Q on bankroll, kelly betting, poker and tournaments

[Al_Capone_Junior]

I've posted this two other places and gotten no responses, so I'll try it here.

Hypothetical situation:

A player starts with $100,000 bankroll. This is for poker only, expenses are paid separately from another account. This player plays both cash and tournaments. They are definitely a winner at both, but their style is one of high variance (i.e. LAG). Their style undoubtedly is suited best to tournaments.

They have a tendency to play higher than they should, but not to a ridiculous degree (i.e. They won't be in the "big game" at the bellagio). They also tend to satellite into tournaments, where their style is once again best suited.

I'm interested if the concept of Kelly betting, as described in "blackbelt in blackjack," has any applicability to poker, and if so how.

I would also like to hear suggestions on how you might best manage your bankroll in this situation. What limits would you play? (Limit or NLHE). What tournaments would you enter? How many sats would you enter and lose before you gave up? What size tourneys would you enter directly without bothering with sats? How big of a one day loss would you tolerate (ignore things like tilt). What else should be considered?

I'm pretty mathematically inclined and very familiar with books those on these forums have likely read, however i don't know it all, and I'm not sure about this hypothetical situation.

Also, if there are further références i may not have read please do tell.

Thanks

Al

[Don Olney]

Capone,
I have sent you an e-mail on this subject......

[*TT*]

Thread where the Kelly Criterian is discussed.

[NaturalSelection]

Tournaments are for suckers

100-200 to 300-600 mixed games at the B

or just 10-20 NL

[steamboatin]

[ QUOTE ]
Tournaments are for DONKEYS


[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

Tournament structure favors Donkeys. Calling a riase with speculative hands trying to crack aces is a favorite play of Donkeys and often correct tournament strategy.

[DeathDonkey]

[ QUOTE ]
Tournaments are for suckers

100-200 to 300-600 mixed games at the B

or just 10-20 NL

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL at playing 3/6 mix with 100k. Welcome to BUSTO.

-DeathDonkey

[AZplayer]

Al -

I am in the same boat, albeit not yet with the 100k bankroll (hopefully soon).

One thing not addressed in your post, which is absolutely critical, is: WHAT IS THE OBJECTIVE/GOAL of your friend? Is it fame? Ego stroking? Visibility? A specific ROI on that bankroll.

Just because he is a LAG style with high variance doesn't mean that's the type of income-return he is looking for, right? I am LAGgy in NL and tournaments, TAGgy in limit, and am striving for less variance.

A good metaphor is to apply asset allocation techniques that you would towards investment portfolio management (e.g., aggressive would be 10% bonds, 15-20% international equities, 5% cash, 20-30% small caps, etc.) and use the right categories for what he plays. For example, satellites might be 15-20% of budget, direct big-buyins might be 5%, NL cash might be 50%, etc.

PM me if you want as I'm roughing out an article on this topic and could use some 'back-and-forth' on my ideas.

[NaturalSelection]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Tournaments are for suckers

100-200 to 300-600 mixed games at the B

or just 10-20 NL

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL at playing 3/6 mix with 100k. Welcome to BUSTO.

-DeathDonkey

[/ QUOTE ]

I hear you, I've only sweated it personally (I don't play over 1/2), it's always seemed like a good game when I've been there, but I can see it being VERY high variance.