Comments on: This is Starting to Get Out of Control

By: Rookie

Rookie — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 15:35:55 +0000

The problem with No Limit poker (or even Pot Limit) is that you cannot make money management within the table. Gambling theory suggests that you should never risk your whole bankroll even if there is 0.0001% chance of losing the hand. Nevertheless your opponent will shove it and you will have to call it in such a situation and inevitably sometime lose. You will with almost absolute certainity go broke with AA in your hand on 100 consecutive shoves against a bigger stack. The only solution is to have money management outside of the table. Which means you should bring only a fraction of bankroll to the table (and there is actually a way to calculate the optimal amount). This will put a cap on your losses. Bringing all your bankroll is by theory losing play (even half is bad enough). I don’t know how those pros are backed up by their sponsors, but if they are playing with full bankroll at some point they will go broke, and I will be there to see it.

By: greylocks

greylocks — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 03:08:32 +0000

Personally, I hope they all keep playing those stakes. It keeps them out of the $10/$20 games.

Be careful what you ask for, Bill.

By: Bill Rini

Bill Rini — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 10:23:50 +0000

@Jordan: I agree we want fish but I think it hurts the image of poker more to see guys winning and losing $5 million a day than it does to let players know that they should have X number of buyins before playing at a certain level. I’m not talking about turning players into world class champions. I’m talking about teaching them not to go broke . . . which, is a good thing for poker as players can play longer rather than taking a shot once or twice and never playing again.

By: Cyril

Cyril — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 10:07:26 +0000

Plainly agree with your post.

What happens in this “high stakes bubble” is becoming ridiculous.

I also think that this gives a very bad image of poker. A lot of people, even outside the US, are trying to change the public opinions and the governments views on this game, and seeing a bunch of kids *gambling* millions of dollars over the Internet is certainly not good to make people understand that poker is a smart, skill and thoughtful game.

By: How High is Too High? | Pokerati | Texas Hold'em and Las Vegas Poker Blog

Wed, 09 Dec 2009 02:32:28 +0000

[...] longer can they keep these remarkable games going without any fresh fish at the table? Our friend Bill Rini thinks the answer is not much longer. Related [...]

By: Jordan

Jordan — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:44:26 +0000

Very insightful, but my only quibble is with: “But almost all of these nose-bleed heroes acts as a poker ambassador via their online poker room sponsorships so they should be promoting proper bankroll management, staying within your limits, and other principles of playing smart poker.”

Poker Ambassadors, loosely speaking, should be putting on a good show for non-players, to bring legitimacy to the game and to encourage expansion by attracting new players. But promoting proper bankroll management, etc. should not be in their job descriptions. They are merely there to legitimize the game and tempt the fish, not to educate the fish, necessarily. Some might take on that role, like Negreanu, but others can and should freely ignore that element of the game. After all, we want new fish, not new sharks.