Cash Game Theory

[bluechip270]

I have been playing the NL 600min buy in game with blinds 10-20 at Commerce Casino for the last 3 months. And I have noticed that I always come up a lot in the beginning then it slowly goes down. So I came up with this strategy, but I am not sure if it is a good/correct one to have. I sit down for 4grand, and once I come up 1grand, I leave the tbl and go home.

Tell me what you guys think,
Thanks

[threeonefour]

your system is based on a fallacy... ill let others elaborate


EDIT: but seriously, you should be willing to play as long as you have a positive expectation at the table. Quit when its time to go home or when you no longer have a postive expectation at that table at that time

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: but seriously, you should be willing to play as long as you have a positive expectation at the table. Quit when its time to go home or when you no longer have a postive expectation at that table at that time

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the boiler plate advice about continuing to play a long session is dribble.

Whether you're still awake, or playing well or whatever doesn't matter. After a certain point you need to protect your profits. The cards won't keep hitting you, the bad players at the table will leave, etc.

With enough experience, we can tell when we've hit the wall as far as pushing for more profit. In the stock market, the term would be momentum. The momentum of your game decreases.

You could still have a positive expectation as far as playing the players at the table, but there is still a gut feeling that develops that says 'time to go'.

Leaving the table with a rack or more of profit is always looked at with jealousy. Nobody thinks to themselves "Gee, that guy should have stayed because he had positive expectation." Instead, the thought is "I wish that was me".

[meow_meow]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: but seriously, you should be willing to play as long as you have a positive expectation at the table. Quit when its time to go home or when you no longer have a postive expectation at that table at that time

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the boiler plate advice about continuing to play a long session is dribble.

Whether you're still awake, or playing well or whatever doesn't matter. After a certain point you need to protect your profits. The cards won't keep hitting you, the bad players at the table will leave, etc.

With enough experience, we can tell when we've hit the wall as far as pushing for more profit. In the stock market, the term would be momentum. The momentum of your game decreases.

You could still have a positive expectation as far as playing the players at the table, but there is still a gut feeling that develops that says 'time to go'.

Leaving the table with a rack or more of profit is always looked at with jealousy. Nobody thinks to themselves "Gee, that guy should have stayed because he had positive expectation." Instead, the thought is "I wish that was me".

[/ QUOTE ]

Try as I might, I can't detect are sarcasm/satire.
wow.

[ChewyMint]

I think if you're playing no limit, and the game is beatable, it isn't worth leaving up $1K in a game that size. No limit is all about doubling through, in my opinion. When I play no limit, I play tight until I have every covered by quite a bit, and then work on bullying the players who are now "shortstacked" in relation to my chip stack. I think you will end up winning more per hour if you give yourself a chance to acquire a big stack to work with.

ChewyMint

If he's just a regular cash game player then I agree he should try and maximize the winnings at NL but if he's a pro then going home with a 25% profit every day would be about the best thing he could wish for.

[SNOWBALL138]

[ QUOTE ]
you should be willing to play as long as you have a positive expectation at the table.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is limit advice.

I think this is bad advice for no limit. Let me explain.

Lets say that your bankroll allows you to gamble about 10k on a single hand. You buy in for 3k, and then you double up twice. All of a sudden, you have 12k, but by winning, you've ended up playing outside of your bankroll!

This is assuming that someone else has you covered.

[okayplayer]

[ QUOTE ]

Lets say that your bankroll allows you to gamble about 10k on a single hand. You buy in for 3k, and then you double up twice. All of a sudden, you have 12k, but by winning, you've ended up playing outside of your bankroll!


[/ QUOTE ]

If you are buying in for 3k and your BR is 10K, you are SEVERELY underrolled.

I personally like playing with a big stack, and it seems OP does also, but the key is to continue to play your A game. I believe quitting after posting a win of X for each session is very poor practice. You should play for as long as the game is good and you are feeling/playing well.

[PapiChulo503]

What are you doing in the beginning that your doing different in the end?

Has the texture of the game changed?
A couple different players sat down?
Are you still making correct decisions?(is getting tired affecting your play)


I was having the same problem for a while and these were a few of the questions that I asked myself. The thing I found about my game was that as soon as I doubled my buy in I began to play differently. My starting hand range would increase and I was making too many decisions where I was gambling. It was all psychological for me.

[PokrLikeItsProse]

Maybe your opponents play a bit "weak-tight" against you to gather information cheaply and you win a few pots. Then, once they figure you out, your stack shrivels up.