PDA

View Full Version : A couple of thoughts on bankroll issues (got kinda long)


bholdr
06-13-2005, 09:02 PM
It seems to me that a lot of the questions in this forum revolve around bankroll issues. questions range from "what kind fo a bankroll do i need to play such-and-such game/limit/etc", to "how to best build my bankroll with bonuses, play, etc". Often posters get standard-issue responsed that simply reiterate the consensus understanding that 300BB for limit and 20 buyins for big bet poker are necessary to avoid busting due to simple bad luck. I've been thinking about how this applys to non-serious players, and i've come to the conclusion that it's generally not the right advise, or at least, it's too generic. here are my thoughts:
(none of this is supposed to be authoritative, I'm kind of brainstorming here, and hoping that some more experienced posters will add their thoughts)

-Of course, for a losing player, the standard line is thst 'no bankroll will ever be big enough', I disagree; there are things that you can do with your bankroll to mitigate your poor (hopefully improving) play. the first thing is to keep at least $500 in your roll, such that you can take advantage of the various party skin, pokerstars, and paradise reloads. A -4BB/100 loser playing on a bonus all the time will be breakeven or better at .50/1. If they only had the standard 300BB, they would not be able to pad their play with the reload bonuses, and will be broke eventually unless they get better fast.

-Some will say: "Why bankroll? if, for example, a person is making 50k/year, there's no reason they can't lose 2+BB/100 at 1/2 and never risk any kind of financial problems, poker is an inexpensive hobby (compared to many other ways to spend your dough) for the great majority of players." I disagree with this, too, and i think that people that just deposit whenever they want to play and then slowly lose it are losing more than they think. Maintaiing a bankroll is the best way to track your progress and limit your losses; it forces you to become a better player. Even if you make a ton of money and only play very low stakes, there is a purpose and a justification for using the standard bankroll paradigm (300BB or 20 Buy-ins)- the point is that using a roll makes you a better player faster.

-for the winning player, i sometimes feel that the 300BB rule isn't enough. I am rolled to play 10/20, but there is no way I'm confidant enough in my abilities to beat that level long-term. so, i play mostly 3/6, which i can consistantly beat. When i first moved up to this limit (i play mostly stud- holdem i'll only go as high as 2/4) i played scared, even though my roll was bigger than necessary (I'm young and not yet a wealthy person, so seeing more than $100 in a limit pot go the other way hurts a bit). I'm just getting to the point that i can play at that limit totally fearlessly, that is, correctly. I am also willing to play at lower stakes- down to 1/2, if i think i can make more money and clear bonus faster at that level.

-but i wouldn't take that concept too far- it's important to avoid playing so low that you are not challenged at all, and the money doesn't matter. Sometimes when I'll sit at a really small table I notice that i play terribly, being a mainiac, not paying attention, etc. this isn't making me a better player, which is my goal. I think all players should play at the level where it stings a little to lose a big pot, but not enough to mke you play scared.

-There is a school of though that say if you have more than 600BB for your limit, you are losing your potential incresed winnings at a higher level. there is some merit to this idea.

-Also, I think there are probably a lot of players that stick to the 300BB minimum far too rigidly. The 300BB number should only apply to your normal limit. one shouldn't be afraid to take a shot at a bigger game if it looks really good. When i see a known mainiac/fish sit at a 5/10 table, and there's a seat open on his left, i'm there, even though that's a bit bigger than my normal game. Also, taking a shot once in a while will condition the fear out of a player as they prepare to make the move to a higher limit full-time. Also, live games are often much weaker than online games, and have bigger limits- I have seen live 8/16 games that were softer than Party 1/2. why wouldn't you play, if you're disiplined enough to quit if your roll gets seriously threatened?

-I have no idea what kind of a roll that one needs to play MTTs. I assume it's big (like 100 buy-ins, 2k for $20 tourneys or something like that). I never play tournaments, but i am starting to get into them would someone please fillin this blank spot in my knowlage for me?

So:
-If a losing player has a big enough roll to take advantages of bonus money, they may lose in the games but they don't have to lose money. this means $500
-Everyone that's serious about learning to be a good player should establish and live by a bankroll- it doesn't necessacarily have to be 300BB, though it probably should be.
-One should keep a big enough roll that they don't have to play scared, be it 300BB, 500BB or 1000BB. by doing this you may be losing a little money.
-Don't be afraid to play in games that you're not bankrolled for, if they look good and you're disciplined enough to move back down
-if i have a 6k roll, what level MTTs should i be playing? I have a very good tournament record (sample sixe- I've only played about 20 of 'em), cashing often, but i've never played any bigger than a $35 buy-in. TYIA

Thoughts, opinions, things I've missed or have wrong? how do you use your roll? how 'bout those MTTs? if you like this post, sheridancat, would you put it on the wilki? geez. i had no idea i'd written so much- i get to rambling sometimes (like right now, for example) and a lot of this stuff is almost stream-of-conciousness writing. okay, stopping now.

AKQJ10
06-14-2005, 09:20 AM
OK, its up there as the Bankroll article: http://poker.wikicities.com/wiki/Bankroll

Just to give fair warning though, like anything on a wiki it can evolve over time as different people make edits. The wiki does store a history though so you can always retrieve the original version.

Thanks for writing this!

SheridanCat
06-14-2005, 12:30 PM
[ QUOTE ]
-Of course, for a losing player, the standard line is thst 'no bankroll will ever be big enough', I disagree; there are things that you can do with your bankroll to mitigate your poor (hopefully improving) play.


[/ QUOTE ]

Right, but the point of the "no bankroll big enough" assumes the person is a long-term loser. Not an improving player. A player who comes to the game fresh, starts reading, starts out losing is not necessarily a long-term loser. She may be just a short term loser who is improving, and in that circumstance, I agree with your point. Bonus chasing can keep you above water while you learn and improve.

[ QUOTE ]

-for the winning player, i sometimes feel that the 300BB rule isn't enough. I am rolled to play 10/20, but there is no way I'm confidant enough in my abilities to beat that level long-term. so, i play mostly 3/6, which i can consistantly beat.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think that just becuase you have a bankroll big enough for a limit doesn't mean you have to play it. If that limit is really tough, you may well be better off playing lower. Remember, bankroll management is only a portion of what makes a player a winner. Game selection is a huge component of winning as well. However, as you allude to later, if you see a game that is juicy you may be more inclined to jump into it if you're properly bankrolled (or close to it).

Even winning players will undergoe 200BB downswings. If that makes you queasy, it may be best to stick to a limit you're over-bankrolled for.

[ QUOTE ]

-I have no idea what kind of a roll that one needs to play MTTs. I assume it's big (like 100 buy-ins, 2k for $20 tourneys or something like that). I never play tournaments, but i am starting to get into them would someone please fillin this blank spot in my knowlage for me?


[/ QUOTE ]

I can't. For me, MTTs are just an amusement. Unfortunately, they have also been a small drain on my bankroll over the years.

Regards,

T

topspin
06-14-2005, 01:18 PM
[ QUOTE ]
for the winning player, i sometimes feel that the 300BB rule isn't enough.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
There is a school of though that say if you have more than 600BB for your limit, you are losing your potential incresed winnings at a higher level. there is some merit to this idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering that 600BB at one level is at most 300BB at the next level up, aren't these two points somewhat contradictory?

I tend to agree with your first point more. While 300BB downswings may be theoretically remote events, dropping 200BB is probably going to have you pretty scared and playing less than your A game. Having a bigger roll insulates you from this.

bholdr
06-14-2005, 11:30 PM
"Considering that 600BB at one level is at most 300BB at the next level up, aren't these two points somewhat contradictory?"


When i mentioned that some people believe that if yuo have a 600BB roll and are capable of beating the limit for which it is a 300BB role, you should be moving up, and when you don't you are losing money- It's a good point, but the peace of mind of having 600BB ay be worth the lost earnings. I was giving the other side of the argument equal time.

diebitter
06-15-2005, 09:32 AM
I personally can't wait to start the next level, even though I do play scared initially. I approach it this way:

once I got 450BB, I go up to the next level. I then play that level unless I get back down to 300BB of the previous level, and then I revert back to the previous level. I've moved up from the micros to currently playing 1/2. I've got busted down once from 2/4, but the bust has given me a real taster for the higher limit, and allowed me a lot of thinking/reading/envisioning as well as the stats in pokertracker - of how to approach it next time.

It's also given me an appetite and good attitude to tackling 2/4 when I reach $900 (400BB of 1/2).


I believe it's working well for me. I think it's also a good approach if you don't mind dropping back down a level (and I don't).

Any thoughts?

bholdr
06-15-2005, 02:53 PM
I like your aggressive approach, just keep in mind that it gets a little more intimidating when making the jump from 5/10 to 10/20 than 1/2 to 2/4. (it has been for me, anyway)

personally, I think a great way to move up is to work it into your multitabling- when i jumped from 1/2 to 3/6 (stud- there is no 2/4 on party) is to play three small tables and one the next level up, when comfortable, add another, etc....

GL.