Back to the Bottom

[shipitfish]

Despite the fact that that I have cleared about $100 in the NYC clubs, my bankroll remains too small. I realized yesterday that I am at risk of going broke on my meager $800 bankroll. As I mentioned in previous posts, I had to raid my bankroll for moving expenses, on top of existing heavy losses this year. I realized that I simply don't have enough bankroll to play in any of the live games that are spread here in New York, the smallest being $1/$2 NL with a $200 buy-in and $4/$8 limit.

My bankroll is really only enough for $1/$2 limit HE, if I want to be sure I don't go broke. So, that's what I'm playing. It will probably take me four or five months before I'm able to play at the highest limits I can regularly beat. Here's to working my way back up through the limits.

It's not merely the crime of raiding the bankroll for "real expenses" that I have to blame here. I've had a bad year, with few winning sessions. I read recently that many pros (even those playing primarily cash games) have actual all-out losing years, where they don't show even a gross profit for the year. Four months in, I'm down a few thousand (aside from the few thousand I took out for expenses, and the amount for my 2004 taxes). Now, I'm forced to play at stakes where I am highly unlikely to recover those losses this year. I guess I'm headed for a losing year, no matter how well I rock the $1/$2 limit games.

But, I still have bankroll, and I'm still playing, albeit in the high variance $1/$2 limit HE on Pacific. I doubt I'll post much, because, frankly, I doubt $1/$2 limit HE play is of interest to my readers.

I still promise to post about the few additional visits to NYC clubs that I made before I got realistic about my bankroll risks. I want to finish that tribute to Greg's game, too. I'll space those out over the next few months, so I expect only sporadic posting.

There's an irony here of my personal history repeating itself. I totally missed the dot.com boom, because while my friends went and took high paying jobs, I went to graduate school because I was so sick of the computer industry. Now, as poker's own "dot.com boom equivalent" keeps the NL games rocking with lots of loose money, particularly at these games I've seen in NYC, I'm without the bankroll to actually invest in these very profitable games. This poker craze won't last, and I'll surely have missed it by the time I move up again. Get rich, guys. I'll see you at $10/$20 limit HE on the back-end in a year or so.

Comments

Poker Craze

[frankieriver.livejournal.com]

"This poker craze won't last, and I'll surely have missed it by the time I move up again."

I've heard you mention this before at Greg's game in passing. I'm interested to hear your point of view on this subject. While I agree with you, these games from an economic standpoint cannot simply stand to be this good for a sustained amount of time. But then again, what is a sustained amount of time? 10 years? 20? In your opinion, how long do you think the 'poker boom' will last? Certainly this will affect us all when/if it does. From your post above, you seem to think that it will only last a few years? Curious to why.

As a side-note, the last time I played on party poker i bought in for $500 to cover the 20% max bonus for May and quad-tabled 1/2 limit HE for the $100 bonus and netted $60 over the top of that while clearing the bonus in under 4 hours of straight play. 30 BB's + $100 DB = not a bad Tuesday afternoon in my opinion.

Good luck in New York, the lower limits, and looking forward to the 'Greg's game' post.

Scared money

[reddogace.livejournal.com]

I hope your luck turns quickly, I feel your pain. I think one of the most difficult things to do in poker is to play with scared money. Maybe you should pick up a part-time job, get some positive cash flow - then hit the tables at night until your bank roll is big enough to go full-time again. I'm sure you thought of this, it's probably what I would do.