[hurtchow]

For any new players who are playing poker and have goals to play in bigger games, but are having trouble seeing a light at the end of the tunnel, you might care to read my story...

I started playing online in August of 2005 with a deposit of $50. I didn't know anything about bankroll management and I just kinda played by ear. I started out playing NL 2 for maybe 3 weeks or maybe a month, and then I started playing NL 10.

I always would cash out the initial deposit, and play with my profits, with some sort of "I can only lose what isn't mine" mentallity. That was a bad idea. It made me panic when my bankroll would get to around $34 and I was playing NL10. I'd get mad, jump into NL 25 or NL 50 and tell myself I might as well double up or go bust. That was a bad idea, because I did go bust very often. Normally when that would happen, I'd put my original deposit back on the next day.

Luckily, I eventually managed to run good enough and long enough to get my bankroll at a steady $200 plateau. But eventually, I started breaking even and losing again, and in a fit of frustration, I jumped in a 100 NL game hoping to quickly patch up my losses and get back to where I was.

My stupidity taught me a lesson, and my bankroll was down to $118. I lost 59% of it, so I cashed out, feeling defeated. I took a few weeks off of poker, and I started playing again on March 24th, 2006. I decided to play $5 NL because I had around 20 buy-ins for the level.

When I would have a losing session, my bankroll wouldn't be hurt too badly. It could coushin the blows. I could accept the swings knowing that in the long run, I was steadily winning.

I also started to play .10/.20 7 card stud, and I ran very well, hardly ever recording a losing session. My NL game was profitable, too. I was basically becoming what they call a "grinder." I wasn't playing like a hot shot, I wasn't aiming to get rich quick, I was just playing my hands, trying to make the most logical and profitable decision every time.

I got the roll up to $250 on May 8th, 2006. I had met my goal to move up limits, which was 25 buy-ins for NL 10. Of course, I had not yet got over my stubborn and short-sighted worse-self, and I tilted during the summer after what I felt was a long breakeven stretch (it was probably two weeks.) I spewed, complained in the chat, and took shots when things would go wrong. Sometimes the shots would work out and sometimes they wouldn't. I hated what it felt like to lose. It disappointed me so much to destroy the hard work I took months to accomplish. I hated myself for being such a sore loser. I took my money out in November of 2006 after a miserable session at 100 NL put another unneccessary dent in my bankroll. I didn't know if I would continue playing poker, because I felt I just wasn't born a winner. I figured I couldn't control myself and I was eventually going to blow it all away.

Then I got $15 in chips for free at Party Poker, and I played it without expectations. I won. I won a lot. The longhanded 10 NL games were so easy, a bunch of the people really just gave their money away. Of course, it didn't hurt that I ran ridiculously well.

In December of 2006, I once again put my stars profits back online, and I played .10/.20 Stud when I wasn't at the longhanded NL 10 tables at Party. I played the $5+.25 HU SNG's at stars as well, which are very easy.

Finally on March 1, 2007, I had $750, 30 buy-ins for NL 25. I almost completely stopped jumping levels to cure losses. My only setback was a jump to 200 NL after what was my new longest breakeven stretch, 2 months. I complained about my horrible luck until many posters explained that the amount of hands I played, single tabling for about 2 hours a day, did not make for a large sample size. Apparently, a dull stretch like that is totally common, or "standard" as they said.

By now it was July of 2007. I wanted to find a way to get more hands in, to make a break even stretch shorter in terms of days and weeks. So, I began multi-tabling. At first I played 2 tables at a time, and after I felt comfortable I added a third, and sometimes a fourth. I noticed that playing this way made pots seem a little less significant. I could lose on one table, but win big on two others. It made it easier to look at the big picture. Of course, two hours of 3 tabling is still pretty insignificant in the long run, too. Realizing this made bad sessions a little more tolerable. W

While the swings were a little bigger, they wouldn't seem to stretch for as long anymore. That helped me play with a little more serenity.

On September 1st, 2007 when I had made $1750, I had 35 buy-ins for NL 50, once again following the 'five more buy-ins' rule that I used in the subsequent level jumps. While it is a conservative bankroll strategy, it is pretty good if you run bad at your few sessions. Losing double what you are used to is a real pincher, so I felt it would be wise to take some extra padding with me.

I'm still playing NL 50 today, and my game has improved a lot from all my experience. Hopefully you can learn from mine and not go through the unneccessary drama that I now can avoid. In the future, I hope to devise a strategy for shot-taking. That's something I've never responsibily considered.