grinders method

[mjws00]

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

[DWarrior]

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.

[jipster]

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...

[DWarrior]

[ QUOTE ]
grinders method

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

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

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

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't spend it all in one place.