A straw poll on bankrolls (in re: "Limit move up!")

[Nate tha' Great]

Please take a moment to answer the following question if you consider yourself to be a long-term winner at limits of 10/20 or higher.

[Franchise (TTT)]

I took the second choice.

Most of us aren't pros, and have supplemental income to boost our bankrolls if they drop noticeably. Also, we have the option of dropping to a lower game since our living expenses aren't tied to our hourly rate. Finally, we don't play enough hours to trigger the long-term in any reasonable amount of time.

[Duke]

Aside from the social atmosphere, I see absolutely no reason for a pro to play anywhere but at home. Online games are so unbelieveably juicy, and you get so many more hands that you can sustain decent earn rates at tiny limits. I'll assert right now that there isn't a live 30-60 player out there that can make more per hour than an expert 4-tabling 5-10 online.

It's topical because you don't need much of a bankroll to do it that way.

~D

[mosch]

I wasn't sure how to answer that one... I used to y'know... lose.

Since I started taking the game seriously though, I've had at least a 300BB bankroll for all the games I sit in regularly.

I do cheat slightly though... if I've decided to get wickedly drunk during the session, I book that result as a gambling win/loss, not a poker win/loss.... and I feel free to violate bankroll rules.

[Nate tha' Great]

Okay, thanks to everyone for participating.

A couple of comments, notwithstanding the fact that I can't spell 'whither' right.

It had always been my impression that maintaining a proper poker bankroll is one of those things (like, say, remaining faithful to your significant other) about which people are inclined to be more conservative about in theory than they are in practice. A substantial number of you escalated through the limits *without* being fully prepared for the eventuality of a serious downswing. Maybe you took on the mid limit games a bit before you really should have, ran good for a bit, and by the time the run ended, lo and behold, had not only built up a bankroll but also developed the skill necessary to be a long-term winner at those games. It is worth noting, I think, that a player with a "true" expectation of +0.5 BB/hr (I think this is perhaps realistic for an intermediate player with some holes in his game but precocious card sense), while still at significant risk of busting out if he's playing on an inadquate bankroll, is nevertheless substantially *less* likely to bust out than a player with a "true" expectation of -0.5 BB/hr.

For example, let's say that a player intended to play 200 hours of poker on a half-bankroll (150 BB), and that his SD/hr is 13 BB.

The risk of ruin for a player with a "true" win rate of +0.5 BB/hr is 24.9%
The risk of ruin for a player with a "true" win rate of -0.5 BB/hr is 60.4%

In this example, the more skilled player will bust less than half as often as the less skilled player. Certainly, a risk of ruin approaching 25% is more than most of us would knowingly want to accept. Nevertheless, the (natural and inevitable, IMHO) inclination of many players to take on a higher limit before they are really ready for it probably does something to select out the better players.

Certainly, somone with a grind-it-out approach can come to achieve success at higher limits too; GoT is perhaps the best example of this, and I have no doubt that he'll continue to make lots of money at poker for many years at pretty much whatever limit he chooses. But I do think there are some downsides to grinding. It takes a long time to work up an appropraite bankroll. During this time you may grow bored or complacent with the game. Worse, I think you can develop bad habits. I routinely see stuff on the SS forum along the lines of "just play the cards, not the players", or "I was playing 16 tables and watching a porn, so no reads" and while I have no doubt that you can make a profit at low limits while completely ignoring the characteristics of your opponents, I think that's very dangerous advice to give out for someone who really wants to become a winning poker player in the longer term. I think that the players who gravitate toward higher limits more quickly are going to develop their games more quickly, all else being equal, even though many of them will bust out and discontinue playing poker entirely. So while there are risks to moving up too soon, there may also be rewards.

Finally, it's worth pointing out the obvious, which is that risk of ruin is a relative thing. Busting out means, I think, that you'd need to devote money that you didn't originally intend to spend on poker in order to continue playing poker. If you are a single twentysomething with a reasonable disposable income, playing poker for short-term recreation and perhaps the *longer-term* hope of using it as a source of income, that might not mean a whole lot to you. OTOH, if you were David Ross, playing poker as a sole and immediate source of income in order to support a family, that's a vastly different situation. I'm not saying that we should encourage people to move up before they are ready, but we ought to ask them to think about this sort of context, and that the 300 BB requirement should not be taken as some kind of universal.

[Schaefer]

Sick post. Very well done. I play small stakes but I have my eyes on the bigger games all the time. I think that if a typical player "gets bored" while grinding out at the lower limits he will never be a successful player. I personally think you have to have a true love for this cruel game and everything around it. I look at my time playing small stakes not only as a time to build my bankroll, but more importantly as a time to improve my game and fix the multiple leaks that I obviously have. I think that this experience will help me when I do reach a bankroll that allows me to move up. I think the bankroll factor is important because it helps you psychologically absorb the huge downswings that inevitably will hit us all.

[Kenshin]

A great post!!! However, you have convinced me to drop down limits. I believe I am a winning player (unfortunately I play at a site where I cannot statisically confirm this statement); however I consider a 20% chance of busting with my 150bb bankroll simply to high to continue at 10-20. Thanks nate!

Goodbye midstakes, hello small stakes

kenshin

[ZeroGee]

Are you playing for a living?

If so, drop down.

Otherwise, if you think you are a winning player, do you think your rate is only .5 BB/hour? In an online game, where you see SO many hands, I would imagine you're averaging more than $10/hour at 10-20. That 25% number is for someone winning .5 BB/hr. And if you're not playing for a living anyhow, why are you so worried about "busting"?

It's not like you said, "What's poker? Oh. This. Let's see. I'll start myself at 3-6, so I'll keep a bankroll of $1800 to play, even though I've never played a hand."

The whole point of this is to play recreationally, you don't need to keep such a huge reserve. You bought into that 3-6 game with $60. You lost a few times. Then you started winning. Then you started tracking. Now, your bankroll is your "poker profits."

Keep playing 10-20 if you're winning at it. You'll be fine.