Bankroll and bad beats

[propaganda]

Hi all,
First time posting here, so bear with me. I'm having a bit of trouble at pokerroom. I can get into the money in the $10+1 S&Gs at a fair rate, but find the 5+.50's' nearly impossible due to bad beats. My bankroll is very short (about $100, I took a beating the past week) as I'm a student. So what I'm wondering is, is my greater cash rate at the $10+1's a fluke, or is the varience just that horrendous at the $5+.50's? Am I better off risking ruin at the $11's or is my problem with the $5.50's just an odd run of luck?
--propaganda

[Freudian]

So what I'm wondering is, is my greater cash rate at the $10+1's a fluke, Yes
or is the varience just that horrendous at the $5+.50's? Variance or not, should be easier to beat
Am I better off risking ruin at the $11's or is my problem with the $5.50's just an odd run of luck? No, you are not better off playing the 11s and yes luck will have a big influence in the short run

[MegaBet]

If you plan on playing the 11s with a $100 bankroll...good luck. There are not many of us here who'd last too long with only 9 buy-ins to work with, even at the "easy" 11s.

[propaganda]

I think I figured out what is causing much of my volatility. I find myself staying with top pair/good kicker(usually top kicker) hands. Keep in mind, I'm often the best hand when I do so, but the folks in the $5.50's don't get the hint when you're firing off pot sized bets. Get a few of them to chase 2-6 outers over the turn and river, the pot size goes up dramatically, I'm betting off a good chunk of my stack, and they only have to hit once. It may be a weak-tight strategy, but when I get a chip lead in a $5.50, I think that if I don't flop better than top pair, I'm going to be FAR more cautious than I have been.

In other words, I need to drill into myself that staying out of unnesessary hands applies to the post-flop as much (if not more) than pre-flop.
Thanks for the quick replies,
--propaganda

[valenzuela]

so not true , Im playing the 11s with an initial bankroll of 1 buy-in.

[kyro]

[ QUOTE ]
so not true , Im playing the 11s with an initial bankroll of 1 buy-in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you stop? Please. I can't tell if you're kidding and trying to lead OP astray, or really this much of an idiot. Either way, you're not helping one bit.

[cha59]

If you really want to get better, you should learn how to beat the 5.50's.

If you can't beat those games, your game has leaks that you won't be able to plug as easily at the higher limits, assuming you are able to move up.

I'd say plug away at the 5's, learn how to win there and try to build your bankroll there till you have 30 + buyins at the next level. At Poker Room, the rake wont hurt you as bad as playing the Party 5+1's, so it makes sense to me to stay there for now.

[LordBP]

The varience and lucky just probably aren't on your side right now. You want people to be trying to hit 2-6 outers in the long run.
Also <10 buy ins is not a good idea if you plan on keeping that money for long. Even the 20ish at the 5.50s is probably low.
How many have you played in the last week. I'm sure it's to small to show much.
Good luck.

[propaganda]

About a dozen, dozen and a half. Won a few, lost a lot more. I really have to start keeping good records. I usually lose some, then make it back up in ring games, but I've been sticking to s&g's lately.

Placed 3rd and 1st today (out of 2) in the $5.50's. Caught a few bad beats, but they didn't bust me. I've been overvaluing top pair/good or top kicker. While it's a mistake for my opponents to call pot sized bets with bottom or middle pair, it's just inviting bad beats on my part. I still bet out, but am a little more cautious with callers now, seems to help. Of course, 2 games is hardly proof that that's my (main) problem, so time will tell. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Thanks again to everyone for the prompt resposes,

--propaganda

[kuro]

Your sample size is so small that your win/loss records don't mean anything.

[TheNoodleMan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
so not true , Im playing the 11s with an initial bankroll of 1 buy-in.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you stop? Please. I can't tell if you're kidding and trying to lead OP astray, or really this much of an idiot. Either way, you're not helping one bit.

[/ QUOTE ]
No bankroll is safe in the hands of a losing player, and this one buy in waste of a poster is constantly finding new ways to assure me that he is just that.

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi all,
First time posting here, so bear with me. I'm having a bit of trouble at pokerroom. I can get into the money in the $10+1 S&Gs at a fair rate, but find the 5+.50's' nearly impossible due to bad beats. My bankroll is very short (about $100, I took a beating the past week) as I'm a student. So what I'm wondering is, is my greater cash rate at the $10+1's a fluke, or is the varience just that horrendous at the $5+.50's? Am I better off risking ruin at the $11's or is my problem with the $5.50's just an odd run of luck?
--propaganda

[/ QUOTE ]

whats a bankroll? holla

[KJ o]

[ QUOTE ]
If you plan on playing the 11s with a $100 bankroll...good luck. There are not many of us here who'd last too long with only 9 buy-ins to work with, even at the "easy" 11s.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is so completely non-true. Can you see why?

Chances are you were serious, so I will spell it out for you. There is a world of difference between a STARTING BR and a MAXIMUM BR. If a world-class SnG player only ever had 9 buy-ins there would come some time where he would go broke. However, starting on 9 buy-ins at a low level and allowing the BR to build from there, the chance of a truly great player going broke is truly small.

[freemoney]

this is completely untrue.

[valenzuela]

Im not kidding, Ill explain myself.
What happens if you lose $90? If you have 100 and play the 11s the worst possible outcome is losing 100 bux, if you have 100 dollar plz stop worrying about not having 30 buy-ins just play. And if you dont agree with me and u think the OP has to play the 1s, fine but I think he should keep playing the 11s if he wants to.

[Blarg]

The variance is horrible -- absolutely nightmarishly horrible -- at all levels. That's poker, and that's SNG's.

You see even the best players here talking about 500-game losing and breaking even streaks. And these are the BEST. Kind of puts things in perspective, eh? Especially when you're less than the best.

Well, at least for a few minutes, anyway. One of the major spectacular feats of successful poker playing is not letting it get to you. Few players of any skill level seem capable of accomplishing it.

That said, I do think that the lower you go down, the more often you run into the kind of absolutely crazy playing that makes your win rate jump all over the map. And that there's a difference even between 5's and 10's. But there are enough crazies at those levels, and even at the 20's, that you can have long runs of sitting at tables full of them, and I've seen 20's that are every bit as crazy as the craziest 5's.

What it comes down to is that you have to have the bankroll to suffer outrageously horrible luck without tilting, which is quite a trick, as most people can be put at least subtly on tilt by losing very tiny fractions of their bankrolls, so their bankrolls have to be truly enormous before they feel totally divorced for an extended period of time from bad results. With your $100 bankroll for the 10's, you're nowhere near there, I don't care who you are, even if you're the Buddha himself. That's just too small.

You're going to play anyway, though, so play what you like and feel most comfortable with. Nobody's going to persuade you any different, since you already know how dramatically underbankrolled you are in the first place yet are still playing. Practically speaking, it's not wise, but I guess you like the element of danger or whatever. So, just enjoy your poker. That's how and why most people play, and there's nothing wrong with that. It's not exactly what these forums are about, but I'd be more surprised if people played within their means, budgets, and abilities than not.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
What it comes down to is that you have to have the bankroll to suffer outrageously horrible luck without tilting, which is quite a trick, as most people can be put at least subtly on tilt by losing very tiny fractions of their bankrolls, so their bankrolls have to be truly enormous before they feel totally divorced for an extended period of time from bad results. With your $100 bankroll for the 10's, you're nowhere near there, I don't care who you are, even if you're the Buddha himself. That's just too small.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me put it this way: I rarely tilt, but still have the ability to donk off a stack now and again, and I am *very* confident that I could build a real roll off $100 at the 11's. So could most people who don't suck at poker, with a 20-25% margin of error because hey, variance does hit sometimes.

But am I 75% confident that I can build up a $100 roll to $300 and then to $600 or whatever without leaving the 10's? Sure. I did that with my girlfriend's account once, except that was with 50 bucks and I was bored so I cashed out.

Then I left $43 in her account, she wanted the money so I logged in, went to 2 NL $25 tables, 77 hit a set and turned a full, AK hit his nut flush on the river and raised all in on a $4 pot and I hit the magic $50 mark ($65 mark) after 4 hands.

So my point, basically, is that depending on the game 2 buyins is plenty. 4 if you're feeling frisky and can redeposit or play a big freeroll or something. Holla.

[valenzuela]

two very different opinions on two posts.
The wise old guy who proposes a huge bankroll and the clueless teenager who likes risk, still I dont see the idea of playing underbankrolled foolish if you have parents.
To the OP , two options:
a)Just put an Oasis CD on, start an 11, maybe chat with a friendly player, visit twoplustwo , dont screw up, have balls to steal blind( its not so easy pushing Q3 with ur BR on the line) when ure on a very dramatic BR situation and pray variance to plz hit u when u have more bankroll.
b) 4table 1s, move up to the 5s once u have $150 in ur br and keep 4tabling.
My case: Which option makes u better at poker? I think A.

[Blarg]

That a guy who is a proven winning player at the 100's, which it's my understanding you are, feels very confident about his ability to win at the 10's should go without saying, really.

The OP is struggling at the 5's and 10's. What a player capable of regularly and consistently beating much higher levels is capable of doing at levels he's long since mastered has little relevance to his personal situation. If he had the skills to cream the levels he was at, he very likely wouldn't have made his post in the first place.

Really, Adanthar, your post seemed like an extended brag and not helpful or realistic. This being 2+2, I expect a flame war to erupt from that remark, but so be it. "Two buy-ins is plenty"? Puh-lease, man. I've heard people saying you don't need 30 buy-ins, but...you don't need 3? Come on, man. We've all had 5 or 6 or 7 game ITM streaks or maybe more; I had 11 of 12 once I think. But...especially for a beginning player, coming from the vantage point of either incredible skill or incredible luck is no place to be telling him what he realistically needs as a bankroll as a beginning player.

Sorry I have to disagree with you so strongly here, and I hope you don't take it personally, but I think your response was way, way, nutty crazy way wrong.

[pooh74]

[ QUOTE ]
Really, Adanthar, your post seemed like an extended brag and not helpful or realistic. This being 2+2, I expect a flame war to erupt from that remark, but so be it.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah andanthar...stop bragging. If you manage to pass the bar, then come back and brag...until then, you're still a pissant JD who's not allowed to practice. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

gl btw...

[11t]

The "bad beats" at the 5 dollar level are most likely just random chance or all in your head. I'd suggest sticking with it until you have 30 buyins for the 10+1 levels and then go there.

If you play smart and consistent you can beat those games pretty easily.

[11t]

I agree, variance on 1500 chip 10 minute level tournaments at the 5 and 10 dollar levels is much much lower as compared to the mathematical crapshoots that most people here play.

[The once and future king]

Having your downswhing at one limit and then having the counter upschwing at a lower limit sucks mega time. (I speak from experience.)

Best to have a roll that allows you to absorb all the variance whilst staying at the limit of ones choice.

[adanthar]

There was *just a little* tongue in cheek in that post, man /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

I don't think the OP should be doing this. I do think the constant 'you must have $300 to play the 11's and be safe' posts are way overblown. Come on, even if you lose the hundred bucks reloading from freerolls/affiliate programs for (Site X)/microlimit PS games takes maybe a week, tops. And in the meantime, what's 500 games at that limit going to tell you other than 'I can beat the worst players alive'?

These aren't rocket science and even a merely mediocre poker player isn't going to lose 30 buyins at the 11's without some horrible luck.

[valenzuela]

[ QUOTE ]


I do think the constant 'you must have $300 to play the 11's and be safe' posts are way overblown. Come on, even if you lose the hundred bucks reloading from freerolls/affiliate programs for (Site X)takes maybe a week, tops.

[/ QUOTE ]

I basically agree with evrything you say except for what the OP to do. In fact Im part of an affiliate program, Im part of empirebacker.com and all I do is post on recpoker.com once a day, twice on weekends, theyre suppose to give me $30 by monday...hope that works out.
I think a sensible roll for the 11s is basically any roll, if you have a $11 br...ehhh u can only lose 11 which is basically like a three beers or something. Instead of getting drunk u lose a SNG, how can that be a big deal?? well if you have $100 u have more chances of busting, but its only an expensive dinner..and its a profitable investment.

[microbet]

I'm surprised this really generated any argument. A bankroll requirement depends on so many unlisted factors, it is impossible to tell.

Pretend like you know what your ROI is. Make up some risk of ruin that would be acceptable. Plug the numbers into one of the spreadsheets or do the calculation (you probably have to fabricate an ITM distribution). Maybe post those and someone else will do it for you.