Re: BR disagreement/fallacy
 

[ QUOTE ]
"Nothing is certain, except the fact that you can be certain of nothing in poker."
dogmeat


I like it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am certain that in texas hold them, a Royal Flush beats a full house.


--Zetack

Re: BR disagreement/fallacy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"Nothing is certain, except the fact that you can be certain of nothing in poker."
dogmeat


I like it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am certain that in texas hold them, a Royal Flush beats a full house.


--Zetack

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya, I guess you are right. I don't like it anymore. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: BR disagreement/fallacy
 

Bankroll Formulas
http://support3.com/poker/bankroll/

Re: BR disagreement/fallacy
 

I personally think the posters on this site generally espouse what I would characterize as a "weak tight" approach to BR. Having 500 BB on hand for a game is completely ridiculous unless you're barely a winner at all. Even 300 BB is usually excessive, because for every good player that goes through a 300 BB downswing, there are many who never experience it. It is true that if you play poker long enough you will go through a 300 BB downswing, though everyone here seems to think this means it is somehow likely to happen to a given winning player in his lifetime. It isn't.

Many (not all) of the posts on here from "established" winners who have gone through lengthy downswings are, I believe, from people who are marginal winners with significant leaks in their game that get magnified by the frustration of a downswing. If you're a smart player, are more than a marginal winner (2+ at least), and if you can actually handle a 100 BB downswing without tilting away another 50 BB, you're highly unlikely to experience a 300 BB downswing in your lifetime. So relax about these doomsday BR requirements and play solid poker.

Re: BR disagreement/fallacy
 

[ QUOTE ]
though everyone here seems to think this means it is somehow likely to happen to a given winning player in his lifetime. It isn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have to disagree. It's not only likely, it's inevitable.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find too many players who have made it to limits above 15/30, logged at least 500k hands, and who haven't had at least 1 300BB tanker.

Re: BR disagreement/fallacy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
though everyone here seems to think this means it is somehow likely to happen to a given winning player in his lifetime. It isn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have to disagree. It's not only likely, it's inevitable.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find too many players who have made it to limits above 15/30, logged at least 500k hands, and who haven't had at least 1 300BB tanker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm honestly not trying to be disagreeable, so please don't take it that way, but I know many players like this. Probably 20 at least. Maybe they didn't tell me about their major downsings, but I believe they would have.

And for what it's worth, I have not experienced it, and I am a 15/30-30/60 player who has about 5 years and a million hands under my belt. Perhaps I have been very lucky, but I find that when I go on a 100BB downswing I am usually not playing well. The few times I have gone on 200+ streaks, poor play has been a *major* factor in the losses. I have no evidence or data to back my claims up, but I really do feel that a "pure" 300BB downswing where the player plays close to his A game and still loses 300BB through sheer bad luck is an exceedingly rare phenomenon. I hope it never happens to me, and at the risk of invoking the wrath of the poker gods, I don't expect it to.

Re: BR disagreement/fallacy
 

Its a lot easier to not tilt when your bankroll goes from 500BB to 400BB, than it is when your bankroll goes from 300BB to 200BB.

Also, being forced to move down by downswings is bad, because then you spend much more time recovering.

By the way, I am waiting for 700BB to play 20/40. Of course not all will be on a poker site; more than half will be in my bank account. It's for the idea of knowing it's there just in case.

Re: BR disagreement/fallacy
 

If you're a winner, and you started playing at 300BB, just think how much further ahead you'd be instead of waiting for the extra 400BB ... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: BR disagreement/fallacy
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you're a winner, and you started playing at 300BB, just think how much further ahead you'd be instead of waiting for the extra 400BB ... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Well that's the thing. How can you be sure you can beat a game you never played before?

Re: BR disagreement/fallacy
 

I don't use PT so what should an avg. SD be for both long handed NL and Limit?

Thanks