Reply from LearnedfromTV
LearnedfromTV sent me the following PM:
I know you are thinking about bankroll guidelines for the book, and it seems from some of your posts in that thread that you think standard br management guidelines are too risky. I thought you might be interested in hearing from the extreme nit side, plus I'd be interested in any quick thoughts you have on my situation.
I play full time. Although I have backup plans and a couple non-poker things I'll be doing in addition to playing, I would like to play full time long term (I'm 26). I have ~$60k devoted to poker, mostly won from tournaments. I'm a solid winner at 200nl online. And I play 200nl (six max). Yes, with 300 buyins. I haven't even taken a shot at 400 or higher. I've played some live 2/5, played 5/10 a couple times a while ago, but haven't since I went pro. I am thinking about taking another shot at the supposedly soft local 5/10 game, but haven't yet. When I switched to cash games a few months ago, I thought of it as "I'm rolled for 5/10, but I want to be sure I'm a winner at each level before jumping in." 100k hands later, I'm still at 200, sure I'm a winner there, fairly sure I could beat 400/600, but aware of so many leaks, still making so many mistakes, and not confident enough in my ability to distinguish bad play from bad luck to feel comfortable moving up. It might be a dumb mental block, or maybe it's appropriate caution - I'm not sure. I don't have any ego urge to play as high as possible, but I am competitive and do want to move up, plus I want to maximize my income. But I haven't figured out what will convince me I'm ready to move up.
So anyway, reading that thread with all the high stakes guys saying, "if you drop to 10K just grind 3/6" kind of blows my mind. I mean, I know the best players would have very low risk of ruin with 20-30 buyins at midstakes, but it feels to me like it's just too easy to run hot, move up every time you have x buyins, reach levels you can't beat, lose it all back, move down and then find out you don't have the safety net you thought you had because you ran hot the first time you moved through the levels and you really aren't that good. I mean, I could play 10/20, where I'm def. -EV, and justify it "I have the roll and if I lose I'll just move down" - and I bet that's the mindset of a lot of the fish in those games, even if they are trying to play well and manage their bankroll. It's hard to tell because people aren't often going to be honest about numbers on a message board, (or, err, ever) but it seems there are a lot of people who have yoyoed through the stakes in exactly this way. And I feel like people who advocate shottaking beyond a 20-30 buyin guideline are most likely to be the ones who succeeded when they took their shots. I'm trying to treat poker as a real long term endeavor, and I think the standard br management advice people state on these boards is way too likely to get people broke. I don't understand how 20-30 buyins can be enough when it is so easy to drop 10, and with the way psychology changes when losing. I can't imagine ever playing with less than 50 buyins at midstakes, and like 100 at 10/20+. On the other hand, I feel like I want to be at upper midstakes within the next year, and am trying to figure out how to approach moving up.
Apologies if this is too long, I'm sure you're busy but I thought you'd be interested in hearing from someone with the anti-balla approach, and if you have any advice, I would definitely appreciate it. Looking forward to the book!
Tom
P.S. I know of another guy, a very good tournament player, who has ~150K br and a day job, is moving to cash games, starting at 200nl, and "hoping to get to 5/10 by the end of the year." Definitely not the norm, but we are out there.
I wrote back but will not post that reply for now; He added:
Just rereading that thread and your reply to me (end of year contemplative/planning time I guess) and the bold part really sticks out to me. I think people who quote the math and only the math in this context miss that there's added variance inherent in the fact that your edge varies game to game, depending on opponents and your state of mind, full-blown tilt, subtle tilt all factoring in. You can't always play your A game. Calculate your risk of ruin from your average winrate and sd as though they are fixed and you underestimate it, by a lot I think, because your actual wr/sd varies so widely... any marginalk to decent winner is probably playing a decent number of hands in -EV situations, etc. Even for someone doing everything by the book, i.e. they move down when they should, quit when they tilt bad, it still means they'll be more likely to have to move down than they expect.
I wonder how people on standardish rolls, like 25-35 buyins at midstakes or 40-50 at high stakes can handle losing 25%+ in short periods of time. I couldn't. And right now, even as my bankroll increases I've got low absolute dollar pain thresholds, like I take a dayoff if I lose $1K. Start playing 3/6, I'd bve taking days off every third day. Standard bankroll guidelines assume your pain threshold goes up in proportion to bankroll. I don't think that's true, especially at the highest stakes.
|