moving up

[SeaEagle]

[ QUOTE ]
200 bb's

[/ QUOTE ]
So if I take a shot at a recap:
Over 2 years, you built up an $800 bankroll.
A couple weeks ago you doubled it to $1600.
A week ago you lost it all.
Now you wonder if you should be playing $20/40.

It sounds to me like you've been seriously under-bankrolled all along and only needed a bout of bad luck to break you. You're lucky you went 2 years without having that bout.

In order to safely play 20/40 you need (at least) three things:
1) a minimum bankroll of $12K (300BBs)
2) a basic understanding of bankroll management
3) the ability to beat better players, on average, than those that play 4/8.

It doesn't appear as though you have any of those 3 requisites.

[fuzz66]

thank you seaeagle. you suggest i stay in 4-8 with larger bankroll.thats seems to be what everyone is suggesting

[fuzz66]

by the way, how often should one expect these bad luck outings with a limited bankroll?

[The DaveR]

[ QUOTE ]
by the way, how often should one expect these bad luck outings with a limited bankroll?

[/ QUOTE ]

At the same frequency as you would have with an infinite bankroll.

[fuzz66]

stupid question. i guess i should learn to read people better so i can muck full houses and nut flushes when i know their beat.

[argybargy2002]

Hey man relax, it can happen to all of us. I'm steaming right now having just lost 40 big bets in my 5-10 game. However I have another 360 at home to fall back on. These swings happen, which is why you need to have a 400 BB bankroll at least if you wanna play this game seriously. Forget about 20-40 or even 10-20 until you have 400 big bets at those levels.
You can be the best player in the world but if you can't manage your bankroll properly you WILL go bust.

[spex x]

[ QUOTE ]
Forget about 20-40 or even 10-20 until you have 400 big bets at those levels.
You can be the best player in the world but if you can't manage your bankroll properly you WILL go bust.

[/ QUOTE ]

You've got to understand that the variance is HIGHER the higher you play. 10/20 has much more variance than 4/8. The reason is that the 4/8 game is probably about 60-70% fish who are very beatable and the rest solid players who are also beatable. The 10/20 probably has about 30% fish who are somewhat beatable, and the rest are solid players and experts who you will lose to. The 20/40 game probably has about 10-15% fish and the rest are experts. In the higher limits you'll be paying off better hands more and getting paid off with strong hands less. You've got to be able to manipulate those guys in order to win. 4/8 tactics won't work.

Also, the higher you play, the lower your BB/100 is expected. A 10/20 player might make 1bb/100, but a 20/40 player might make .75 bb/100 or less. Why? Because they are playing against better players who aren't going to easily give up additional bets.

What are you reading? While a book like "Hold'em Poker for advanced players" might help your game, "Small Stakes Hold'em" is more appropriate. The tactics in middle limit poker don't apply a lot of the time to our SS games. Be careful that the books you're reading are not geared toward the ML players.

[fuzz66]

my reasoning for moving up in limits is that it seems that i win smaller pots against better players and lose bigger pots against weak players.i truly believe if i played against better players during my last break session,although i probably would have had a losing session,i would not have gone broke, maybe even won a little.im i wrong for thinking this?

[The DaveR]

[ QUOTE ]
my reasoning for moving up in limits is that it seems that i win smaller pots against better players and lose bigger pots against weak players.i truly believe if i played against better players during my last break session,although i probably would have had a losing session,i would not have gone broke, maybe even won a little.im i wrong for thinking this?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's your money. Just send Hobbs a PM before you take a shot at the 20 game.

[Harv72b]

[ QUOTE ]
my reasoning for moving up in limits is that it seems that i win smaller pots against better players and lose bigger pots against weak players.i truly believe if i played against better players during my last break session,although i probably would have had a losing session,i would not have gone broke, maybe even won a little.im i wrong for thinking this?

[/ QUOTE ]

The italicized portion of your post is exactly what will happen any time you are up against opponents who are playing better than you. This will happen more, not less, often when you are playing at higher limits, against opponents who are (presumably) even better. Erego, if you were playing at a higher limit game and had the exact same run of cards, you would have gone busto sooner, not later.

You ran into some very tough luck hands, apparently--boats losing to four of a kinds, an ace high flush losing a straight flush, etc. How many raises did you put in after you were beat in those hands? Were the opponents who put in those extra raises generally passive? Did either of those full house vs. quads hands happen when there were 3 of a kind on the board?

Don't focus on the beats, or on how statistically unlikely they were to occur. Instead, focus on how you could have saved a bet or two when they did occur. Sometimes that's just not possible, and you are destined to lose the maximum number of bets in those pots. Most times, especially in a live game where you should have reasonably good reads on your opponents, it is possible.

Oh, and play with an appropriate bankroll. 200 BBs is not enough to guard against normal variance, even if you have next to no major holes in your game. The 24 hour sessions are also a bad idea.