Chip Reese comment as applied to Bankroll
 

He was quoted last night as saying he does not play in the smaller ring games because it does not hurt when he loses in those. He was not talking about hurting bankroll, he was talking psyche.

I have noticed that when I am playing within my bankroll 30-50x my buy-in for SnGs, I often take something of a complacent attitude into the game. However, if I play a little beyond my bankroll, I will typically play my top game. My thought is, why not play a few games a little above my bankroll, if I lose then back it down. Anyone take a similar approach? Pros and cons (aside from the obvious con that you run through your bankroll quickly if you are not ready for the next level or are running bad)?

Re: Chip Reese comment as applied to Bankroll
 

If you are thinking about taking a 'mental' approach to the game, then why not focus on having great control of your game when you are within your bankroll?

Chip Reese is a great player and his pressure is not really similar to anyone elses. He knows he can always go beat another game no matter how badly he loses in one.

Re: Chip Reese comment as applied to Bankroll
 

Agreed. I'm customed to play with 10-15 x buy-in bankroll because I just don't have the patience to play tight and make reads in smaller stakes. Though I play 2 and 5 player SnGs and they might have smaller variance than 10 player SnGs.

Re: Chip Reese comment as applied to Bankroll
 

I really like this approach. I usually play $20s, but when I'm on a high and feel like I'm playing my top game, I'll try out a $30 and give it my all. That's how I moved up to $20s. While building your bankroll on a lower level, it never hurts to dip into a higher level, just don't dip TOO high. Always remember, if you can't afford to lose what you're gambling, don't gamble it.

Re: Chip Reese comment as applied to Bankroll
 

Good point. One of my weakness as a player is that I am not nearly as focused when running routinely within my bankroll.

Re: Chip Reese comment as applied to Bankroll
 

It is so much easier for me to play stronger when playing just beyond my limit. If I ventured too far outside my realm, at this point I play at the $30-50 SnG, I push too much and feel uncomfortable.

Re: Chip Reese comment as applied to Bankroll
 

I recently tried a new approach to BR in order to stay safe and also parlay a little at the same time.

I had a home base level and BR of $1000/30+3 level.

I play 4 tables at a time, so if my BR ever got to at least 220 I moved to the 50s to take a shot. I would continue to play at the 50s unless my BR dropped back to $1000.

I think this could work well for any proven good player starting from the 10s and moving up. I took an ass beating at the 50s so I stopped doing this. wasnt worth it for me because I need that money to pay rent.

If you are a winning player at both levels you do this for then it should work. It may give you that edge in your mind you need to play top poker. PLaying slightly out of your means with a backdoor out if there is trouble.

Re: Chip Reese comment as applied to Bankroll
 

[ QUOTE ]
My thought is, why not play a few games a little above my bankroll, if I lose then back it down. Anyone take a similar approach? Pros and cons (aside from the obvious con that you run through your bankroll quickly if you are not ready for the next level or are running bad)?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's a common thing for everyone to get a little bored within their comfort zone, and focus more when they bring a real risk of ruin into play. But...it's a sign of impatience/letting your ego get in the way/lack of discipline...which all = bad poker...

And think of it this way too - if you don't have the discipline to stay at the proper level (BR-wise) when things are going well, well...it's much, much harder to have that discipline (to drop back down right away) when things are going bad...and then you may very well go broke/near broke.

Besides, if you multi-table, you can work in one of the next higher level with your lower level SNGs before you have the BR to play exclusively at the higher level...letting you "take shots" while being adequately BR'd for it.

Re: Chip Reese comment as applied to Bankroll
 

I think the most important consideration isn't how much money you have in your Party or Stars account, it is how much you feel comfortable and can afford to lose. If you make $90,000 a year your day time job, and you have $500 in your pokerStars account, I don't see anything wrong with playing $55 SnG's. Whereas if you make $20,000/year and scrape together $500 for your account, stick with the $5 SnGs.