Ridiculous short stacks at the Party $100/$200 game

[SpaceAce]

I'm not even remotely rolled to play in the game mentioned in the title but I decided to have a peek at it tonight while I played my regular games. I'm watching a table with on guy sitting with $494, one with $700 and one women (at least a female avatar) who had $500 when I opened the window and has been down as low as $200 several times. Are there really that many people playing in that game who are playing so close to the felt or just plain scared? Are these the gambling addicts Party has been trying to protect for so long with their limited selection of higher-stakes games? It's obvious to me that, in general, the people sitting with one big bet suck at the game.

How long do you suppose you $100/$200 sharks will be able to feed off of these underrolled, underskilled marks? In addition to the three tiny stacks, I see three others with 5-9 bets on the table. The game just doesn't look very healthy with so little money in play on the tables. Do you think these guys will bust once or twice and bounce back and forth between limits or will they self-destruct completely and leave the $100 pond short of fish stock?

SpaceAce

[bugstud]

as long as the novelty and flow of these stacks remain, they will be fine.

[yanicehand]

Last night I saw two people from my buddy list (20/40 running short) sitting at 100/200 with under 700$ in front of them. Sigh.

[A_C_Slater]

I'm watching them right now. It's like watching a 1-2 game. I just saw a 26BB pot get taken down.

[Deftoner]

Awesome avatar.

[Paluka]

I think a lot of people who don't normally play on the Party skin have had trouble getting money quickly enough onto Party. I know that is my problem.

[bugstud]

[ QUOTE ]
Last night I saw two people from my buddy list (20/40 running short) sitting at 100/200 with under 700$ in front of them. Sigh.

[/ QUOTE ]

one of mine sat with 10k. haven't seen him since.

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a lot of people who don't normally play on the Party skin have had trouble getting money quickly enough onto Party. I know that is my problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

deposit 2500 via neteller. hit the back button, repeat until 10k is reached. at 7500 they say "please email us a copy of your liscense so we can verify etc. etc. " complete the scan and email and you can hit back and repeat till you run outta money.

-Barron

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think a lot of people who don't normally play on the Party skin have had trouble getting money quickly enough onto Party. I know that is my problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

deposit 2500 via neteller. hit the back button, repeat until 10k is reached. at 7500 they say "please email us a copy of your liscense so we can verify etc. etc. " complete the scan and email and you can hit back and repeat till you run outta money.

-Barron

[/ QUOTE ]\

Ahhh yes, but I ahve to get that money into Neteller first!

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]
Last night I saw two people from my buddy list (20/40 running short) sitting at 100/200 with under 700$ in front of them. Sigh.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I wonder about that aspect, too. What's this doing to the games under $30/$60 that so many of us play.

SpaceAce

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm watching them right now. It's like watching a 1-2 game. I just saw a 26BB pot get taken down.

[/ QUOTE ]

That was my impression, as well, at least on the occasions when I watched at night/in the early morning.

SpaceAce

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a lot of people who don't normally play on the Party skin have had trouble getting money quickly enough onto Party. I know that is my problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hadn't considered that but it does make sense. However, wouldn't those people be better advised to just wait a week or whatever to get some money in their account rather than play on very short stacks? Also, while this explanation may explain some of the shortish stacks, I doubt it covers people playing with 1-4 bets in front of them.

SpaceAce

[AlexSem]

Do you guys realize the proper bankroll for a game like 100/200?

Take 500BB, that's how much? My head is spinning. 100k?

I think 100/200 anyone with less than 60k as their bankroll is asking to go down and go down hard.

I am not sure how many high rollers who can spare 60k we have on these boards, less than a dozen?

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]
I am not sure how many high rollers who can spare 60k we have on these boards, less than a dozen?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to nitpick, but your bankroll is not money you can "spare". There have been plenty of times since I started playing poker where I've had wads of money, thousands of dollars, and didn't have a penny to spare.

SpaceAce

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am not sure how many high rollers who can spare 60k we have on these boards, less than a dozen?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to nitpick, but your bankroll is not money you can "spare". There have been plenty of times since I started playing poker where I've had wads of money, thousands of dollars, and didn't have a penny to spare.

SpaceAce

[/ QUOTE ]

i disagree.

my bankroll is indeed money i can "spare." that is, all money pulled OUT of neteller and spent, loaned to mommy, used to buy brother stuff, is no longer considered to be in my bankroll. i have a graphing calculator and store total amounts at each site and at neteller as a letter (N = neteller etc..) adding those letters up = my bankroll. all of it is "money i can spare." if you can't "spare" it then you can't afford to lose it. if you can't afford to lose it then it doesn't belong in a gambling bankroll.

and i dont think 100k is a proper bankroll for 1/2. in fact, i have promised myself that if my total poker bankroll drops below 100k i will be dropping limits.

hope this helps.

-Barron

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am not sure how many high rollers who can spare 60k we have on these boards, less than a dozen?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to nitpick, but your bankroll is not money you can "spare". There have been plenty of times since I started playing poker where I've had wads of money, thousands of dollars, and didn't have a penny to spare.

SpaceAce

[/ QUOTE ]

i disagree.

my bankroll is indeed money i can "spare." that is, all money pulled OUT of neteller and spent, loaned to mommy, used to buy brother stuff, is no longer considered to be in my bankroll.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then it's not really poker bankroll money, is it? It's just cash you have for spending. You said yourself that the money you spend is no longer considered part of your poker bankroll which sort of proves my point. If it's your poker bankroll, it's not "spare" money. If you play poker on your spare money, that's a completely different situation.

SpaceAce

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am not sure how many high rollers who can spare 60k we have on these boards, less than a dozen?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to nitpick, but your bankroll is not money you can "spare". There have been plenty of times since I started playing poker where I've had wads of money, thousands of dollars, and didn't have a penny to spare.

SpaceAce

[/ QUOTE ]

i disagree.

my bankroll is indeed money i can "spare." that is, all money pulled OUT of neteller and spent, loaned to mommy, used to buy brother stuff, is no longer considered to be in my bankroll.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then it's not really poker bankroll money, is it? It's just cash you have for spending. You said yourself that the money you spend is no longer considered part of your poker bankroll which sort of proves my point. If it's your poker bankroll, it's not "spare" money. If you play poker on your spare money, that's a completely different situation.

SpaceAce

[/ QUOTE ]

ok, i see what you're saying. and yes i agree, sorry. money in bankroll is not "spare" money. its dedicated to a purpose like an investment in a mutual fund.

-Barron

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]
ok, i see what you're saying. and yes i agree, sorry. money in bankroll is not "spare" money. its dedicated to a purpose like an investment in a mutual fund.

-Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's a pretty good way to say it. That's all I was getting at.

SpaceAce

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you guys realize the proper bankroll for a game like 100/200?

Take 500BB, that's how much? My head is spinning. 100k?

I think 100/200 anyone with less than 60k as their bankroll is asking to go down and go down hard.

I am not sure how many high rollers who can spare 60k we have on these boards, less than a dozen?

[/ QUOTE ]

I can think of more than a dozen off the top of my head.

[baronzeus]

I think the problem is that the "Beginners" room and the "100/200" room are right next to eachother on the list.

[Nigel]

[ QUOTE ]
is a proper bankroll for 1/2. in fact, i have promised myself that if my total poker bankroll drops below 100k i will be dropping limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Barron,

Without prying too much into your personal finances, what do you think a safe 1/2 BR is? 100k allows you to lose 40k and still be very nicely rolled for 30/60 where you could get the 40k back in one month if needed. Seems relatively "risk free".

I have always been very cautious with BR management, but I have recently been thinking that I have been much too conservative as I assume many of the posters here playing 1/2 through 3/6 are not all operating with 1/4 million dollar bankrolls and they seem to be getting by.

Nigel

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
is a proper bankroll for 1/2. in fact, i have promised myself that if my total poker bankroll drops below 100k i will be dropping limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Barron,

Without prying too much into your personal finances, what do you think a safe 1/2 BR is? 100k allows you to lose 40k and still be very nicely rolled for 30/60 where you could get the 40k back in one month if needed. Seems relatively "risk free".

I have always been very cautious with BR management, but I have recently been thinking that I have been much too conservative as I assume many of the posters here playing 1/2 through 3/6 are not all operating with 1/4 million dollar bankrolls and they seem to be getting by.

Nigel

[/ QUOTE ]


id say a better br is at least 600 bets. 750 for virtual certain safety. so if you really wanted to be sure, go w/ 150k. but 120k is fine imo. but like i said, im not comfortable w/ just 100k. think of a 150bb downswing there...thats 30k. and you also have to consider how much more aggressive 1/2 is than 30 and how much more calling down you have to do so you dont get run over.

some poeple who play with me consistently notice how tight i am. i am definately tighter than what i was at 30/60 in most spots except after the flop. since i play so tight, i go to the showdown more often given i see a flop for a number of reasons that i wont list here but should be clear.

hope this helps
Barron

[AlexSem]

[ QUOTE ]

id say a better br is at least 600 bets. 750 for virtual certain safety. so if you really wanted to be sure, go w/ 150k. but 120k is fine imo. but like i said, im not comfortable w/ just 100k. think of a 150bb downswing there...thats 30k. and you also have to consider how much more aggressive 1/2 is than 30 and how much more calling down you have to do so you dont get run over.

some poeple who play with me consistently notice how tight i am. i am definately tighter than what i was at 30/60 in most spots except after the flop. since i play so tight, i go to the showdown more often given i see a flop for a number of reasons that i wont list here but should be clear.

hope this helps
Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

What's your VPIP, PFR, Aggression factor?

Maybe it's just me but tight people get labelled as just that, tight. At 30/60, people DO have pokertracker and they WILL see your PFR percentage. How can you make any money?

/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[baronzeus]

[ QUOTE ]
since i play so tight, i go to the showdown more often given i see a flop for a number of reasons that i wont list here but should be clear.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm trying to understand this statement. You go to showdown more because you play more hands, right?

Ever since I bumped my VPIP to 24 I've been going to a lot less showdowns than when it was 18ish.

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
How can you make any money?


[/ QUOTE ]

your right. i dont.
-Barron

[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
since i play so tight, i go to the showdown more often given i see a flop for a number of reasons that i wont list here but should be clear.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm trying to understand this statement. You go to showdown more because you play more hands, right?

Ever since I bumped my VPIP to 24 I've been going to a lot less showdowns than when it was 18ish.

[/ QUOTE ]

other way around.

since i play tight preflop, i go to showdown more given i see a flop. the rest should explain itself.

-Barron

[baronzeus]

Err, that first "more" should read "less". Mistype, but I understand.

[alThor]

[ QUOTE ]
ok, i see what you're saying. and yes i agree, sorry. money in bankroll is not "spare" money. its dedicated to a purpose like an investment in a mutual fund.

-Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

But suppose you had money in mutual funds, and had other money for poker. And suppose you had a downswing that would cause you to drop limits. If poker pays better than your fund, wouldn't you be willing to reallocate your "investments" (move money from the fun to poker) in order to stay at the higher limits (assuming higher limits pay better than lower limits)? Yes. This is just rebalancing your portfolio.

You really should think of bankroll as all the money you have, beyond what you need to sustain a basic lifestyle. (When I make a general statement like this, it assumes the investor in question plays a profitable game.)

alThor

[SpaceAce]

[ QUOTE ]

But suppose you had money in mutual funds, and had other money for poker. And suppose you had a downswing that would cause you to drop limits. If poker pays better than your fund, wouldn't you be willing to reallocate your "investments" (move money from the fun to poker) in order to stay at the higher limits (assuming higher limits pay better than lower limits)? Yes. This is just rebalancing your portfolio.

You really should think of bankroll as all the money you have, beyond what you need to sustain a basic lifestyle. (When I make a general statement like this, it assumes the investor in question plays a profitable game.)

alThor

[/ QUOTE ]

I think BANKROLL = TOTAL INCOME + ASSETS + CHANGE IN COUCH - BARE MINIMUM NEEDED TO LIVE is more of a degenerate gambler's equation than a sound financial strategy.

Books 1-7, excellent. Books 8-10, not so much. Have you read the latest?

SpaceAce

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a lot of people who don't normally play on the Party skin have had trouble getting money quickly enough onto Party. I know that is my problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think neteller deposit has a limit of 2500/day, is IGM or other method higher?

Kenny

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]

and i dont think 100k is a proper bankroll for 1/2. in fact, i have promised myself that if my total poker bankroll drops below 100k i will be dropping limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

that's very high bankroll requirement, if you are playing short of 100-200. but anyway, it's nice to hear that you are doing well =)

Kenny

[newhizzle]

anyone know why empire dosent have these big limits?

i cant come anywhere near playing in them right now, but just curious