Which law specifies that you have to use a pen?

As I understand it the law says to keep records of all of your income and expenses and that includes poker. For gambling they want a record for each session. The IRS seldom enforces it on the average gamble because they aren't making a profit. The most common scenario is you have a lot of wins or one big jackpot, and want to offset them with your losses. In that case you will want to have records.

I was told hand written records by a CPA like 5-7 years ago. Laws could have changed. He could just have a different interpretation than you. Regardless, I would check with a tax profession if I was in that situation

I would ask Slim.

I have never been audited but I know you have to itemize your losing sessions so you must have those records by session to even file correctly.

Record in February = 16 wins, no losses. 67hrs @ $67/hr for +$4500 all at 1/2. Im obv running great but my room introduced some new rules, including straddles of up to $10 utg, which the occasional player does every round. Utg+1 can double straddle to 20, etc but thats pretty rare. 10% rake up to $5. $400 max buy in. Could this game potentially be as profitable as some 2/5 games?

Probably more so if 2/5 is the top game in your room. Once some of the smarter 2/5 players realize how much of a printing press this will be, it might get harder

I wouldn't count on this happening. Players are pretty dumb when it comes to choosing between stakes. Enjoy your gold mine.

Yeah, I don't see at all how this is a "gold mine." The player pool is the most important factor, IMO. I've played in games with similar structures which weren't very good.

I would say even more so. You're basically playing 2/5 but with bad 1/2 players. It doesn't get any better than that.

If a really good 2/5 payer sat with a whole table of 1/2 players and they raised the stakes to 2/5, the really good player could sustain $60+/hr. Of course, if the 2/5 players figure out whats going on, some of them will surely get into the game and then everything changes. In my room we play with a 100BB max buy in. Every now and then there is an interest list for a "deep" 2/5 game with 200BB max buy in, but the list always includes several good 5/10 players.

I'm a big believer that game profitability depends on player quality, stack size, open raise sizing and then stakes, in that order. If you're playing with bad 1/2 players in a situation where people often get in for $400 and there are a lot of straddles, that sounds better than a lot of 2/5 games.

My main game is 1/2, but uncapped and people usually buy in for $300 or rebuy for a lot more. Usually 2 or 3 straddles per round. My rake is much, much worse than yours (10% capped at $13) and I tip too much because there are only a couple of dealers and I'm friendly with them. It's an underground room, so you get a wide assortment of players, from those who play 2/5 or 5/10 at a casino to complete newbs to total maniacs. Almost everyone has money though. Over the past year (which is as far back as my records go) I'm winning $46/hour over a 276.5 hour sample. I've had significant run good here, but I think $30/hour is sustainable in this game and you probably save at least $10/hour on rake and tips compared to me plus you have a bigger game for better players to go to, which I don't.

Average stack depth is probably the most important factor aside from skill level of the game. I'll play dee 1/2 all day as opposed to standard 2/5. You can't win chips that aren't on the table.

This has been my biggest struggle at 1/2nl. A lot of the tables are so shallow that when I buy in for 150bb I have the table covered. I probably need to be requesting table changes more aggressively fwiw.

+1

Sounds like you are simply experiencing variance playing in a game that plays bigger than you are used to or even likely rolled for. I find it interesting that people say they would rather play in a deep game, and yet then get all giddy when players straddle huge, which effectively makes starting stacks very shallow. If you were to buy-in to a game where someone straddles to $20 in a 1/2 game with a $400 (200bb) max then you would essentially start out at 20bbs effective.

BTW, having 16 wins in a row is not a gold mine. It's called running well above expectations. It happens.

I heard from many of people buying in short for building a bankroll is OK. It just sucks because u have to be patient


apk ~

If you are playing on a short roll then you have to play patiently anyways. In general, the more patiently you play the more important it is to buy-in deep because you need to get paid when you make hands and will not often win with air.

People round here have started calling me gamelord. And who am I to stop them?

In all seriousness I know Im running super good. Even my winrate from my last 400 hrs I probably wont keep up, but its pretty cool while it lasts

If you are playing in a deep stacked 1/2 game with large raises you may theoretically be playing 2/5 with reduced ante. Straddles merely restore normal blind levels, but it won't play normally because most of the table is completely unaware of this.

2017 results through 3/2/17:

Total hours = 242.5 (96% at $2/$5, 4% at $1/$2)
Profit = $9863
Hourly = $40.67
Total Sessions = 36 (22W, 14L)
Biggest win = $3105
Biggest loss = $3000 (worst session ever)

This is mostly at 200-500 $2/$5 NL with some smaller hours mixed in. I play extreme tag preflop but I am pretty sticky post flop. I'll mix in some situational lag, especially at passive tables. Short sample size and mostly unsustainable, but still a solid start to 2017.

Why do you say that is mostly unsustainable? Did you feel you ran above expectations?

so I am on the worst run of my poker life online...im down $$$$ my last 7-8 months of playing, whereas my worst run b4 was a 3 month breakeven stretch.

So my question is my last 150k hands I am running 2.75bb/100 below EV......could one of you statisticians out there put this in perspective for me?? whats the % i can run this bad over this sample?? can it get much worse than this lol?

Like dream crusher said -- why is it you think you're just "running hot"? Those WR's are def sustainable if you're a top player in your pool.

That being said, it's more likely you are running hot, especially if you know you are certainly not the top % of your pool.

The truth is that I'm not sure what is sustainable at this point. I guess I expected to take my lumps when moving up to $2/$5, not win at a higher rate than $1/$2 almost immediately. I'll be sure to update after a few more months!

I'd like to think I'm in the top % of my pool, but I'm not sure that's true. I think a lot about table & seat selection, so as long as as there are a few non-top players at the table, that's all I need. I think saying that you are "running hot" is a way to prep yourself mentally for losses that are inevitable. Just part of setting realistic expectations.

How did you get that #? You are playing live casino poker for this?