PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $1.00 BB (9 handed) Hand History Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.com (Format: FCP)

MP1 ($133.50)
MP2 ($100)
MP3 ($119.60)
Hero ($74.20)
Button ($87.90)
SB ($104)
BB ($111.85)
UTG ($69.85)
UTG+1 ($67.15)

Preflop: Hero is CO with 7 , T .
UTG calls $1, UTG+1 calls $1, MP1 calls $1, 2 folds, Hero calls $1, 2 folds, BB checks.

Flop: ($5.50) 5 , 7 , 5 (5 players)
BB checks, UTG checks, UTG+1 bets $5, MP1 folds, Hero raises to $15, BB calls $15, UTG folds, UTG+1 folds.

I know the bettor can fold a 7 here, or whatever he has, so I'm thinking just in terms of knocking him out, given the past couple hours at the table. We've been talking a bit, so he knows that I'm a strong player. When the other guy cold calls, I'm done with this hand, right?

Turn: ($40.50) 3 (2 players)
BB checks, Hero checks.

Turn I check through, because I picked up the draw, no need to b/f here.

River: ($40.50) A (2 players)
BB bets $95.85 (All-In), Hero folds.

Final Pot: $136.35

Of course, river is an easy fold.

Any problems?

Pretty standard..except play 6 max.

and im not sure what his overbet on the river means. sometimes thats the nuts, sometimes nada. but i'd fold here.

- Jordan

Ok, I'm still on a short bankroll, I have no idea why I'm playing 100 NL, but we won't get into that, but is the variance at SH > than at full for NL as well?

I couldn't handle the SH LHE variance, mentally.

Why play SH over Full at NL? Paid off more?

Yea, short handed will get you higher variance, naturally.

SH = you play more hands = others play more hands...others suck more than you, so you get more $$.

Basically.

All about the action, baby.

but ya, if you're short rolled, don't press yourself. I play 400nl with 50 and > now buy ins...losing 5 buy ins (which sux) doesn't ruin my pysche...10 probably would hurt my ego a bit, but I'm rolled for that if it were to happen. I dont think you need 50 buy ins for 100nl, or really 400nl, but I do since i'm moving out on my own blah blah blah.

I think 100nl you could play with 3k-4k roll short handed and be good.

Probably less, but he 30 is a good number.

- Jordan

LOL.

Well, I have 6 buy ins.

I'm really just taking a shot for the night, while taking less of a shot in the 50 NL every other night, until I get my BR built up a lot better.

I can't focus on crap like 25 NL anymore.

I do have the discipline to move down if I drop a bunch though. Hopefully.

$600 roll?

Funny thing about poker is this...and i was just talking about this with a few friends...the discipline you learn playing the low limits is the discipline that keeps you afloat playing the middle and upper limits.

Never learn that discipline in the first place, and you'll never learn it later.

You beat up $50nl for a few weeks, you'll have a roll for $100nl. Beat up $100nl for a few weeks, maybe a month, and you'll have a roll for $200nl.

Stay at $200nl for 2-3 months, build a nice bankroll. Learn how to lose $1k a night and not care, and then jump up to $400nl. Then start making good money with the skills you learned from $50, $100nl and most importnatly $200nl and applied a different level where the money is just more. Discipline is the name of the game, in my opinion.

- Jordan

Yeah, I know. Like I said, I was just takin a bit of a shot for a night. I ended up making about $250, so I'm happy with that. But, it's back to $50 NL tomorrow, well, prolly not because I'll pass out when I get home from work, since I work in 3 hours...

Either way, I'll have 13.5 buyins for $50 NL, so that's what I'm gonna do for a while.

To be clear, what would you suggest as a bankroll for $100 NL, and when I should move up?

Thanks.

- Zach

Do you play one table? I suspect that two tables of full ring has appoximately the same number of meaningful decisions per hour as one table of 6-max.

6-max seems to be all the rage, and I'm thinking up rationalizations for my persistence with full ring.

I'm pretty sure that a big part of my overlay is preflop tightness in early position appropriate for 10 or 9 player tables. (This is diminishing, though. The players who play really fast are all gravitating to 6-max tables where their behavior is closer to optimal.)

If I'm going to play short, I prefer to play at a 10-player table rather than a 6-max table. My theory is that players that accidentally end up at a table that's currently playing short sometimes aren't able to make the adjustment.

I also don't want to forget what I'm doing when I play live.

On the other hand, there's certainly a better game selection at 6-max on some sites. I feel like a bit of a dinosaur, to be honest.

Never play short rolled.

......

Ever.

The 6-max thing is interesting. I play on Absolute a lot now, and the NL games are almost exclusively 6-max at every level. I think Bodog is a lot like that too.

I do find it difficult to have the patience to play full ring anything. Although, full-ring tourneys don't bother me at all. Who knows.

Oh and about the hand, he hopes you had A7 and couldn't lay down the top 2 pair.

Some others have said it as well, but proper bankroll management is absolutely critical for NL. I say that from a good bit of experience of not managing my bankroll properly. It can be as easy as one good negative variance possibly combined with a bit of tilt and an improper bankroll can dissappear very quickly.

Personally, I've finally decided to manage my bankroll properly. Like you, I'm sick of $25 NL, but I'm determined to keep it up until I've hit my target bankroll (got about $200 left to go, for what it's worth).

After looking around and reading a good bit, it seems the general advice for full-ring NL is to have about 25 buy-ins for the game you are playing. If you drop below 20 buy-ins, then drop down a level and rebuild.

So, even for $50 NL, you should have a bankroll of around $1250. And for $100 NL, you should be around $2500.

As Jordan noted, if you are playing 6-max, you need even more of a bankroll, as the variance there can get crazy.

And to David_Nicoson, I'm with you. I prefer full-ring to 6-max, and for pretty much the same reasons. Once I've built up a bankroll for $100 or $200 NL, I'm going to take a chunk and have a go at the $25 NL 6-max, and see how things work out.

I'm all for BR management, and I always preach it on the forums here.

However, taking a bit and taking a calculated risk isn't the worst thing in the world. If I were to sit with all of my money, then I'd be in trouble.

Either way, it worked out this time. I'm back to playing $50 NL, which I'm actually still a bit short for, but either way, not too bad.

Thanks for the tips, guys.

- Zach