Reasons for not moving up...

[ohnonotthat]

Yeah, those too. [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img]

Another reason is the precarious legal status of OP here in the states. Many people are understandably hesitant to commit large sums of money when a) they might get in trouble and b)They have no legal recourse if they have a money dispute with a site.

[ohnonotthat]

[ QUOTE ]
Many people are understandably hesitant to commit large sums of money when a) they might get in trouble and b)They have no legal recourse if they have a money dispute with a site.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you fear criminal prosecution I suggest you not play; playing smaller will not help you. When the first Nazi DA decides to pursue a case against a PLAYER - rather than look for the nearest TV camera so as to drone on (and on and on) about the evils of online gambling - he is as apt to go after the 2-4 multitabler as the 20-40 NL player, and why shouldn't he ? The law makes no concrete distinction between these two.

As to the lack of recourse vis-a-vis a civil claim ?

- On any given day my online poker/sportsbook balance (all sites combined) is roughly equal to the balance in my checking account. The first thing I do when I wake up is check to see that The [deleted] National Bank is still afloat; I only check my Party/Stars/Pinnacle balance if I am going to play.

You can call that hyperbole if you like; I call it the sad [yet true] state of affairs these days.

*

This was not meant as a flame. YOU may feel some trepidation re. these two issues and you may know a few others who feel the same way but be assured - the typical American does not.

Note: "[deleted]" was the bank name, not profanity.

[winky51]

I have to agree with you here. I would rather prefer playing 1 table at a higher limit than 4 tables at a lower limit. I find it more mentally challenging to figure out my opponents. I only multi-table to build up a bankroll. Of course I do love money. I would love to get to playing 20/40 30/60 50/100 100/200 and beyond. Right now I am at 3/6 and some 5/10

One of the biggest reasons I can think of is people don't like to lose.

If someone plays for recreation and they can constantly beat a given level, then I can see them staying there indefinitely.

SP

As a poster allready mentioned, there are the swings

Variance ... playing three 3-6$ tables instead of one 10-20 table is that it cuts down variance

Variance can give downswings of 200xBB which at the 3-6$ tables gives +/-1200$

But playing one table 10-20$ gives swings that are +/- 4000$


And that is for some quite a lot to put aside for just playing poker, so I am happy with my current bankroll and only plan to expand it slowly ... by the way, allthough I once in a while take shots at higher limits, I tend to prefer to be overbankrolled for the limits I play .. dunno, that's just the way it is ...

The other reason is getting accustomed to something ... I tend to enjoy buying things, that are out of the ordinary with my pokerwinning .. It's not much, but once every 3 months I have cash for something nice ... Went to Berlin with my girlfriend, bought a drumset (yep, it's a cliche, but I did it) and so on ...

So while the desire to move up exist, I'm not in a hurry .. No reason to blow my bankroll

I must be bored then ??


Not yet .. but tend to mix what I play .. SNG and ringgames ... FL and NL .. and Stud sometimes ... Stud is kinda cool (and Stud8 reminds me of watching wallpaint dry, and yet sometimes I play it anyway .. it's poker, and poker is fun)

I would actually play a lot of lower limit tables than one higher limit table, but that's mainly because of $/hr. for example, I think I can play ABC poker at 2/4, 8-table it, and make more money than at 3/6 and 5/10. But that's only because I have trouble beating those games right now I would definetly like to move up at some point though. I've started playing more tournaments lately, and I'd like nothing more than too play all the big MTTs with Johnnybax, ZeeJustin and the like.

For me, I'm staying at 400NL for a while because I have a goal of making precisly 20k in about 4 months (goin backpacking with some mates)

I think taking shots at 1k NL is +EV, after all if I even have a 30% of beating that game it would be worth it because the longterm effect on my overall earn would be huge.

But I think staying at 400NL maximizes my chances of ending up with 20k after 4 months. Another way to put it is that my utility function is very nonlinear, and even has an inflection point

[Snarf]

[ QUOTE ]
Some people have mouths to feed and bills to pay.
Why risk something that important for self gain?

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree... Also isn't it about money/hour?

If you can beat the higher limit game the same - then you should move up for sure...but likely you'll beat the higher limit for less... maybe its more profitable to stay where you're at.

In may BECOME more profitable in the long run to move up and learn to beat THAT game too...but not everyone has the time/funds/care to do so.

I think there are a lot of factors that would keep someone from moving up.

one reason not mentioned is that as you move up the games in whole get much more aggressive to the point that they are no longer fun FWIW