when pocket aces lose, and lose, and lose.

roadtrip, just curious: have you ever heard of a game with $100 and $300 blinds?

Even in tournaments, Ive never seen that combination.

Anyway, in my initial post I said: "Played in the $300-$500 buy in game. My first time at that level. Usually I play at the $100-$300 buy in game,..."

Anyway, I digress. My point of the post was only that I thought it was strange... noteworthy... weird.... ironic.... unusual (you pick the word you like) that three hands in a row that AA lost.

Of course, if I ever had AA again, I would play it the same way-- make a big bet to isolate the competition and hope you win. In my hand, I was unlucky. It can happen to anyone.

The guy who blew it was the player in the second hand who did not raise pre flop, had too many callers including a player with true junk who hit two pair on the flop.

Slapinfunk and I talked about it today... and we'd love to always have AA against 66.

and regarding bankrolls: remember that in the games I mentioned, players are limited to the amount of money they can use to buy into the game. in the 100-300 dollar buy in game, the most you can buy in with is $300. anyone with more than $300 in front of them got that extra money by winning it. as you lose you are allow to rebuy but only the amount you lost up to $300. once you have $300 in front of you there are no more rebuys. the same is true with the $300-500 game. $500 is the maximum buyin and when you have $500 in front of you there are no additional buys of chips.

Here we go again. This does have SOMETHING to do with the bankroll required for the game, but, man, I sure wish they would put you in charge of some casino somewhere. If they ever do, give us all a shout.

Bankroll requirement refers to the money you have BEHIND, not the money you have in play. For example, for NLH with two $5 blinds and a $500 buy in, the bankroll requirement is probably somewhere near $200,000. I.e. 400 buy-ins.

There are probably a significant number of people in those games with less than 1/10 of that.

MrMarcus, youre nuts. The only bankroll that matters when you play poker is how much you have on the table and how much you can bet. It has nothing to do with you bank account.

For nlh w/ 2 $5 blinds and a $500 buy-in the bankroll requirements are $500 and enough money to feed yourself til next payday.

This is your philosophy. You do not believe that skill will win in the long run, and you always approach gambling one session at a time, without regard for advantage, or disadvantage.

Other poker players, myself included, take the game far more seriously. We know that if we are the better player at that table, we should win money. We know we need more than one buy in to insure our success.

Although I would like to, I would never sit in a game with the "Big Name Pros". I do not play poker for entertainment. It is a job. An income. Work.

You would enjoy playing with the celebrities. I'll find a "better" game to play. If I want Doyle or Caro to have my money, than I'll mail them a check. Because my chance of actually walking away with a win are significantly less at their table than elsewhere. I don't need the entertainment or prestige. I have no image to project or protect. I have no ego or "celebrity" status that "requires" me to make an appearance. I could care less about walking on the red carpet to play poker with "them".

Some players only have a bankroll to invest equal to their buy in. The "correct" amount, according to the math, is that a poker buy in should be no more than about 2% of the players total bankroll, if that player is a "pro". And a true "pro" will not use their bankroll to pay living expenses, etc, it is their investment fund, their toolbox. The money management for living expenses, etc is done annually, or perhaps quarterly. And after that money is removed from their bankroll, they will still not buy into a game where their investment is more than 2%.

You could care less about the money, or success when you gamble. You do not play with an advantage, as evidenced by your constant admittance to playing short pay tables at VP. You actually believe that there is no such thing as "Advantage Play", or that a players skill may allow them to profit from some gambling situations in the long run. You only believe in luck.

OTH, I do not consider poker "gambling".

As WC Fields said, "Not the way I play". It's winning to me, I have my log or poker diaries going back over more than 20 years. I know, without a doubt, that my skill set in the poker room is profitable every year. And I have had many losing months over that time. Some losing streaks were longer than a month, or two, or three, or more.

And that's the reason for a proper bankroll. Because without one, a pro player could find themselves "unemployed" when their bankroll were gone, due to a long losing streak. Of course, they also have long winning streaks, and when they do, it is equally important to put those wins into the toolbox and not spend it.

That's the difference between myself, and several other players on this forum. WE understand advantage play, believe in our skills, and know we will win in the long run, even shortening "the long run" to "annually".

You gamble "for fun", and admit to never having a winning year.

Yet, you continuously harp against those who claim they do, and constantly find fault with advantage play and skill.

I'm not certain why I've written such a lengthy response to your message. I know who you are, what you do for a living, and I actually think I understand "why" you say many of the things you do.

I just find it rather distressing that someone who seems to be articulate can not seem to, or refuses to grasp the realities of gaming and advantage play or understand the skill set required to be successful year after year. And people have tried to explain and teach, and you refuse to open your mind to those lessons.

But, I don't play at every opportunity to visit a casino or poker room. I may go, look around, and decide there is nothing for me that visit. I don't have an "image" to project or protect.

I am a legend in my own mind. But I'll keep my low profile and try to remain invisible. I have no one that I think I should try to impress. Especially when it comes to casino's.

I'm there for one reason. To walk out with more money than I went inside with. I do not seek entertainment. It is not recreation to me. If I want recreation, I'll go fishing or hiking or kayaking or boating or something recreational.

Although the OP with AA losing three times in a row is a good illustration, here's another:

You've found a good game with some weak players. It's $5 $5 blind NLH with a $500 buyin. You've played a while and gotten up to $700. You're dealt the ace of spades and the king of hearts so you raise to $40. You get three callers, two are weak players, one of them has you covered.

The flop comes QJT with two clubs. You bet $150, you get one caller, but then the weak player who has you covered pushes all his chips in. You naturally call his bet, and he turns over the ace and king of clubs. A club comes on the river.

Since you don't believe in bankrolls, you leave the table and wait for your next paycheck, all the while pondering your bad luck and your sick poker skills.

Oh, I understand now. You guys (marcus and RT) are talking about making a career out of playing poker. Sorry. Im talking about the game and actually playing it.

You see, when you make a bet of $100 and you have $300 behind, it doesnt matter if you have $200-thou in your bank account at Chase. the only thing that matters to the other players is that you have made a bet of $100 and you have another $300 behind.

Geez.

mrmarcus writes:

"You've found a good game with some weak players. It's $5 $5 blind NLH with a $500 buyin. You've played a while and gotten up to $700. You're dealt the ace of spades and the king of hearts so you raise to $40. You get three callers, two are weak players, one of them has you covered.

The flop comes QJT with two clubs. You bet $150, you get one caller, but then the weak player who has you covered pushes all his chips in. You naturally call his bet, and he turns over the ace and king of clubs. A club comes on the river."

Question: so what do you do, cry about it or realize that luck is a major factor in poker, and someone had better luck than you and rivered you with a club? and would you pull your hair out if the winner of the pot had 6-7 of clubs and rivered the flush? it happens all the time, charlie.

Do you really think a high roller is going to go on a public message board, such as this one, and tell the world that he really makes a profit gambling from games such as poker where there are no W2G forms issued by a casino for ring games? I think it's a pretty good bet that we are not the only ones reading this message board. And to think that some of you actually boast about making a profit from your advantaged play? Best of luck to you all.

You no understand. That bozo underdog that called you has the 200k in bankroll. He can rebuy. If he only had the table stake then had to go home one he lost it, he'd play more conservatively. That is why bankroll matters.