I think I've cleared just over $150k, which was just what the doctor called for after the butchering the week before. The highlight of the week was a $100k scoop on the Italians v the Scots. I didn't play great during the last cash few sessions in Madrid, was feeling fairly burned out and run down after a hectic month. My body finally gave up last night and I came down with the flu, which was pretty bad timing, as I was supposed to play the high-roller cash game in City West tonight. At the moment I'm horsing the anti-flu tablets into me, so we will have to see how we go. I played one of those TV events under lights before with the flu and it was so disgusting, you end up sweating like a paedo in a playground.Bank Roll Management:This is my philosophy on it, I am not saying it's correct but it's what I believe:In most careers if people looked at your salary it would look like the steps of a stairs, when put on a chart. Poker player's salaries when charted will look like a pyramid. The bigger your bank-roll is at the peak of your career, the more money you will make. Given the average professional poker player career will last about 10 years, it's very important in the 3/4 years surrounding the peak you make a lot of money.Most young guys who are talented enough to make it playing poker generally have other career options. These other careers will offer jobs which span over 35/45 years and while at first offer fairly modest salaries compared to those that can be acquired playing poker; it will churn out an ever increasing wage far longer than your poker career will and offer other benefits such as a pension.A few assumptions I think it's fair to make. Your peak will be somewhere around the age of 35. I am sure there are a few exceptions to this rule, as there are to any rule but I think it's right in 99% of cases.Therefore gambling aggressively when you're on the upward part of your curve is a good idea, as there will be a multiplier affect on future earning. What does gambling aggressively mean? It means risking large chunks of your bankroll in very good spots. I often heard people say, you need x buy-ins to play cash games and need y buy-ins to play tournaments. I have never adhered to these concepts; instead I have always chosen the option to grow my bankroll as big and as quickly as possible, without putting it in a position where it could easily bust. I have never had a problem sticking 20% of my bankroll into a given spot whether it be a cash game or sports bet. I obviously gamble a lot less aggressively on a tournament, as the chance of recognizing your edge is far less likely. I would use Kelly criterion in these spots when risking such large amount of my bank roll. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion I rarely risk over 20% of my bankroll on a given event, even if I think it will return a higher ROI than 20%. By only ever risking % of your bank-roll, you minimize the likelihood of ever going broke. I personally think that if you're not getting at least 10% of your bankroll on the line several times a year, you've got 1 of 2 problems. 1. You're basically not good enough at what you do, as you can't find the edges one needs to find to make a success of their career Or 2. Your conservative nature will curtail your future earnings severely and as a result you won't make enough from your poker/sports betting career and you would have been better off pursuing another career path. I think that by adopting an aggressive strategy like I have, you give yourself the best option of success in life. If you don't have the required skills to make it as a professional gambler you're going to bring the matter to a head much more quickly and you can go off and pursue more conventional career path and still not miss out on too many steps at the top of stairs. As I said at the start, this is just my philosophy and it's why I gamble the way I do. With a few years to go before my 35th birthday, there could be some fun times ahead!!!!
More...
More...
