Re: Some S+G questions, $200\'s on up and ROI\'s (Pokerstars)
 

I understand. Perhaps its a smack to my ego to have to drop down, but ego has no place in poker. Ill do what I have to do to ensure not going broke. Ive never had to deposit in over a year, and I dont plan on doing so now. I have no doubt I can compete at this level (the 100's level appeared very soft to me) but I am coming to realize that I will need more buyins to handle the swings at these higher levels. I wouldnt consider myself to have been "running good" but I guess I havent ran too bad in order to not lose 10 buyins in a row in over a year of play. Thanks for the advice. Thanks for not assuming Im not a winning player despite the fact my bankroll skills obviously arent up to par. At least my record keeping skills are good enough to have brought to my attention something that needed to be addressed before it was too late. Im glad I came on here and asked. Thanks, Ill keep you guys updated.

Re: Some S+G questions, $200\'s on up and ROI\'s (Pokerstars)
 

One thing I should add. I have approximately 25 buy ins for the 200 level currently. This is b/c I never include my old buy in level in the 10x bankroll. Therefore my total bankroll would be 10 buyins at each level added together. Didnt want anyone to think I started playing the 200's with 2,000 dollars. It was at 4,500 I jumped up, which I know is not sufficient going by what you guys have said..but its not as bad as it probably sounded if you thought I was doing it on 2,000 alone.

Re: Some S+G questions, $200\'s on up and ROI\'s (Pokerstars)
 

yeah, your story sounds a lot better now. HAving 20 buyins looks a lot better than 10...still not really sufficient, but a lot more plausible. You've got a healthy roll for the $100's though.

How many are you playing at once, generally?

Re: Some S+G questions, $200\'s on up and ROI\'s (Pokerstars)
 

Yeah, I had not even thought about the fact that I didnt include my other buy-ins..the reason is b/c if I were to lose the 10x in the 200's...I would have dropped down to the 100's with still a bank of close to 2,500 dollars. This was to ensure (hopefully) that I would never go broke. Regardless, I only play one at a time. I CANNOT multi-table, my ROI drops considerably. I still dont understand how some people can be succesful with 4-8 screens running. Pretty amazing feet at the upper levels if you ask me.

Re: Some S+G questions, $200\'s on up and ROI\'s (Pokerstars)
 

I saw spyhard_spb at a $50 over the weekend. He, er, busted out in 8th.

Re: Some S+G questions, $200\'s on up and ROI\'s (Pokerstars)
 

Who is spyhard?

Re: Some S+G questions, $200\'s on up and ROI\'s (Pokerstars)
 

[ QUOTE ]
Who is spyhard?

[/ QUOTE ]

A player that is on the leader board every month on Party Poker. He actually is almost always in the top 5 players per month. He is also the player whom I was referring to. He actually was playing in a 30+3 tourny. Why? I have no idea. If you pull his name up he is without question on 4 200+15 tables per session.

Re: Some S+G questions, $200\'s on up and ROI\'s (Pokerstars)
 

[ QUOTE ]
1 year later without a single cash out yet, playing 2-3 a day or so

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't believe how negative people are in this thread. OSF has played a year, probably close to 1000 tournaments, and everyone says he has moved up too fast. How long are you supposed to take to move up? Ten years?

I think part of the problem is people have misread what he is doing. It sounds like he has his regular bankroll which is solid for whatever level he is at. He then sets aside 10 buy-ins from his profits for taking a shot at the next higher level. If he loses the 10 buy-ins at the next higher level he drops back down. His regular bankroll is never in jeopardy. So far he has not had to drop back down. IMO, 10 buy-ins is more than enough for taking a shot at moving up.

What a lot of people don't realize is that if you are willing to move down, that effectively double or even triples the number of buy-ins in your bankroll. In other words a player with $2180 has 20 buy-ins at the $100, but if he moves down when he hits $1100 and then again at $660, $440, $220 and then plays until he goes broke he actually has 54 buy-ins.

If you can beat a higher level (and that is obviously a big if), by not aggressively moving up you will in the long run cost yourself a lot of money. Once you are settled in at the level you want to stay at, that is the time establish a 30+ buy-in bankroll.

Paul

Re: Some S+G questions, $200\'s on up and ROI\'s (Pokerstars)
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1 year later without a single cash out yet, playing 2-3 a day or so

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't believe how negative people are in this thread. OSF has played a year, probably close to 1000 tournaments, and everyone says he has moved up too fast. How long are you supposed to take to move up? Ten years?

I think part of the problem is people have misread what he is doing. It sounds like he has his regular bankroll which is solid for whatever level he is at. He then sets aside 10 buy-ins from his profits for taking a shot at the next higher level. If he loses the 10 buy-ins at the next higher level he drops back down. His regular bankroll is never in jeopardy. So far he has not had to drop back down. IMO, 10 buy-ins is more than enough for taking a shot at moving up.

What a lot of people don't realize is that if you are willing to move down, that effectively double or even triples the number of buy-ins in your bankroll. In other words a player with $2180 has 20 buy-ins at the $100, but if he moves down when he hits $1100 and then again at $660, $440, $220 and then plays until he goes broke he actually has 54 buy-ins.

If you can beat a higher level (and that is obviously a big if), by not aggressively moving up you will in the long run cost yourself a lot of money. Once you are settled in at the level you want to stay at, that is the time establish a 30+ buy-in bankroll.

Paul

[/ QUOTE ]

Paul, you are correct. I never include past profits in my new buy in level. I did it this way from the beginning so I could realistically see how fast I could advance through the limits. I knew I may have to move down at some point, but was willing to trade that for being able to give myself a faster shot at moving up. Currently, I have about 5,800 in my bankroll and am still playing the 200's..which i started at 4500. If I lost back down to 2300, i would drop to the 100's and so on. For me to go broke (which I know is a possibility) I would have to lose about 70+ buy ins at this point. I will continue to strive for the 300's and not change my routine..which by the way is at 7,600, but I guarantee this..if I have to drop back down, I will, and that would be a humbling, but crucial decision that must must be made in order to protect my year of hard work. I just thought of something..today is the anniversary of my bankroll..pretty cool.

Re: Some S+G questions, $200\'s on up and ROI\'s (Pokerstars)
 

I agree, I went from the $5.50 limit to the $109 limit in less than 200 plays.

It shouldn't take that many sessions to know if the other players are better than you or worse than you at a particular limit. You don't need to see thousands of results to judge the game.

I tried the $215 limit, but dropped back to the $109. Not because of my wins or losses. I could see after only 10 plays that the players at that limit were better than I care to play against.

Now - if your bankroll is totally fixed, it may be a different story. But I'm sure most of us have other sources of income and can always add to our poker bankroll if need be.