The 20 buy-in rule is crap

[ChoicestHops]

My bankroll is not in jeopardy, but Ive gone from $1200 to $870 in two days in about 80 sng's. 20 buy-ins and a few hours ago ago I was around $1100. I just checked the history and it was suck out after suck out 4-5 handed.I think I lost a total of four 80-20's and 2 90-10's. This isn't the first streak Ive had where no 60/40, 70/30 or 50/50 of mine will win in a sample of around 50 sng's either, by all means no.

This is not meant to be a bad beat post, but a simple fact that if I only have 20 buy ins where Im at now I would be back down in limits. In just a few hours with suckouts you can lose your bankroll if you stick by the 20 buy-in rule. I concede that many more is needed.

That is all.

[djj6835]

Who said 20 buy-ins is an adequate bankroll??

[Angelic_Ace]

20 buyins is hardly enough to avoid any risk of ruin. Considering many excellent players here have claimed out of the money streaks of 13+, I'd be more comfortable with 50 buyins. Also it helps psychologically when you have a shitload of buyins in your bankroll, you tend to agonize over your balance less (which leads to playing scared/tight, or just changing your style in general).

[flyingmoose]

I had a 20 buyin drop the last 3 days.

WTF said 20 buyins is good enough?

[ChoicestHops]

Alot of people consider the general rule around 20-30, which may be fine for the 5's. By level 3 you will have 5 people remaining. And then even more ludacris is when I hear some posters claiming that if a 2+2'er has an OOTM streak of 10 games or 15 games or something they need to reconstruct their game. Simply makes me shake my head in pity for when it hits them they won't know what to do.

[flyingmoose]

[ QUOTE ]
Alot of people consider the general rule around 20-30

[/ QUOTE ]

These are the people who think they know their win rate after 500 tournaments. Don't listen to them.

[ChoicestHops]

Well, it's in our FAQ:

[ QUOTE ]
While many agree that to play the lower stakes games, 20-30 buyins is probably enough, many also say that to feel comfortable playing the highest limit games, they like to have 50-100 buyins in their bankroll. 100 being the most conservative number offered for high stakes play.


[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously Im not talking about anything above the 55's.

[flyingmoose]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, it's in our FAQ:

[ QUOTE ]
While many agree that to play the lower stakes games, 20-30 buyins is probably enough, many also say that to feel comfortable playing the highest limit games, they like to have 50-100 buyins in their bankroll. 100 being the most conservative number offered for high stakes play.


[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously Im not talking about anything above the 55's.

[/ QUOTE ]

CRAP! I didn't realize it was in the FAQ. Well, I disagree with it.

EDIT: Actually, if you're reading the FAQ, you're probably inexperienced enough that you wouldn't psychologically be able to handle a 20 buy-in drop anyway.

[Angelic_Ace]

Ive played the 20's for a long time - 20 buyins there is 440 dollars - DEFINITELY not enough to handle the swings. Even with 50 buyins (1100) you will experience significant dips in your roll at times that will feel threatening.

[ChoicestHops]

I was considering moving up when I hit near $1300, but I was breaking even for around 350 tournaments and didnt want to move up when I had an insta spike happen. The only way to beat this is to play more games - I really need a 2nd monitor.