another article

[uncledave]

Biggle posted one from Full Tilt that got turned in an arguement on the English language (which is crap anyway )

I found this one on moving up limits and wondered if anyone goes with this sort of thing...

http://www.fulltiltpoker.com/proLessons.php?lesson=41

DS

[jacedk]

I may try that for my limit games. I'll probably be at the $.01/$.02 by February.

LOL!

[snickers99]

I found this one on moving up limits and wondered if anyone goes with this sort of thing...

I have a question about the article. Am I wrong in this thinking: have three winning sessions in a row at .50/1 (limit), move up to 1/2. Lose 3 sessions in a row (fairly soon after moving up) at 1/2 and I'm back at .50/1. Then realize the 3 good sessions at .50/1 were helped by the good side of variance and move up just in time to see the bad side of variance, thus losing more money because I moved up too fast. Seems over simplistic...er, simple...er, fuck....which ever one is correct. So, I have 3 winning sessions in a row...one for $1, one for $.75, the other for $2. I'm ready for 1/2 now?

[caffiend]

You can assume that she means session in the IRS sort of sense, not online session. Three sessions in a cardroom would likely be on three seperate days, against the same table full of opponents for a couple of hours at a minimum. In that scenario having three consecutive losing sessions is much more alarming.

For example, I keep my records outside of Poker Tracker so I have every game in the same place along with a record of bonus and other non-wager income. At the end of the day I combine the time spent at each table and enter that and the total amount won as one long, single session. Scarily enough, now that I look that results in a WWWLWWWLWWWL pattern. Anyway, using the system given I could move up as soon as I had a sufficient bankroll, because I have three consecutive wins often. And I'd move down for three winning days before heading back to the higher limit every time I had consecutive losing days.

It's actually not a bad idea considering the stated goal of never going broke. It is going to be slower than other systems, but much safer.

[barrin6]

I wonder how long an online session would be? An hour?

[snickers99]

That makes more sense, caffiend. Thought I was missing something there. And for the record, I also count one day of poker as a 'session', not everytime I get up and move to a different table.

[uncledave]

Since I'm kind of starting over on the poker trail I think I might look at something like this method.
I think maybe I'll count a week as a session, and perhaps set a goal of 2BB/100 as my mark of whether or not I am successful? Is that a reasonable goal?

Going to begin getting serious with STT's too, so I'll be starting low there also. Anyway... this is mostly crap-talk...

DS