Was playing badly (almost $25 down) playing 0.05/0.10 NL over 3 days and changed tactic today.
Started playing 0.50/1.00 42 mins ago and already I have recovered $11.95 and that was just 2 sessions and 26 hands!!!
BB/Hr = 28.68
BB/100 = 45.96
How are these stats?
Wow how a new session changes everything!!!
3 sessions
46 hands
BB/Hr = 8.87
BB/100 = 15.11
$6.95 up on the day
Time for bed before I blow it again
I'd say that if you're jumping from 0.05/0.1 to 0.5/1 to make up for your losses, your bankroll management needs improvement 
Hi NYCSavage!
Please stick to the rules of the bankroll management and reread our strategy articles!!! Otherwise you will lose the money faster than you won it. Here is a link: http://www.pokerstrategy.org.uk/strategy/no-limit/#basic
Please read these articles carefully and stick to the rules of the bankroll management.
Good luck at the tables!
Puschkin81
I kept to the rules and was losing $25 so I change tact a little and now I have recouped almost half of my losses
Originally posted by NYCSavage
I kept to the rules and was losing $25 so I change tact a little and now I have recouped almost half of my losses
Haha, you're probably broke before i finish typing this.You have got to think a little.Were you loosing because you were playing badly, or because you were playing 0.05/0.10, how exactly does playing lower limits with less experienced players make you loose?Good luck man, you need to be the luckiest man on earth to survive and go up in limits as fast as you are, having your whole bankroll in at once.I hope you like your odds.
You're probably broke already, but in case you haven't played since last posting here's a statistic you should think about before playing again:
Typically, standard deviation over 100 hands for deep stack full ring no-limit hold'em is about 80 blinds, or half of that for short stacks (it's around 100 blinds for 6 max). Standard deviation is proportional to the square root of the sample size.
You're betting your bankroll on red.
EDIT: realised that if you're doing this, you probably don't know the significance of one standard deviation. 68% of results are expected to be +/- 1 SD from the mean.
Wow!!! Nice to see what you guys think!!
I must actually be the luckiest person in the world if your correct as my balance is now $96 playing 0.50/$1
Not really, you just haven't been playing many hands, and there is a non-trivial (but unacceptably small) chance of you not going broke (at least until you break the assumption of not moving up _again_ without moving down when you're reduced to the same level) provided that you are a winner.
It is possible to get away with appalling bankroll management once, but unless you move up and down in a responsible manner from then on, you increase your chance of going broke until it's a near certainty, and if you manage not to fall into that trap, there's another waiting. Not understanding the mathematics of bankroll management nor trusting those who do, you are very likely to make unsustainable cashouts; that too is part of bankroll management.
Nobody is good enough to win at poker long term without proper bankroll management. Not the top pros and certainly not you. You might get away with this particular decision (although it's at best a coin flip for you going broke), but what about when you decide to take your next shot with a single figure buy-in count? Or take out all your winnings every month and trust that you can still maintain your bankroll (this is mathematically impossible)?
Even if he plays SSS it would be bankroll suicide. And don´t for a second think that this it´s skill even the best cashgame players in the world wouldn´t beat nl100 with 1 buyin. If that was the case the same player would win the WSOP year after year. That is what you will get in the end a tournament with one chance to win. Read the forums and there will be a lot of story's from players like you and they all have one thing in common, they all go bust sooner or later.
I first wrote that what howard said about single figure buyin already happened, but then I realised that if he plays SSS that wouldnt be true. That was what I meant :), not that it is in any way good what hes doing
Single figure -> less than ten. $96 is less than ten buy-ins at .5/1 NL no matter how short you play, nobody lets you buy-in for less than 10bb. Doesn't matter much if he's short stacking anyway, that just means that he's risking his roll on a flip rather than actually being a strong favourite to lose it.
And that, of course, is assuming that he's a good winner at whichever stack he plays in those games and doesn't repeat this foolishness later.
haha i was thinking the same thing too :P.
Regardless if he is busted or not , i think his name will remain in history as the player with the shortest sessions ♦
