Perhaps. But I see the same faces daily at the 1/2 table.

Maybe he meant that they aren't rolled to play poker for a living.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Yeah.
He's using the assumption they don't have a separate source of income.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

I'm saying they aren't properly rolled for the level they play, whether they have a side job or not.

Even at bottom-of-the-barrel-bare-minimum 10 buy-ins(and I would use 25 BI's if you are a 'pro'), most 1/2 players do not have a 3K roll at their disposal. And if they are a 1/2 'pro'(lol) they do not have 7500. That's all I'm saying.

I think what the others were getting at is there are people with bankrolls and there are people who just view gambling as their entertainment expense. They might drop $500/week and never end up in the black over the course of a year, but they don't care and have a comfortable living that supports their preferred form of entertainment. Those are the ones I imagine we see day in and day out, especially in NH.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Yes exactly. For myself, I think 3 buy-ins is a great roll. If I lose three buy-ins in a session, I probably need to stop for the night. Next time I play I'll bring 3 buy-ins again if I lost it all last time. As long as I am comfortable doing that, and having fun, then I think I'm well rolled for the level I'm playing. It's different if your goal is to build a poker bankroll without ever busting, but I think that's a special case.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Exactly what I do blee24. I'm not playing poker to make ends meet anymore and just play when I can and in the mood.

I obviously plan to win and try to play my best, but if I get smashed over the head, I curse at myself on the way home then sleep like a baby at night.

Poker as a hobby > poker as a living.

That's what most casual players do, but that's not the definition of a bankroll. If you lose those three buy-ins and just come back the next time with the same 3 buy-ins that just what you might call, "fun money allocation."

I would assume, that if at some point you lost x buy-ins over the course of y sessions, you would stop playing for a while until you felt you could comfortably return to playing.

That total is closer to fitting the definition of a bankroll than the three buy-ins you bring to a session.

I read an article recently(prob Johnathon Little) that sums all this up nicely, if you’re not paying your bills through poker then you don’t need the customary 20 buyin roll.
Most of these old men 1/2 FW players aren’t supporting themselves by poker and thank God for that

There are certainly different types of approaches for people's situations.

The BI swings at the 5/10 mixed game seem to be tremendously high compared to hands/session. So if you fancy yourself a decent player, have a good job, and play a bunch I still say you need like 50k for poker, if only to keep your sanity while you swingswong up and down the ladder.

Hell I go on weekly 10k swings at 1/3 Omaha way more frequently than I care to admit and most here would say 10-15k is sufficient for live 1/3 PLO with a 700 cap.

I seen that PLO at chasers. I would want more than $10k for that. I would be comfortable with $25k if I was playing for a living.

Regardless of how rigidly you define the term "bankroll", I don't understand what someone means when they say a casual player is "under rolled" for the stakes they are playing. Does it mean they are at risk of losing their home? I don't think anyone who is comfortable losing the money they brought to gamble with is under rolled, even if they choose to play PLO with one buy in.

I'm other words, I think discussing a proper bankroll makes sense if someone is playing for a living, or doing a bankroll building challenge where they want to have a particular risk of ruin, but it doesn't make sense when speaking of casual players because it is so subjective.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Place is really nice inside, I was impressed.

LMK if anyone plans on going there. It's right down the street from where I work and I'd love to meet, play, etc.

Personally, I think you're 'under-rolled' for the game you're playing if you turn down a +EV situation because you're afraid to lose a buy-in. If fear of loss makes you play incorrectly, the game is too big.

Scared money doesn't win.

That's a good point. Maybe the person talking about the regulars in the NH poker rooms was saying they play scared, rather than making a judgment about their choice to play 1/2 given their relative wealth.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Oooo If I ever go there (not this weekend) I'll let you know and buy you a drink (and take your money).

Sounds good, lady!

Started going to Chasers after finding out about it. Really enjoying the 2/5 games.

Seeing as that's a 25 min drive from Wakefield, any others worth the drive? I had been going to Springfield until I learned about Chasers...bah!

For just 2/5?

This is my personal take on the scene. Only my view...

If you are playing 1/2 you have freedom to play everywhere in NH.

2/5, you are looking at Chasers as the leader followed by Hampton Falls or Boston Billiards if they have any games. You obviously can drive to MGM Springfiled/Twin River/Mohegan Sun/Foxwoods, but all are over an hour each way.

5/10, your choices are limited. You have Chasers, Twin River & maybe MGM Springfield...most likely nowhere else unless something rare.

1/3 PLO Chasers (1-4 tables) is the hotbed, followed up by Boston Billiards (usally gets 1 game).

5/10 MIX plo/holdem on fri/sat at chasers (they are trying not to kill off the 1/3 plo, that is why it only runs those days).

1/3 PLO/O8 mix at Boston Billiards (I don't play it so don't know when that runs). It may also run at Chasers & Hampton Falls as well. But not sure. Poker Atlas will tell you.


Tournaments, Manchester & Hampton Falls seem to be the big draws for tournaments. Just seems like their cash games have taken a much bigger hit then years ago due to competition.

Just trying to help.and again it is only my opinion.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Pretty accurate summary. Chasers is the all around leader for cash games, and especially convenient if you are coming from Wakefield or anywhere along 93.

PLO and O8 in Nashua is good for a couple lively tables on days they run the high hand (Tues/Weds). It's a very nice place in terms of size, decor, comfort, TVs, pool tables, bar, arcade, etc but if you are judging purely on poker it's only so so.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

I've played the 5/10 NLHE/PLO mix a few times.

I think its a good game, but plays too big for the buy-in limit.
Plus, The PLO plays bigger than the NLHE, so there's additional pressure to straddle up the NLHE to make the 2 games more equitable.

This, to me seems like the wrong answer, as it exaggerates the same issue of max buy-in being too small for these stakes, and often eliminate post flop or later street play. of course, once stacks get bigger, this problem semi goes away, but then you have short stackers deeply influencing deep stack play.

I think a better adjustment would be to make it 2/5 PLO with 5/10 NLHE. Management also asked about this as others have also mentioned it.

I would welcome feedback from others, in this forum or in-person at chasers, or PM.

It’s been posted in a few places that You Talk Funny has passed away. Cause of death is unknown

Heart attack. Another dealer (coworker) or his said so.

He was one of my favorite posters and seemed like a great guy. RIP, YTF.

Yeah, I stalked the Breakroom just to read his stories