How much is too much?

For my first couple of years as editor of the Australian Correspondence Chess Quarterly, I didn't actually play any CC. I'd played previously, but having taken on editing duties, I suddenly found myself without the practical experience that should go with the job. So recently I got back into 'Net' chess, as previously described on this blog.
Now my tournaments of choice are Thematic events, where the game starts with a set position. I enjoy this as it allows me to work on openings I think are important, or fun. So the other day I signed up for two such events. Now these events start when the field is full, and I figured that they may start a week apart, so I wouldn't get overwhelmed. However my calculations were a little out and I woke up this morning to find I had 24 new games requiring my attention. Too be honest I think this is a little much!
However I did choose the tournaments based on the openings so I may be able to cope. The first is the Ryder Gambit in the Blackmar-Diemer (1.d4 d5 2.e4 dxe4 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.f3 exf3 5.Qxf3) Personally I feel it is unsound for White (After 5. ... Qxd4 6.Be3 Qg4 I'm not seeing the compensation), but to be a sport I haven't chosen that line in all my Black games.
The other tournament is a Traxler (1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 Bc5!!) which I'm on record as stating is "a forced win for Black". So here my dilemma is that to win the tournament I need to win some games with White, which then contradicts my previous statement. Of course if I look at it from a "glass half full" point of view, I can regard any losses with the White pieces as destiny, rather than any shortcomings on my part!