So I'm finally starting my bankroll challenge for 2024. The title is overly ambitious for fun, but as you'll see from the rules of the challenge, it's actually doable if you (or I) are actually winning players.
My goal is to play on ignition mixing 1 zone table and 3 reg tables.
Starting at NL5 with $100 and moving up once I have 20 100bb buyins at the next stake.
BUT
Rather than actually using my resulting bankroll, I will simply use my all in adjusted winnings plus rake paid out on pots I've won.
In other words, I'm ignoring variance on all-in pots and ignoring rake, since micros are such a rake trap and I want to actually move up some time this century.
This obviously means I can still move up from running too hot (all in adj only covers so much), but I don't want a ton of volume with pennies. This is just for fun after all.
As you can see, with these rules, someone who is an actual crusher gets to cheat a bit on the bankroll management side in order to move up faster in keeping with something a little bit closer to their expected winrate.
Once I've "won" enough to double the roll, I deposit more into the account to make up the difference of rake and all in variance (obv ignoring all of the rest of the variance of the game tree).
Then I move up and play the next stake.
If I get my ass kicked at the next stake, I have to keep redepositing until I quit or improve my graph enough to recover and move up.
Ignoring rake and all in variance won't protect me from being a bad player. If I'm a losing player, I can't move up.
And since zone doesn't cover all stakes, the zone table will become a reg table for stakes not covered.
So far only 7k hands in. A bit of runbad on all-in pots (which we get to ignore!).
We have all-in adjusted net winnings of $22.29
Plus $44.45 rake paid on pots I've won.
So we're already $66.84 of the way to our $100 needed for NL10.
Wish me luck folks!
-9c6