![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Part of my problem when I start trying to play at a higher level all the time is that my lack of comfort with the stakes mixes (during the week) with a lack of motivation to play.
So, what happens is that I get to a level of profit that I would be quite happy with, after just a quarter of an hour, and I say to myself "do I want to be here?" and the answer is, no, so I quit and go to watch some TV, or do something in the flat that "needs doing".
Of course, you can see where I am heading here. The net result is that, if I have a "lucky" month, I end up winning not much more than I would have won at the lower stakes, but having played considerably fewer hands. If I have an "unlucky" month, I end up playing considerably more hands for considerably less profit. The final outcome appears to be a slightly lower profit for considerably fewer hands -- not quite the result intended when moving up in stakes.
The obvious solution if I am thinking as a serious player is to "buckle down" and to try to focus for as long at the higher level as I used to at the lower level, playing according to the same profit and loss principles, except that I multiply them by two. It's a bit silly playing at $200 buy-in, while applying $100 buy-in profit and loss principles.
However, it's the old "easier said than done". I'm managing this at the weekend, but during the week, I find it very difficult. Yeterday I just clocked up about 50 hands at each site (FTP and No IQ) and quit when I was $25 up both times. In terms of variance, that's not even a single hand that goes beyond the flop (SD at $200 buy-in for me is about $160 per 100 hands, I think). But I just said "fuck it, $50 is $50".
I know it's the wrong attitude, but it's the bane of being full-time-employed while trying to "think" like a pro player.
++++++++++++++++
Northern Rock took out an injunction against the FT today to stop it publishing details of future scenarios put together by The Crock. This is a fine example of making things worse. Sure, the memo was confidential, but, once out, it's best to leave it out and to explain things, rather than try to suppress it.
Not that the scenarios should have surprised anyone. Still owing money to the BoE by 2010? Well, hardly a shocker. Potential buyers want interest payment holiday? Again, not the biggest revelation in the world.
It seems that Northern Rock should have gone into administration and that the potential buyers have all come to the conclusion that, as is, Northern Rock equity is worth 0p (US equivalent = 0ยข) per share. But the government feared another run on banks, so it wouldn't let it fail. This leaves us in a farcical situation with the government unwilling to make anything look like a rescue (because this would undermine confidence) but unwilling to let the bank fail (because this would undermine confidence). This seems to me to make it odds-on that some complex "restructuring" will take place (a break-up by any other name) that will be put together in a manner too complex for anyone on the Six o'clock News to understand. They will therefore trot out the Government/Crock/purchaser's line about how it's a "solution". The best way to do this would be to sell off the infrastructure and the securitised mortgages, leaving behind some real shit to be run-off in the fashion of a closed book life fund. This run-off part could be government-backed on the quiet, while the "name" part was sold on. As far as Joe Public and the BBC News is concerned, it's still Northern Rock, but to the purchaser, it's Northern Rock 2007 PLC.
++++++
The rising price of scrap metal has led to a spate of lead thefts from the roofs of churches - 1,800 this year compared with 100 last year. It's probably just a few commercially aware gangs who are responsible -- a couple of years ago they were digging up cobblestoned streets overnight to sell the bricks. However, they are clearly helped by the Uk's mad building regulations.
I'm kind of ambivalent on the building rules in the UK. Anyone who has driven through some US suburbs, where the malls simply repeat themselves every few miles or so, rather like a low-budget cartoon background, can't but help appreciate the architecture of England. But the rules relating to Grade II and above buildings are such that, if you ever consider buying such a house, you should quickly go to have a lie-down. At Grade I level, you need to be a multi-millionaire just to maintain the place.
Why is this? It's because any replacement has to be the same as that which is replaced (the extent of "sameness" varies according to the Grade). So, the churches, having had all their lead stolen, have to replace it with, yes, more lead, which then gets stolen, and so on. In some cases the replacement rules are good, because they are necessary to maintain character, but in others they are just plain silly. And this is one of them.
So, what happens is that I get to a level of profit that I would be quite happy with, after just a quarter of an hour, and I say to myself "do I want to be here?" and the answer is, no, so I quit and go to watch some TV, or do something in the flat that "needs doing".
Of course, you can see where I am heading here. The net result is that, if I have a "lucky" month, I end up winning not much more than I would have won at the lower stakes, but having played considerably fewer hands. If I have an "unlucky" month, I end up playing considerably more hands for considerably less profit. The final outcome appears to be a slightly lower profit for considerably fewer hands -- not quite the result intended when moving up in stakes.
The obvious solution if I am thinking as a serious player is to "buckle down" and to try to focus for as long at the higher level as I used to at the lower level, playing according to the same profit and loss principles, except that I multiply them by two. It's a bit silly playing at $200 buy-in, while applying $100 buy-in profit and loss principles.
However, it's the old "easier said than done". I'm managing this at the weekend, but during the week, I find it very difficult. Yeterday I just clocked up about 50 hands at each site (FTP and No IQ) and quit when I was $25 up both times. In terms of variance, that's not even a single hand that goes beyond the flop (SD at $200 buy-in for me is about $160 per 100 hands, I think). But I just said "fuck it, $50 is $50".
I know it's the wrong attitude, but it's the bane of being full-time-employed while trying to "think" like a pro player.
++++++++++++++++
Northern Rock took out an injunction against the FT today to stop it publishing details of future scenarios put together by The Crock. This is a fine example of making things worse. Sure, the memo was confidential, but, once out, it's best to leave it out and to explain things, rather than try to suppress it.
Not that the scenarios should have surprised anyone. Still owing money to the BoE by 2010? Well, hardly a shocker. Potential buyers want interest payment holiday? Again, not the biggest revelation in the world.
It seems that Northern Rock should have gone into administration and that the potential buyers have all come to the conclusion that, as is, Northern Rock equity is worth 0p (US equivalent = 0ยข) per share. But the government feared another run on banks, so it wouldn't let it fail. This leaves us in a farcical situation with the government unwilling to make anything look like a rescue (because this would undermine confidence) but unwilling to let the bank fail (because this would undermine confidence). This seems to me to make it odds-on that some complex "restructuring" will take place (a break-up by any other name) that will be put together in a manner too complex for anyone on the Six o'clock News to understand. They will therefore trot out the Government/Crock/purchaser's line about how it's a "solution". The best way to do this would be to sell off the infrastructure and the securitised mortgages, leaving behind some real shit to be run-off in the fashion of a closed book life fund. This run-off part could be government-backed on the quiet, while the "name" part was sold on. As far as Joe Public and the BBC News is concerned, it's still Northern Rock, but to the purchaser, it's Northern Rock 2007 PLC.
++++++
The rising price of scrap metal has led to a spate of lead thefts from the roofs of churches - 1,800 this year compared with 100 last year. It's probably just a few commercially aware gangs who are responsible -- a couple of years ago they were digging up cobblestoned streets overnight to sell the bricks. However, they are clearly helped by the Uk's mad building regulations.
I'm kind of ambivalent on the building rules in the UK. Anyone who has driven through some US suburbs, where the malls simply repeat themselves every few miles or so, rather like a low-budget cartoon background, can't but help appreciate the architecture of England. But the rules relating to Grade II and above buildings are such that, if you ever consider buying such a house, you should quickly go to have a lie-down. At Grade I level, you need to be a multi-millionaire just to maintain the place.
Why is this? It's because any replacement has to be the same as that which is replaced (the extent of "sameness" varies according to the Grade). So, the churches, having had all their lead stolen, have to replace it with, yes, more lead, which then gets stolen, and so on. In some cases the replacement rules are good, because they are necessary to maintain character, but in others they are just plain silly. And this is one of them.
