what does mason have to say about this and how come i cant read any of these charts in this book and how come i cant calculate my SD correctly? could it really be that high number?

i have lots of money right now and im spending lots on great people and things and stuff right now and my game is not suffering as i thought it would, it's being set free from anxiety and tilt. im winning because ive studied the living sh*t out of the game and i play excellently especially compared to my competition and i dont need to horde like $20k or something so i can take shots higher and higher. when things turn around, run bad, etc ill just smile and take a seat at the old 6-12. ill always have $400 to play 6-12.

[Vehn]

"I'm running good" would have sufficed.

[mike l.]

""I'm running good" would have sufficed."

okay so i gushed. but really there was more to it.

the point is the difference (or maybe "balance" is the better word) between "im running good so ill use all this money to risk and invest back into the whole bunch of sadsack cynical gambling addict cardroom parasites" and "im running good so ill use this money to make my life and the lives of the ones i love better". sorry i didnt make that clear enough.

[PokerBabe(aka)]

Yes, and I would be the only player who LGPG /forums/images/icons/grin.gif /forums/images/icons/heart.gif

[D.J.]

Mike,
Once again I sooo agree with you about spending the money that I win. Of course not all of it, but some of it for random stuff. I was really upset w/ myself a little while back b/c I was running pretty well and made something like $7K playing 15 and 20 in 3 days, of course I blew it trying to play 80-160, and when I left the casino after blowing that money, I thought of all the stuff I could have or should have spent the money on rather than taking a shot in the big games. I could have paid off some bills, bought some clothes, bought those $150 sunglasses that I wanted, or just had fun with a couple thousand... but no, I had to "gamble" in the big game and lose it all. Like you, I also feel better when I spend some of my winnings on other things instead of reinvesting it at the tables, then if I lose I don't feel so bad b/c I have something to show for it instead of just stories about running bad.

-D.J.

[mike l.]

"bought those $150 sunglasses that I wanted, or just had fun with a couple thousand... but no, I had to "gamble" in the big game and lose it all."

i think it's key to the success of the winning semi-pro. use those poker winnings to treat yourself to a higher standard of living, dont use it to feed your ego by playing higher than reasonable.

im so taking my kids and wife to hawaii for a week this year and it's all gonna be thanks to the suckers at hollywood park.

compare that goal to:

im so playing 80-160 this year and im gonna be the sucker when i walk out of there stuck six grand.

[Billy LTL]

Great post Mike.

These days the average game I play in is 50-100 or 30-60. Occaissionally I'll play 100-200 if it's really good but never higher. My bankroll is much bigger than the 300 bb recommended by S&M. I'm not disputing their 300 bb recommendation, I'm sure it's accurate for most but it's not good for me.

I don't consider myself a pro, though I live off my poker winnings. I have money put away in case the hard times hit again. I lack the desire, the talent and the nerve to play any higher than I do these days. I know which limits I'm comfortable with, which limits I play well at and I'm no longer stupid enough to push beyond those limits. Lord knows that hasn't always been the case though.

My bankroll doesn't grow. I don't want it to grow very much. What I win I spend one way or another. When I lose for awhile I live somewhat more frugally until it's back up to par. I can play for the rest of my life and never fear growing broke. I think this is quite important for those of us who aren't looking to move up much higher than we already play.

[andyfox]

Your best post ever, Mike. Right from the heart and the gut.

Irritating us should be number zero on your list of priorities; irritating your wife should be number one on your list of things to avoid, but it sounds like you know this.

You've got a loving wife who you love, ditto for the kids. And secondarily you've got poker, and you're very good at it and constantly becoming better and you've got your head on right about it.

You've got it made.