My friend has a problem with playing out of his bankroll

[Al Schoonmaker]

[ QUOTE ]
Is it even my responsibility to try and stop him from losing his money, or should I just bite my tongue?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it is NOT your responsibility.

You have done your best. If he wants to be a jerk, it is his right.

Just don't say, "I told you so," if he goes broke.

Regards,

Al

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]
He deposited $100 a few days ago and jumped straight into 5/10 shorthanded games on partypoker. Now he's playing 10/20, with a $900 bankroll!

[/ QUOTE ]

Fine, he's playing over his head.

But do you find that you often run your $100 deposit into $900 very quickly?

At least if he comes to his senses and starts trying to control his swings, he's got something to protect.

Which is always more than a great many low-limit grinders can say.

All he has to do is to learn the difference between taking a shot, trying to make a parlay, and committing bankroll suicide.

In some ways, he's well ahead of many of the posters here, who, if you jammed a piece of coal up their collective ass, would be crapping diamonds pretty quick.

He just needs a modification, not an overhaul.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
Now he's playing 10/20, with a $900 bankroll! ... The problem is that his mommy gives him a $100 a week allowance, and he keeps losing the money.

[/ QUOTE ]
I see no problem whatsoever.

First, if he has a budget of $100/week for poker, he doesn't have a $900 bankroll. His bankroll is much larger. $100/week isn't much, but do you realize how much money you have to invest to get $100/week in interest? A winning player who can count on this stream of income should not be nearly as conservative as someone who will have to flip burgers if he loses the $900 in his pocket.

Second, I see no reason for you to be concerned. If he isn't upset about losing the $100 most of the time, and still feels he wants to play $5-$10 rather than $0.50-$1, why should you be upset? It sounds like you have different goals for his money than he does. Let him spend $100/week on the chance of winning big in poker.

If he were desperately unhappy about losing, that would be a problem. If he had no source of income and thought playing above his bankroll was the best way to become a good player, that would be a problem. If he were about to quit his day job because of a hot streak at $10-$20, that would be a problem. I see no problem with someone getting a lot of entertainment within a budget.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
In some ways, he's well ahead of many of the posters here, who, if you jammed a piece of coal up their collective ass, would be crapping diamonds pretty quick.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and if many of the posters here didn't have to use their own money to try it, intead of mom's, many would. Because of this, i don't think he's ahead of many posters here at all.

[ QUOTE ]
He just needs a modification, not an overhaul

[/ QUOTE ]

To truly learn about BR, you really need to use your own capital.

b

[Rushmore]

All of your points about playing with one's own money are valid, and probably better-suited as a response in this thread.

I DO believe, however, that there is a general bankroll cautiousness here at 2+2 which often precludes a real shot at advancement--stake-wise, limit-wise, and skill-level-wise.

But again, I think your points are more valid and valuable than mine as they pertain to the original poster's friend.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
I DO believe, however, that there is a general bankroll cautiousness here at 2+2 which often precludes a real shot at advancement--stake-wise, limit-wise, and skill-level-wise.

[/ QUOTE ]

This may be true, but it's better to be overcautious. It's not just about the BR itself, but the amount of time invested in building it. The higher someones roll, the more they probably want a smaller risk of ruin to help them play more comfortable. This also reduces possibilities of tilt from that angle.

Personally i like GoT's BR idea. (he posted it inside some thread awhile back, no idea where, sorry) He may be a good example of someone you might describe as over-rolled for his limit.

Also, once you bust out a couple times, or live vicariously through someone who has, you see the effects of BR mgt more clearly. It's really something one has to experience rather than just read about.

Fact it, it sucks rebuilding a roll. For whatever reason you lost your roll for.

You don't get near the experience when using someone else money. You're risking nothing. Especially if you know they'll lend you more.

I will agree, though, that on smaller, micro limits, with an easier replenishable roll, one might take a stab a little more often at a little higher limit as the cost is relatively kinda low in comparison. You don't need a full roll at micro or LL to start out. I never did. But you do have to learn BR sometime. It's very valuable, yet very overlooked by many players. That is, until they bust out a couple times. Some still never learn it. Just as some never really learn how to deal with the wave of beats that happen. The earlier someone learns about it, the better. Learn it cheap if you can. Even if it's not the most sexy part of the game.

b

[drdre2001mm]

My parish has its weekly G.A. meetings every Wednesday at 7:30pm. He's more than welcome to come.

[kiddo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I DO believe, however, that there is a general bankroll cautiousness here at 2+2 which often precludes a real shot at advancement--stake-wise, limit-wise, and skill-level-wise.

[/ QUOTE ]

This may be true, but it's better to be overcautious.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with first poster. And this post is a typical example. First u say it could be true and then u say: but its better to be overcautious.

I dont believe in being overcautious. If u are winning 3-4BB/hour at .50/1 or 1/2 u are to good for this limit and probably good enough to win at 3/6 or 5/10. $100 to try at 5/10 is to little but $500 is fine. If u loose, go down and build. If u are lucky and hit a good run u will be able to stay at the new level and u will learn poker much faster playing better players.

The idea of not going up before u have 300BB at the new level will make u learn poker slower. Its that easy. Take 50-75BB and go up, lose it, down, win... a new 50BB and go up.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
First u say it could be true and then u say: but its better to be overcautious

[/ QUOTE ]

I also clarified my reasoning behind it.

[ QUOTE ]
If u are winning 3-4BB/hour at .50/1 or 1/2 u are to good for this limit and probably good enough to win at 3/6 or 5/10. $100 to try at 5/10 is to little but $500 is fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't this depend on how long you've sustained this winrate? One can go on a nice run early, without even playing an actual winning game, and move up long before they should.

[ QUOTE ]
If u loose, go down and build. If u are lucky and hit a good run u will be able to stay at the new level and u will learn poker much faster playing better players.


[/ QUOTE ]

Not necesarily. It's a different texture you're talking about. You don't necesarily learn it faster. I of know many players who play higher limits but have lots of trouble beating loose passive players. The only thing you really get to quickly is getting to the limit where you now think of the money and what may happen if you lose it after building it.

[ QUOTE ]
The idea of not going up before u have 300BB at the new level will make u learn poker slower. Its that easy. Take 50-75BB and go up, lose it, down, win... a new 50BB and go up

[/ QUOTE ]

You realize, your risk of ruin starting each level with only 50-75BBs is pretty high even if you're playing well, right? This is not how to learn about bankroll considerations for a self sustainable roll.

b

[kiddo]

All you say is true and I think we agree on most things. I started to play one table at .50/1 two years ago and I am now playing 3-4 tables at 10/20, its not like I am moving very fast (I, for example, played at 5/10 for 10 months because I needed the money and didnt have time to think about learning 10/20). My bankroll is 350BB and I am prepared to put in more if downswing was even bader then that.

If u already have a healthy bankroll at a certain level, say $600 at 1/2 and you feel lika moving up my idea is that you do this best if you dont try to first get 300BB needed at the new level (this is especially true at Short Handed at Party Poker where u have to jump from 1/2 to 5/10). Your answer is:

[ QUOTE ]
It's a different texture you're talking about. You don't necesarily learn it faster. I of know many players who play higher limits but have lots of trouble beating loose passive players. The only thing you really get to quickly is getting to the limit where you now think of the money and what may happen if you lose it after building it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I agree, lets say that the players at the new level plays differently, not necessarily better (which I for example think is true of 5/10 and 10/20 SH at Party). But this is excatly the reason why u shouldnt try to move over night. You will not be able to understand the new texture before your bankroll is seriously hurt. But if you go up with the intention of "only" losing 75BB at the new level (still having a healthy bankroll for lower level) you will lose your money and then get some time to think about this new texture. If u just sit there hour after hour thinking u are the unluckiest guy on earth (I always think that at a new level, u think to much about money, and u dont really understand what they are doing) u will lose much more. Because what u need to do is think, not play another hour. And this thinking is better done, grinding at the lower level, and then take another 75BB (or something) up to the new level.

Being good at adapting to a new texture is excatly what makes u a good pokerplayer. Trying a new texture - at least when u are not very used to adapt to new textures - should be done in small steps. Not in one big. At least this has worked for me.

My biggest loss before winning when I moved up to a new texture was going form .50/1, full, to 1/2 5max. I lost something like 300BB before understanding how to beat those games. My latest move, from 5/10 to 10/20 only took +75BB downswing before I started to win. This could be a coincidence but 10/20 got a much higer variance then 1/2 and I like to think that I have become better at understanding how to play each player and the new texture.

This was a long post telling u I think I agree with what you say [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]