[AdamL]

No, poker is not an interest garnering activity. The whole point is that the money can be used to create more money. There is a big difference in the dictionary but a small one on paper when we're talking about opportunity costs of not having money. I gather the point itself was clear.

The correct approach is to adjust bankroll based on your evaluation of what you'll need and how likely you are to need it. It just doesn't have to be 100%. "Calculated Risk" is the whole point, whether you are investing or gambling. The way poker players normally manage their bankroll is actually very conservative. (Which is fine, but not necessary for everyone.) The entire business world has been doing just fine using weighted probabilties of both likelihood and importance for their spending decisions with respect to their cash holdings. Maximizing utility often involves making probablistic estimates about what you're likely to need, when you'll need it, how likely you're going to need it, and how much (qualitatively, urgently) you'll need it if you do.

If you're doing that, your approach is best. It's not really proprietary - lol. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Certainly a car counts as "a big money-pit, pain-in-the-ass, somewhat uneccessary, depreciating asset." I know mine does. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

See you shortly...