My Casino AZ Problem....

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
You think that you need 500BB to take a shot at the 20/40? I was planning on taking a couple shots at ~250BB (though, mostly to get my face recognized and not get shots taken at me constantly when I start playing it regularly).

-d

[/ QUOTE ]

In that game, yes you need 500 or so BB. Its a 1/2 kill game and its plays very wild, these games tend to be high variance.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
Playing up with 150 BBet is probably fine, provided you can move back down if you start out bad. But when it's not a rational decision, rather a matter of "growing balls", then what are you going to say if you get a bad run of cards and have to play down? "I castrated myself and played within my bankroll"?

What a stupid way to approach poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its his money, his decision, his risk. Its not a wise decision, but he obviously ran good and made a bank for the game (its still not an ideal bank, but its good enough). Its not stupid, and personally I welcome the shot takers because they usually (not always of course) make the game better.

I suggest everyone who is in this thread read Mason's fantastic book Gambling Theory and other Topics where the concept of bankroll theory was first discussed and applied, as well as the first understanding of a player's standard deviation for various game textures and types.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[Hass]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I finally just grew some balls and took a 150BB shot and never looked back.... I guess what made it easy was the fact that I did run very good for the first 100 or so hours.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, yeah. Which is why your association of playing higher with "growing balls" makes you sound like a donkey. I love nothing more than playing against opponents eager to show their virility by making ill-considered bluffs and calls.

Playing up with 150 BBet is probably fine, provided you can move back down if you start out bad. But when it's not a rational decision, rather a matter of "growing balls", then what are you going to say if you get a bad run of cards and have to play down? "I castrated myself and played within my bankroll"?

What a stupid way to approach poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not exactly sure why you think what I said is so dumb. Maybe I'm missunderstanding you or whatever.

I set aside 300BB for 8/16 and took the rest to 20 to take a shot. I ran good and didn't need to move down. The growing balls part meant that I didn't know If I could beat the game or not so I "grew some balls" and took a shot. I don't play for a living so I am very comfortable with 300BB and I will still move down if I get to an uncomfortable level.

[HOWMANY]

[ QUOTE ]
patience grasshopper. Everything you told us shows that you don't have the bankroll to play 20/40 yet. How many big bets do you have in your roll for 20/40? You shouldn't step foot near that game until you have 20k at a very minimum (its a 1/2 kill game, you will often be playing relative stakes of 30/60).

PS: This really isn't a B&M question, this is a general Hold'em topic. It doesn't matter if your playing live or on line variance, win rate, bankroll, and standard deviation issues are the same.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree with your point, but I think it's completely insane to wait until you have 500BB for a game this level when there is a regular game at the level immediately below it to rebuild at. 300BB should be more than sufficient if you are a winning player and I think taking a small shot when you've got 200BB couldn't be all that bad. I'm a nit, so I wouldn't do that, but I'm sure that it wouldn't be bad.

Online I definitely agree, but live it seems nuts to wait till you've got 500 bets.

OP: I know exactly how you feel. I played 8/16 for what felt like forever, partially because the 20/40 game at this casino almost never went and I'm a wimp. However I think having a 15/30 between would not be good. From personal experience having games at close levels is not good at all. When I played 8/16 what would often happen on weekdays is that the 8/16 players would settle into a 4/8 game and the floor wouldn't want to break a 4/8 to start an 8/16 and the players wouldn't always want to get up from the 4/8. The result is that the game wouldn't even start many days and the result of that is the people like me that do not want to play lower than 8/16 don't waste their time going to the casino any more and then the game just plain never goes any more and the casino has a million 3/6 games and a couple 4/8 games. I could write another rant about having 3/6 and 4/8 in the same casino, but since I don't play 8/16 any more it doesn't matter that much.

It might suck not being able to move up faster, but it will benefit you in the long run to have a consistent 8/16 or 20/40 game to play than a spotty 8/16, 15/30 and 20/40 that all leech off each other.

[Hass]

[ QUOTE ]


Online I definitely agree, but live it seems nuts to wait till you've got 500 bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, but of course this is givin you have the ability to move down and not chase losses.

[AKQJ10]

I'm saying that conflating what should be an entirely rational motivation with another motivation, "growing some balls" (proving your courage) is ultimately not in your best interest. If you think taking shots at bigger games is +EV, fine, and it sounds like in this case it worked out for you.

As I already said, the problem is when the same reasoning indicates that you should move back down. Does that mean that, having grown some testicles, you're now shrinking them? If you think this way, then you may have immense psychological barriers to playing at the stakes you need to play at given a certain bankroll. After all, moving down would mean you're a pussy, right? And in general, poker decisions borne out of a fear of being a pussy aren't good ones.

In general anything that tempts you to make a -EV decision should be avoided -- including metaphors that wrongly accept playing higher stakes as a sign of virility. I liked that your post was factual -- I took a shot, I ran good -- so why detract from it by bragging about your courage when you really just took a reasonable gamble and got lucky?

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
patience grasshopper. Everything you told us shows that you don't have the bankroll to play 20/40 yet. How many big bets do you have in your roll for 20/40? You shouldn't step foot near that game until you have 20k at a very minimum (its a 1/2 kill game, you will often be playing relative stakes of 30/60).

PS: This really isn't a B&M question, this is a general Hold'em topic. It doesn't matter if your playing live or on line variance, win rate, bankroll, and standard deviation issues are the same.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree with your point, but I think it's completely insane to wait until you have 500BB for a game this level when there is a regular game at the level immediately below it to rebuild at. 300BB should be more than sufficient if you are a winning player and I think taking a small shot when you've got 200BB couldn't be all that bad. I'm a nit, so I wouldn't do that, but I'm sure that it wouldn't be bad.

Online I definitely agree, but live it seems nuts to wait till you've got 500 bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

I assume you haven't played in this specific game at this casino before... its very juicy but its also very high variance. Your being blinded by the 20/40 limit, think of this game as a 30/60 limit game that sometimes goes down to 20/40 - because it often plays like this.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[VORP]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You think that you need 500BB to take a shot at the 20/40? I was planning on taking a couple shots at ~250BB (though, mostly to get my face recognized and not get shots taken at me constantly when I start playing it regularly).

-d

[/ QUOTE ]

In that game, yes you need 500 or so BB. Its a 1/2 kill game and its plays very wild, these games tend to be high variance.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't taking a shot, by definition, not require a full bankroll? I think Hass has pretty much described exactly what taking a shot entails. As long as you set aside enough to drop back down with a solid bankroll nothing catastrophic can happen and there is a lot of upside.

[*TT*]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You think that you need 500BB to take a shot at the 20/40? I was planning on taking a couple shots at ~250BB (though, mostly to get my face recognized and not get shots taken at me constantly when I start playing it regularly).

-d

[/ QUOTE ]

In that game, yes you need 500 or so BB. Its a 1/2 kill game and its plays very wild, these games tend to be high variance.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't taking a shot, by definition, not require a full bankroll? I think Hass has pretty much described exactly what taking a shot entails. As long as you set aside enough to drop back down with a solid bankroll nothing catastrophic can happen and there is a lot of upside.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re-read the full thread. This has already been covered.

[Hass]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm saying that conflating what should be an entirely rational motivation with another motivation, "growing some balls" (proving your courage) is ultimately not in your best interest. If you think taking shots at bigger games is +EV, fine, and it sounds like in this case it worked out for you.

As I already said, the problem is when the same reasoning indicates that you should move back down. Does that mean that, having grown some testicles, you're now shrinking them? If you think this way, then you may have immense psychological barriers to playing at the stakes you need to play at given a certain bankroll. After all, moving down would mean you're a pussy, right? And in general, poker decisions borne out of a fear of being a pussy aren't good ones.

In general anything that tempts you to make a -EV decision should be avoided -- including metaphors that wrongly accept playing higher stakes as a sign of virility. I liked that your post was factual -- I took a shot, I ran good -- so why detract from it by bragging about your courage when you really just took a reasonable gamble and got lucky?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok I see what you are saying now, I thought you were just being another "I have more post than you arrogant prick".

I don't really think that moving down is "being a puss" but I see how it seems that way. I was just, more or less scared of not being good enough to play 20. After doing it I'm not scared of moving up so much anymore. I actually can't wait to have about 20-25k so I can take a few shots in the 40 game. At CAZ it seems there is quite a skill level difference between 20/40 and 40/80 that I don't think exsists from 8/16 to 20/40.