okay... just to clear a few things up Zara, I'm not sure if you read through it too quickly or what but that was a pretty negative post, and I believe I answered, directly or indirectly every complaint you had...I can start this out with one of my first lines..
JaysonWeber said:
Not maybe... Will. I did not throw this out to be followed verbatim this is a conversation starter until we find a few ideas everyone can agree on.
Zarathustra said:
If you have a proper bankroll for say 2/4 (ie 1200), it doesn't matter how many tables you play (within reason), you're properly bankrolled. Forcing a 300BB/table is rediculous.
JaysonWeber said:
I think it'd be better if we followed the 300bb rule
Although, At the bottom that paragraph I also say
JaysonWeber said:
but theres something to be said about variance and 3 tabling so thats up for discussion.
This is not a Rule by any means, in the past, and for quite a few other "experiments" like this on this website and others, players have stuck to the 300 bb/100 rule, just for the simple fact that many people who are newer to poker than someone like yourself playing 2/4 (and from the sounds of it doing well) understand the importance of b/r management.
Zarathustra said:
As I understand it, the 300BB rule is for being able to avoid nasty swings of luck. Mathematically, there is no difference between playing 50 hands/hr (1 table) or 200 hands/hr (4 tables).
Your 100% right... But 4 tabling within 1 hour with $100 at each table is different than playing 1 table for that same hour. I said that the variance is lower in these cases but it still exists! Its just a guideline, and I certainly dont think it'd be a problem at all if while 3-4 tabling for this experiment people didn't follow the 300x ideaology. this is simply the beginnings, the rules are not set in stone by any means. Even when they are, due to many people who are already well on there way through this, the rules will not have been meet by everyone. This is as much for the people doing it as it is for everyone reading, its a great opportunity to gain information by compiling everyones information toegether to get a braoder idea as to "how much harder" a game is from say .5/1 to 3/6. That is one of the many reasons for doing this in my opinion.
Zarathustra said:
. I don't have $3600 to set aside to 3-table 2/4 like I do now with your restrictions. Furthermore, I'm not going to drop down to .5/1 as I would be losing too much potential profit and it's just not worth it to participate.
Well... I think I did cover this as well.
JaysonWeber said:
People can start with $50 I dont mean this as an insult that I won't be starting with $50, its just that in a month poker is going to be paying my rent and I dont wanna drop lower than .5/1 for that reason.
So if that wasn't clear, I'll re-itterate. The reason many of the people who already began playing didn't start at $50 is for this exact reason! The $3600 starting b/r claim I think I already talked about, perhaps you want to do one where you start with a bit more money and try to make the same percentage profit? Many will be starting with 1k or a little over 1k, Hopefully some will start with lower amounts too.This isn't a strict set of rules at all, These are just beginning guidelines so people have a "general" idea as to where this is going.I hope I've answered all the questions, Atleast we got some good discussion rolling here.
"Here are my rules: what can be done with one substance must never be done with another. No two materials are alike. No two sites on earth are alike. No two buildings have the same purpose. The purpose, the site, the material determine the shape. Nothing can be reasonable or beautiful unless its made by one central idea, and the idea sets every detail. A building is alive, like a man." - The Fountainhead.