LOL what...

Who wouldn't want 0 variance and highest EV? But naturally EV goes with variance and obviously not everyone apply to the same variables.

For example, if you are a nut peddling nit, opening up your game to allow more variance does not mean higher EV.

And for most losing players, lowering variance alone is higher EV.

However, if you are actually a decent thinking player, often higher variance and higher EV go hand in hand.

I'd like to hear more anecdotes about how married grinders manage their bankrolls. I feel like my BRM rules would be way too degen for most women to tolerate.

20 max BI is way too degen? Perhaps you should define BRM first.

I don't think you can define 5-10 hrs/week as grinding anything.

I have a min #BI. After that everything goes to a house down payment. After that I'll likely build for bigger games and spend on big purchases that I/she/we want that we would otherwise have to save for.

Last summer I played mostly in pretty reggy (as in same players not skilllevel) games with everyone buying in for 250bb and by the end of the night the average stack was at least 500bb deep + with half the table much higher, it made for a very profitable game if you made the right adjustments as most people really overvalued hands that are the nuts <150bb deep.

I always find it highly suspect when posters say things like deep games are more profitable.

I don't think nut peddling in deep games is profitable, but that's usually the adjustment people make when effective gets deep.

I'll rephrase, people would stack off far lighter than they should given stack depth, for example getting it in with hands like TPTK or AA as an overpair that would ordinarily be fine at shallower stack depths but very deep not so much, meaning hands like SC's, lower pairs and the like became much more valuable as the implied odds were much greater but not too much more difficult to realise vs a number of the regular players. I opted to squeeze a much wider range in position than I would ordinarily as lots of players felt uncomfortable playing that deep (and I guess didn't want to admit it) and as a result way overplayed hands that were of marginal strength.

So if the other player is overplaying certain range of hands, are you adjusting by having a higher strength threshold when x > 150bb goes in the pot?

How often do you play x > 150bb pots when stacks are deep?

It's kind of my point that people adjust by nut peddling because...OMG, stacks are deep and godforbid, people overplay their hands.

I may be atypical, but it works for me is this:

We have enough micro hustles and live pretty frugally so we dont need to bring in that much money.

Mrs Deadfish makes enough(along with out passive streams) to cover about 80% of our monthly expenses. shes super understanding with how poker works.

I basically kick in the delta, act as our spearhead for investments/retirement and hedge against crisis/emergency.

I recently used up a lot of my roll for wedding and honeymoon expenses. It was worth it. I am now more or less back to square one after some poor play, coolers, and negative variance. I don't depend on this income and I don't aspire to play 10/25 some day.

The usual deal is I play at least 20 hours a week. All poker money stays poker money until I have 20BI or there is some sort of exceptional event (like a honeymoon for example...another example might be loss of day job...of course, one should have a liquid cash emergency fund separate from their BR). If I ever grind back up to 20BI, all funds over that amount will be diverted into student loan payments and/or a house down payment fund.

My wife understands the short term luck involved in poker. She is okay with it. But I think more importantly is that she understands it's an enjoyable hobby for me that she doesn't want to **** up for me.

Poker is effectively a hobby for me, my job is the main income.

I play for pennies online and now for low stakes live. Mrs Werebeer was very dubious about me playing poker but I ended up depositing $100 and never had to reload. She's fine with poker now since everything poker related is funded from poker winnings and stored in a separate bank account.

It's amazing how quickly the spouses seem to turn around from "kinda on the fence about poker" to "ok with it" once they see money rolling in. Mrs On The Spot was the exact same way. It's like they all read the same book

There is a natural stigma ties to poker because it is still gambling for 90% of players.

It's a hard sell to convince anyone not braindead that you can actually beat the game with a "system."

IMHO, it makes no sense to pillage the LLSNL poker bankroll for life stuff. Winnings need to be constantly re-invested back into the poker roll, so one can move up to higher stakes games ASAP and so the roll can be safely simulated from inevitable downswings that would otherwise drive a player into busto territory.

I'd probably use the word 'trickling' instead of 'rolling' to describe my case but yeah. You can explain everything about the game and sample sizes and variation and running bad and whatever. It means nothing to wives until you have a proven winning record, which is probably fair really.

Meh. People think kids are stupid. they are not. Obviously people in this thread think women are stupid.

Waaaay back in 1992 when I decided to be a perfessional gambooler I laid out my plan to my Gf/future bride/mother of my daughter my plan/idea/goal. I explained everything - took my time, answered questions...and really explained where my edge came from and why I would win. She said ,"yep...makes sense".

It aint rocket science. We raised a kid together and she was a stay at home mom.

Women aren't stupid (lol yes they are). They're not all the same though. It's cool that some wives accept it quickly. Others do not. There was a time when mine thought of poker as my mistress. It had nothing to do with the money although she still calls it gambling. It had everything to do with her feeling that poker was more important to me than her. It wasn't, but it took a long time for us to get to the point where she didn't feel threatened by it. It took understanding from both of us to get there. If you have a good relationship, then the hobbies will take care of themselves.

This whole thing is loosely tied to bank rolls but we haven't been banned so I guess it's OK.

I can't wait to get to the point in my BR life where I can spend it on her again. It paid for most of our wedding, all of our honeymoon, her engagement ring, and a lot of bling for her previously. I don't begrudge the expenditures at all. If you've got the money why not spend it? I didn't play poker for a year because i spent my roll on those things, but I also didn't play because I knew we needed that time to get our marriage on good footing. I didn't want her to have any doubt that she>>poker. It seems to be working.



I now have 12.5 BI.

Mrs blackchipsmatter doesn't like it especially when I lose big amount of blackchips. They obviously matter to her too.

Renton had an excellent post about this some time ago in MHSFR, where he explained that implied odds are not increasing with precise correspondence to stack size. A misconception I see on this forum is an idea that all the chips are in play. In most games there are diminishing returns on implied odds as stacks get deeper, and then a threshold where people just won't stack off without the nuts.

So, unless: preflop raise sizes are becoming larger, postflop raising and reraising ranges are expanding, or postflop calling ranges vs overbets are expanding, there is no difference between playing a deep game and a shallow game.

Lol same here. Im in the same spot as a lot of guys here. My wife gets it sort of. She still thinks when I come home down $500 that I did something wrong.

If the stackoff threshold after xBB becomes the nuts (or effective nuts), then its pretty easy to figure out how to beat somebody who wont stack off without the nuts.... I'll let you guys fill in the blanks.

Been actively playing poker for a long time and I haven't had to report anything as far as winning or losing to her in the last 3 years.

As long as there is money, pretty sure she would not care.

You're either bitter or trolling. I don't care which.

Deep poker is higher ev obviously if you are a crusher. Though i do think many winning players are worse off in deep games where they aren't the best player at the table


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This would be a more accurate depiction of how deep games work: your skill edge increases more-so than your implied odds, but if you aren't willing to use any sort of skill edge and instead become a nut-miner yourself, than deep stacks don't increase your edge whatsoever (unless people will just spew off 200+bbs to you of course)