{"id":18,"date":"2004-09-08T16:54:03","date_gmt":"2004-09-08T21:54:03","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/dtrdev\/2004\/09\/08\/bankroll-and-other-comments\/"},"modified":"2004-09-08T16:54:03","modified_gmt":"2004-09-08T21:54:03","slug":"bankroll-and-other-comments","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/dtr\/2004\/09\/08\/bankroll-and-other-comments\/","title":{"rendered":"Bankroll and Other Comments"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a><\/p>\n

Couple of thoughtful comments below<\/A> to my post<\/A>.  One was from the author of Online Poker Thoughts<\/A>, another cool Bostonian poker blog.  Here’re a couple responses:<\/P>
\n

First, my comment was a bit misleading re: moving up to higher limits.  I agree with both commenters about playing lower limits given my bankroll – by “eyeing” 2-4, I mean it as a later<\/EM> possibility, not now, and I’d like to use the bonuses to help build up to that point while I’m playing the lower limits.  Kevin’s comment also points in a similar direction.<\/A>  I was playing 2-4 for casino play because I was going to the Palms to hang out with my grandfather and grandmother – which was really fun in its own right, though not the best decision for me if you solely consider  my skill and bankroll. Oh well – not nearly enough time to see family, plenty of time to play lower limits online if I want.<\/P>
\n

Second, re: river play: as I’ve discussed before,<\/A> I get the basic sentiment about calling bets on the river in big pots.  Totally with you. What I’m talking about is slightly trickier situations.  For instance, smaller pots (not 16-18 bb, but more like 10-13) with some scare cards on the board – I know that’s vague, but there are a lot of distinct situations.  As I’ve said, my approach has usually been too call because of the devastating error it can be to fold in big pots, but I’d like to improve that part of my game over time.  It’s about finding the right balance.  Also: betting for value in trickier situations with scare cards.  Not talking about calling, but betting out, with the possibility of a raise from your opponent(s).  <\/P>
\n

Third, on overthinking – well, at least with the river, I have been making the calls because that is the safer play, so in that regard I’m not sure I’m otherthinking.  But I agree that, generally speaking, it’s best to not overthink situations.  What I’m trying to get at are the trickier situations, heads-up, somewhat scary boards, etc. – most of the time the right play is fairly straightforward – but what about the other X% of the time?  If I can improve on that X%, I’d like to.<\/P>
\n

Finally, re: playing to many cards – fwiw, I follow Lee Jones\/Abdul Jalib (very similar) and Ed Miller’s recommendations.  Given my skill level, I do not try to figure out the unique situations borderline hands are playable.  The main adjustment I try to make is with the smaller pairs; if the table is too tight (want to play it against a bigger field if you hit the set), or too aggressive (likely to be a rise behind), I will play them less than the Ed Miller chart recommends (Ed Miller makes this point explicit outside of the chart).  Similar sort of analysis for the suited connectors – Ed Miller is less keen on those than Lee Jones is, it seems, except in looser games.   Also, as I noted before<\/A>, I do follow Ed Miller’s suggestion re: hands like AJs, ATs, KJs, which many people say I should not raise with.<\/P>
\n

However, if my posts have given you the impression I play to many hands, please give me tips – I’m eager to learn and willing to listen<\/STRONG>.  <\/EM>Cite some examples in my posts and let me know.<\/P><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Couple of thoughtful comments below to my post.  One was from the author of Online Poker Thoughts, another cool Bostonian poker blog.  Here’re a couple responses: First, my comment was a bit misleading re: moving up to higher limits.  I agree with both commenters about playing lower limits given my bankroll – by “eyeing” 2-4, I mean it […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1037,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1356],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-18","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-dtrstories"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/dtr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/dtr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/dtr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/dtr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1037"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/dtr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=18"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/dtr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/18\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/dtr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=18"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/dtr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=18"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/dtr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=18"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}