grinders method
 

$0.5/1 6max; 2 tables... aim is $50...

once achieved new aim is $55; then $60 etc..

also i take a break after every target has been met (anywhere between 10minutes to a whole nights sleep!)

i bank the winnings immediately for two reasons;

1) it keeps my bankroll at a level that i wont be tempted to up stakes

2) it seperates my short term aims from the long term...

meaning long term play good poker and short term grind out a living with accesible targets

anyhows, my first post to this forum; try out this method and let me know what you think; any adaptions or suggestions will be appreciated

Re: grinders method
 

What do you buyin to the 100NL with?

Re: grinders method
 

I think this limits your earn potential

Re: grinders method
 

Your goal shouldn't be to win X dollars. Your goal should be to play optimal poker. Don't be results-oriented. Further, why would you take a break after winning a pot or meeting the goal?

Oh and by the way, ratholing is unethical. (IMO)

Re: grinders method
 

if ratholing is what I think it is, what do you think the minimum time a player should be at the table is, assuming they are making money?

Re: grinders method
 

[ QUOTE ]
if ratholing is what I think it is, what do you think the minimum time a player should be at the table is, assuming they are making money?

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't care about this as much if they won the money playing poker. Of course I always want the monkeys at my table, but leave the table and rebuying for your original buyin is lame.

Re: grinders method
 

is this a limit bank roll?

50/1 6 max
50$??

Re: grinders method
 

Very fuzzy.

Let me just say this. If you win a big pot and take the money you just won off the table in order to lock in your win, that is what I'm saying is unethical. Since it's generally hard or impossible to achieve this online, many people "hit & run" in order to achieve the same effect. They come to a table, win a pot and then leave. But I believe that the reason they do this is the same reason why live players rathole, and therefore the hit & run is also unethical.

What makes it unethical is not the length of time you keep your just-won money in play. It is by the fact that you are taking the money off the table in order to make in inaccessible to your opponents. Which means that if you were just about to quit for the day anyway and win a huge pot, it's not unethical to go ahead and quit when you were planning on quitting. (I usually wait one more orbit, but that's admittedly stupid)

How's that for clouding the waters? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: grinders method
 

that was pretty good

Re: grinders method
 

That explains most of it ... I typically keep everything at the table when playing online, regardless of how long my sessions.

Re: grinders method
 

thanks guys, sorry i wasnt clear... i have a bankroll that buys me in; and its no limit....

as for unethical; what can i say; i disagree... online poker has a limited social aspect to it; i couldnt care less whether it winds up my opponents; in facr better if it does


in reply to the 'play optimally' reply; i try to play optimally at all times... admittedly i might miss out if i leave a good table; but i think keeping my eyes; back and brain healthy and not burning out is more important....


just to clarify; if i am to lose 100$.. i get up have a break and start again from $50

Re: grinders method
 

[ QUOTE ]
thanks guys, sorry i wasnt clear... i have a bankroll that buys me in; and its no limit....

as for unethical; what can i say; i disagree... online poker has a limited social aspect to it; i couldnt care less whether it winds up my opponents; in facr better if it does


in reply to the 'play optimally' reply; i try to play optimally at all times... admittedly i might miss out if i leave a good table; but i think keeping my eyes; back and brain healthy and not burning out is more important....


just to clarify; if i am to lose 100$.. i get up have a break and start again from $50

[/ QUOTE ]
my guess is that many people do not like you. but it sounds like you don't care.

thus, this post is meaningless. QED.

Re: grinders method
 

Personally I think you lose a fair bit of EV if you take your wins off the table in some way. It's not uncommon for a bad player to get lucky and double up and you miss the opportunity to play them deep stacked.

Re: grinders method
 

[ QUOTE ]

as for unethical; what can i say; i disagree... online poker has a limited social aspect to it; i couldnt care less whether it winds up my opponents; in facr better if it does



[/ QUOTE ]


Since you don't give a [censored], hopefully people will not care enough to give you useful advice in response to your posts.

Re: grinders method
 

'this post is meaningless'... as if that one had a point.

i assure you i'm a nice caring guy in real life..

when i'm playing poker everyone on that table is my enemy, best friend, mum, whoever...

as for the loss of ev; this is a fair point but for me in terms of 'life' ev its better for me to get 10 150+ $ in the bank rather than risk a huge stack.


I've had a bad time of it on the tables and need to steadily build my roll (which was $15k at one point) back to $6k r so to then hav a crack at th odd big tourney or bigger cash game.

thanks again... maybe this isn't a good grinding method and should perhaps be viewed as a bankroll building excercise?

Re: grinders method
 

I've had great success building a bankroll playing poker.

Re: grinders method
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've had great success building a bankroll playing poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was just gonna say, what's wrong with grinding out hands like everyone else does?

Re: grinders method
 

[ QUOTE ]
i assure you i'm a nice caring guy in real life..

when i'm playing poker everyone on that table is my enemy

[/ QUOTE ]

How nice & caring you are is irrelevant. When I'm at the poker table, everyone is my "enemy" too. I am doing everything I can to take every dime the have in front of them, and not let them get any of my money.

But if you think that poker being a competition gives you the right to behave in unethical ways, then you are a bad person.

Let's try an example. You are on a soccer team. Your team is good. Real good. Good enough in fact that you've made it to the finals. So there you are at the World Cup finals playing against your arch-nemisis. Unfortunately, your opposition is much better than you, and you know that there is no way you can fairly win this match unless you get very lucky. So to remedy this problem, they day before the match you poison the food of some of the other team's key players. You don't kill them. You just incapacitate them for one day, after which they will fully recover. They are forced to sit thier key players and sub-in 2nd stringers, which gives you a fighing chance in the match.

Was your behavior ethical? Regardless of the answer to the first question, was your behavior accpetable?

Re: grinders method
 

Goot points grunch. I also like how you subtly imply that ratholers do what they do because they believe (know!) that they are inferior players whose only chance of building a bankroll is to limit their losses and get lucky a lot.

Re: grinders method
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i assure you i'm a nice caring guy in real life..

when i'm playing poker everyone on that table is my enemy

[/ QUOTE ]

How nice & caring you are is irrelevant. When I'm at the poker table, everyone is my "enemy" too. I am doing everything I can to take every dime the have in front of them, and not let them get any of my money.

But if you think that poker being a competition gives you the right to behave in unethical ways, then you are a bad person.

Let's try an example. You are on a soccer team. Your team is good. Real good. Good enough in fact that you've made it to the finals. So there you are at the World Cup finals playing against your arch-nemisis. Unfortunately, your opposition is much better than you, and you know that there is no way you can fairly win this match unless you get very lucky. So to remedy this problem, they day before the match you poison the food of some of the other team's key players. You don't kill them. You just incapacitate them for one day, after which they will fully recover. They are forced to sit thier key players and sub-in 2nd stringers, which gives you a fighing chance in the match.

Was your behavior ethical? Regardless of the answer to the first question, was your behavior accpetable?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure this is the best analogy to use since the topic in question is pretty subjective whereas the soccer analogy is just out and out cheating/illegal.

That aside I also don't really have a problem with people who want to do this. I don't myself because I consider it severely -EV and will come and go from tables based on whether I wish to be playing and whether I think I have an edge.

If someone else isn't comfortable playing for 200BB+ I don't see why they should be forced to move tables just to play with a normal stack. And if they wish to lock up their win then good for them, someone else will take their seat and I'll play against them.

Re: grinders method
 

I don't care if someone hits-and-runs from my table. Thats just another opponent who will still have money for me to take tomorrow. Sometimes I use the find feature and add myself to the wait list for the other tables they are on.

I don't leave a table just because I have too much money in play. Every time I put money in pre-flop I know I may be facing an all-in from anyone who is in before me or left to act after. I also keep that in mind on subsequent streets. Sure, I'll be a lot less frisky with 500BB than I might be with only 50 at risk, but thats just stack management IMO.

Re: grinders method
 

can someone explain to me what ratholing is and how the OP is planning on doing it? maybe i'm just sleep deprived but i don't really get what's going on [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: grinders method
 

[ QUOTE ]
can someone explain to me what ratholing is and how the OP is planning on doing it? maybe i'm just sleep deprived but i don't really get what's going on [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Classical "ratholing" is taking money off the table while still playing at the same table.

Online, if you just get up from one table, but are still playing on others, some see that as ratholing. However, I feel that since most sites will NOT let you come back to the same table unless you buyin with what you left with, that it's not the same {IMO}.

Re: grinders method
 

OP starts a 100NL table w $50. Once he gets to some predetermined amount like $60, he leaves that table and buys into a new one.

It sounds like he's not comfortable playing full stack poker much less deep stacked.

I usually leave when I'm planning to, if I win a large pot on my planned last orbit, I'll sometimes tell the table I have to go and play one more orbit, especially if it's the the same lineup for a long time like 1+ hr. I don't leave a profitable table just because I won a pot though.

Re: grinders method
 

Yes I would agree most of these players are bad players. What I've seen lately is people winning due to a suckout and then they take money off the table.

Re: grinders method
 

I dont really think this grinding plan is very good. If you plan to stop after winning 50 or losing 100 you will hopefully end up with way more winning sessions than losing sessions. However, this will not yield a higher EV since your losing sessions will be for twice as much.

I think it is bad because you will end up cutting your winning sessions short and your losing sessions longer. If you are in a winning session, it is more likely to continue being a winning session because of a good table. So when you are winning, it makes sense to play more. I think your plan would work better if you quit after winning 100 of losing 50 cuz atleast then you play longer when winning. Although ignoring things like this all together is prolly best.

Re: grinders method
 

[ QUOTE ]
Very fuzzy.

Let me just say this. If you win a big pot and take the money you just won off the table in order to lock in your win, that is what I'm saying is unethical. Since it's generally hard or impossible to achieve this online, many people "hit & run" in order to achieve the same effect. They come to a table, win a pot and then leave. But I believe that the reason they do this is the same reason why live players rathole, and therefore the hit & run is also unethical.

What makes it unethical is not the length of time you keep your just-won money in play. It is by the fact that you are taking the money off the table in order to make in inaccessible to your opponents. Which means that if you were just about to quit for the day anyway and win a huge pot, it's not unethical to go ahead and quit when you were planning on quitting. (I usually wait one more orbit, but that's admittedly stupid)

How's that for clouding the waters? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh. For every guy that I have a big edge on that takes a big pot away from me and then takes the money off the table, there's another guy that I have a big edge on that still has money to lose to me because he did the same against someone else. It's zero-sum, so I don't really care. Besides, he may be playing 100NL because he can't stand to lose more than 100 in one pot, in which case I don't see any reason I should insist that he plays with 300 dollar stacks.

Then there are the guys who sit down with the sole purpose of doubling up and leaving. They might want to join a $215 but only have $100, or whatever. Sometimes they succeed, more often they donate their $100. I love these guys.

For every guy who sits down intending to double up and leave, and succeeds in doing that against you, there are 2 guys who sat down intending to double up and leave and instead gave you their stack.

Re: grinders method
 

[ QUOTE ]

Then there are the guys who sit down with the sole purpose of doubling up and leaving. They might want to join a $215 but only have $100, or whatever. Sometimes they succeed, more often they donate their $100. I love these guys.


[/ QUOTE ]

I love them too.

Re: grinders method
 

Didn't really read all the responses. sorry for that ...but I think this kind of playing style really sucks.

For a good player a long session is supposed to be +EV. Good player makes reads and adapts to table conditions. This kind of grinding leaves much less room for skill.

Re: grinders method
 

If bankroll management is part of the game, then leaving a table after hitting a certain percentage of your bankroll should be part of the game too. If players should only risk 5% of their bankroll per buy-in, then they should probably be leaving if they manage to double up or more otherwise they end up risking 10% or more of their bankroll.

A player that risks only 5-10% of their bankroll at a time is a lot less likely to go broke.

Table selection can also provide a player with an reason to move from table to table. Banking profit may be invetible especially with the max buy-in at most sites.

Applying a single table rule (not banking profit) while still in the game to typical online multiple table session play doesn't seem reasonable. It's based on a B&M single table poker game where it's impossible for players to be playing more than one table at a time. The online poker game is different and all the rules associated with classic B&M poker aren't necessarily applicable.

I think OP grider bankroll management system is silly but not because he's a ratholer. If I understand correctly, he's risking $50 to win $5 or $10. I can't imagine that's going to work out in the long run for him.

Re: grinders method
 

[ QUOTE ]
$0.5/1 6max; 2 tables... aim is $50...

once achieved new aim is $55; then $60 etc..

also i take a break after every target has been met (anywhere between 10minutes to a whole nights sleep!)

i bank the winnings immediately for two reasons;

1) it keeps my bankroll at a level that i wont be tempted to up stakes

2) it seperates my short term aims from the long term...

meaning long term play good poker and short term grind out a living with accesible targets

anyhows, my first post to this forum; try out this method and let me know what you think; any adaptions or suggestions will be appreciated

[/ QUOTE ]

Something tells me you won't succeed.

Re: grinders method
 

I'm sure the ethics of rat-holing have been long debated. There is NO real way to rathole online. Most sites don't let you remove chips. You can leave a table. This is not similar to setting aside (x) chips and continuing to play the same game.

It may be rude. Inconsiderate. Blah Blah Blah to leave a table after a significant win. But this is not an ethical dilemma in any sense. There is no compelling moral obligation to stay at a table. It is simply a courtesy. Are you a prick if you hit and run? Probably. Ethics and Morals don't really apply here, imho.

If you are comfortable and within your bankroll risking 100BB (5% BR) on a hand, it is NOT unreasonable to find another table when you are risking 200BB's (10%) instead. This is simply good money management and helps us avoid risk of ruin. You may be giving up EV but all risk control has a cost.

Getting a tiny win and banking it instantly, then removing it from the BR doesn't seem like an optimal solution. Your BR exists to absorb swings. It should probably swing up as well as down before you mess with it.

But if this keeps you from playing beyond your skill level, or tilting... so be it. Overtime you'll probably end up on the same side of the fence as the old-timers. The only thing that matters is your play. It is +EV or it is not. Chip tricks along the way aren't terribly significant.

Mike

Re: grinders method
 

The problem with this approach is that it systematically errs on the side of poor table selection.

If I'm reading this correctly, OP's basic strategy is: leave up $50, leave down $100.

The 6max swings are huge, so this won't be as noticeable, but villain will tend to stay at bad tables longer and leave the tables faster where there's a donk just handing away his chips, but you'll tend to stick around while you get outplayed until you donk off a buyin.

You'll also tend to leave the wild tables (usually when there's an aggrodonk), and stay at the horrible tables full of rocks.

Anyway, OP has huge misconceptions on variance and difference between short and long term. GL.

Re: grinders method
 

Thinking about money in poker is a sure way to prevent making a lot of it.

Re: grinders method
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thinking about money in poker is a sure way to prevent making a lot of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Re: grinders method
 

Grunch,
You seem like the same kinda of guy who feels bad when a fish buys in for 600/600/600/347.46.

Please, if I'm taking a shot and I get it all in preflop with AA/KK and I don't feel comfortable sitting 200BB in that game. I will immediately get up and take my unethical earnings to the unethical bank and spend it on unethical behavior more than likely.

Re: grinders method
 

One thing seems clear: the OP has little interest in the game of poker.

Re: grinders method
 

[ QUOTE ]
Grunch,
You seem like the same kinda of guy who feels bad when a fish buys in for 600/600/600/347.46.

Please, if I'm taking a shot and I get it all in preflop with AA/KK and I don't feel comfortable sitting 200BB in that game. I will immediately get up and take my unethical earnings to the unethical bank and spend it on unethical behavior more than likely.

[/ QUOTE ]

there is a difference between hit and running and ratholing, while both are annoying for the regulars, i doubt anyone would question your right to hit and run. Its the issue of sitting back in the same game with less money than you left with that pisses people off.

Re: grinders method
 

again interesting responses.

i accept that this is a -ev way of playing

in response to various posts:

1) i have no issue playing a deep stack... be assured when that 100$ is on the table i'm not afraid to lose it...

2) i would have no issue sitting back down in the same game with $150 (or more) if after said breaks my seat was availible (esp if it were a good table)

3) i would not leave a game with an aggrodonk; in fact i probably perform better given my loose-aggro style

everyone, it seems, has assumed i'm a weak (weak-tight) player who is scared to lose.... far from the truth i assure you...

i guess fundamentally its a bankroll building excercise..., yes i am looking to minimise risk and i am aware its not the most optimal strategy.

just as a note... so far ive failed to get past stage 3 (60$)...

results in total: im up $280 since playing this way... plus bonus plus rb [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] gluck on the tables...

Re: grinders method
 

you should buy-in short too... then you can really start pissing people off [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]