Adam had posted about how he was targeting the $1000 bankroll figure and that got me interested in targeting that goal as well. He was thinking a challenge like Cake II where there would be a certain deadline. I was proposing a race to $1000 instead since I think it would enforce better bankroll management than having a set date. Case in point, when Adam went for broke (the first time, around June 1) because that was the *only* way he could have a chance to win the Q2 prop bet.
There are pluses and minuses to both but I was trying to think of a different mechanism. *Assuming* that the challenges are about bankroll management, then there are many options that could be used to help enforce that notion.
* Make it mandatory that certain bankroll management rules are followed like not exceeding x% of your roll on a table at any one time. The first person reaching $1000 without breaking BRM rules would be declared the winner and that would prevent players from taking excessive risk in order to try to win the prop bet.
* Lowest negative variance. Not sure how this would be done but I have to think there is a statistical measure which would allow us to determine who had the swingiest chart without penalizing positive upswings from big tourney cashes, RB payouts, bonuses, etc.
* Smallest negative downswing. Could just say that the person with the smallest (or smallest 10 or whatever) downswings percentage-wise would be the winner. That would allow for unlimited huge upswings and only measure negative bankroll movements.
I'm sure there are many more ways we could structure it to keep BRM as a defining factor in the challenge. Or it could just be a no holds barred race if we don't want to make BRM such a factor.
Bottom line is that I know that I do much better when there is a carrot in front of me to chase after. Ever since the April 1 deadline came and went I have lost focus and incentive to play well or manage my bankroll well so I would welcome some sort of competition to get me over the $1K hump.