Quote:
he has this miracle strategy to moving up levels.
This doesn't sound like any kind of "miracle strategy" at all--he's playing two or three tables on a normal roll and one table under-rolled.
I want to go back to the earlier example, and ask you something about it: you said you play two or three tables of NL100 and maybe one of NL600 on a $2000 roll, right? Well, what happens if you lose two buy-ins at the NL600s? That's easily possible no matter how short you buys in for. And if that happens, you're down to playing NL50.
It just doesn't seem like a financially responsible scheme, even if you're a winner at NL600--if that's the case, he ought to play there with a full roll ($15,000 +). If you don't have that kind of money, grind up to it.