Bankroll Requirements

[dandy_don]

In the Posting Guidelines and FAQ, Andy has written the following:
[ QUOTE ]
Q. How big of a bankroll do I need to play a particular limit?
A. The 300 big bet guideline so often quoted for hold'em is applicable for stud. This assumes that you are playing for a living (or at least that you are somewhat dependent upon poker for income) and that going broke is therefore unaccpetable. If you are playing for a living, you might want to have a bit more than this. If you have a day job, and most of us do, these considerations are not nearly as important. If you're playing $.50/1.00 and lose your on-line bankroll, is it really going to be that hard to come up with another $25 or $50 to get back in action? If the thought of being out of action for a week or two until your next paycheck comes is too much for you to bear, you might seek out Gamblers Anonymous. I also think that some players unnecessarily hold themselves back by imposing unnecessarily stringent bankroll requirements on themselves. Personally, when I first moved up to $6/12 and $8/16, it was because I had a good job and a working wife, so it really wasn't that big a deal to peel off $300-400 if the need arose.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this generally agreed upon by the forum?

I have been sticking to the 300BB for my bankroll as discussed in The Zoo, but I also do not depend on poker for an income and can understand what Andy is saying.

First, I have been using the 300BB to determine what level I should be playing. Once I reach 300BB of the next level, I move up. In the event I hit a bad run (or playing beyond my capacity) and I drop to 300BB of the level below me, I'll drop back down. This should keep me from losing my entire bankroll and allow me to determine the level of my ability.

The second reason for this concept is so you play the game the way you know how and not constantly worried about going broke. Running scared makes for bad poker. If you're playing mid or higher limits with a small bankroll, your mind may be worried about busting when you should be playing an aggressive style of poker.

Is anyone else doing something similar? How else do you know when to move up or down?

[Jeffage]

Bankroll requirements are predicated on two factors: one that you plan on playing a particular limit for life and two, that the bankroll can't be replaced. The only way (imo) to build a bankroll is to occasionally take shots at bigger games with money you can afford to lose. That's how I got to where I am...if I stuck with the 300 bet rule, I wouldn't have most likely. Say you have a 5000 roll and play 10-20. You should occasionally take a $1000 shot at 20-40 if the game looks good, you feel good and you've been running good. And if you win at it, play till you have a $1000 loss at it. Wash, rinse, repeat. It is my opinion (and Mason's actually) that you can do with about half as much money as traditionally recommended if you're willing to move down if you lose half your roll. $4,000 is a little light for 10-20, but if you're willing to move down if you hit 2000 (to 5-10), I think it's fine. This is particularly true if you have a job. JMHO, but if you are a proficient player, I recommend taking shots and trying to build a real roll. Ironically, if you do build a huge bankroll, you now have ot be much more protective of it. Small bankrolls (say a few grand if you have a good job) can be pretty easily replaceable. Once you get up there (say respectable five figures), you must be much more careful and disciplined with it b/c it would be very tough to replace if you lost the whole thing.

Jeff

[PoorLawyer]

[ QUOTE ]
Bankroll requirements are predicated on two factors: one that you plan on playing a particular limit for life and two, that the bankroll can't be replaced. The only way (imo) to build a bankroll is to occasionally take shots at bigger games with money you can afford to lose. That's how I got to where I am...if I stuck with the 300 bet rule, I wouldn't have most likely. Say you have a 5000 roll and play 10-20. You should occasionally take a $1000 shot at 20-40 if the game looks good, you feel good and you've been running good. And if you win at it, play till you have a $1000 loss at it. Wash, rinse, repeat. It is my opinion (and Mason's actually) that you can do with about half as much money as traditionally recommended if you're willing to move down if you lose half your roll. $4,000 is a little light for 10-20, but if you're willing to move down if you hit 2000 (to 5-10), I think it's fine. This is particularly true if you have a job. JMHO, but if you are a proficient player, I recommend taking shots and trying to build a real roll. Ironically, if you do build a huge bankroll, you now have ot be much more protective of it. Small bankrolls (say a few grand if you have a good job) can be pretty easily replaceable. Once you get up there (say respectable five figures), you must be much more careful and disciplined with it b/c it would be very tough to replace if you lost the whole thing.

Jeff

[/ QUOTE ]

interesting point about protecting it when it gets large.
I am way over bankrolled for the games I play at but I play a lower because it is where I feel comfortable playing. I have taken a couple stabs at 5/10 and would be adequately bankrolled for it, but just don't feel like I want to risk that much right now and have to start over, so I usually play 2/4 whenever I can and 3/6 when it looks really good. I think it depends on what you play poker for. I play mainly for fun even though I obviously want to win money as that is the point of the game. Maybe I am holding my skills back by not taking higher stabs, but I like to be able to know that if I need some extra money it is sitting there and I would have no problem going into poker money when something "more important" comes along. By more important, it could be anything from buying an ipod to staying at the hard rock instead of the monte carlo in vegas, but for me it seems better to know that I have this bankroll that I am slowly growing that I won't lose any time soon unless I spend it on something else.

[Backstabr]

Having a sufficient bankroll (300-500BBs, depending on who you ask) minimizes your risk of ruin (the chance that a prolonged run of bad cards will zero your roll). Unless you depend on poker for income, this doesn't matter much.

For us recreational players, figures like 300BB serve as an indirect but objective measure of skill. I've seen some posters here say that 100-150BB roll will suffice for, say 10/20 stud8. Doubtless they say this because they've not experienced losing streaks that large. On the three occasions that I've take a shot at 10/20, 150BB in hand, I've lost 25BB and then decided my skills needed more honing at the 5/10 tables. (If today's experience at the the 5/10 tables in any indication, I may need to go back to 3/6 [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] )

I'm all for taking shots: I've discovered that I can beat the 10/20 hold'em game at the nearby casino, despite the aforementioned 150BB roll. It's feels great sitting in front of a pyramid of red chips.

My philosophy: take shots when the limit you play seems easy to beat. Step back down when you roll hits a predetermined limit, assume you lack the skills for the game--time to go reread Zee. Again.

[donkeyradish]

Yes, thats what I do as well. (300BB rule)

I will still occasionally deviate from it (play at the next level up) if an exceptionally loose table shows up though.

I have had bad runs that caused me to move down a level (but, never 2 levels).

Since I started doing this I feel much better about my game.

[Jeffage]

A lot of it depends on why you play poker and everyone's reasons are different. It sounds like you play for the challenge and love of the game, but you play to win. You don't want to lose b/c then what's the point of playing, but you're not playing for money that's very significant to you. In my case, though I have a good job, I make most of my income playing and take it very seriously. I have fun b/c I absolutely love the game, but I don't play for fun. It is deadly serious to me. That said, I also have lots of gamble (I used to be a pretty big degenerate in the pit back in the day). While I have that part under control now, the little bit that's left allowed me to take shots where other people wouldn't. I remember when I had just graduated in college and had about 3k in the bank and played 20-40 with 1000 at a time. If I lost, I would just play 10-20 with 500 the next time. I also had a job. I kept doing this and built a nice roll, then got more conservative with it. But as it grew bigger, I took shots at bigger games, only for 20 bets or so at a time. Now I have a good roll for the limits I'm playing. But people I know have tried to talk me into playing even higher (c'mon, we'll go halves in that 300-600, etc.). But I'm not doing it. I worked WAY TOO HARD and have been through WAY TOO MUCH to risk the comfortable lifestyle I have now. So I don't see myself moving up any time soon, if ever. And if I get drilled at a high limit game, I may play lower next time even if I didn't put my roll in jeopardy. It's my security blanket and my way of maintaining sanity. It's taken awhile, but I think I've finally grown up.

Jeff

[BeerMoney]

Dandy, I would say that my views are a combination of yours and Jeffages. When just starting out, I usually waited for about 300 BB's to move up, or feel confident I could beat a current level. You should however note that this could cost you money if you could be beating a more profitable game.

Also, taking shots at lower limits isn't as big of a deal as higher limts. Losing a buy in at 2/4 is $100 compared to $500 at a 10/20.

I think it all comes down to the fact that bankroll is a personal thing. Do what you're comfortable with, and makes sense to you.

Andy does it differently than a lot of us online players. For us, keeping a bankroll is rather easy. However, if we had a wad of cash laying around, like a live player might do, it would be a lot easier to spend it on other things. Andy has the benefit of knowing he is a great, solid player. For people like me, I like to see some quantiative results that I am beating a particular limit. Particularly when I started out. Now, I have enough experience to evaluate a particular table, and determine if I can expect to win.

[peritonlogon]

I play online solely, and as such, I consider myself to have multiple bankrolls when determining what level I should play at. And, based on the bonuses offered, the game selection, and whether I'm willing to single table for a time I require different bankroll sizes for site. eg, pacific always has good games in holdem and stud up to 30/60 in holdem and up to 15/30 in stud ( sometimes 20/40) and while I withdraw twice a month I require 100BB to play in a given level, and if I approach 75bb I drop, and if I make 100 at the next level I go there. I think I can do this safely becase 1)I'm disciplined enough to move, 2)there really isn't much of a skill difference between one level and another (sometimes 3/6 bb for bb lookse tougher (though not much) than 30/60) at this site (in holdem, half the players are taking there shot with 30bb or fewer) 3) I'm crushing the games for about the same BB/hr so why not make twice as much?. But my bank roll for crypto sites is managed quite differently. After a bad run at 1 of my sites, I now only play for 5 hours a month at the lowest stud limit there is(1/2) since I'm down below 200 bb and the site pays about $40 to play 5 hours as a bonus. I may be a bit lazy about moving money on line, but, until I had some big bills I needed to pay, I kept at least $5k as an online BR, but I always treated it like 3 or 4 bank rolls.

[Alex/Mugaaz]

I have to say that I disagree with everyone here. Back in the day where getting into a good game at XX stakes only happened infrequently or rarely, then taking a shot made sense. Today there are a couple hundred stud games going, and plenty of them are good. Taking a shot is completely meaningless. The only time playing slightly above your roll is a good idea is if all your cash is on 1 site, the game you normally play sucks, and the higher game happens to be extremely good. Otherwise, I just think it's foolhardy. Unless you have a high paying job it is pretty hard to rebuild a bankroll for 5/10 or higher. If poker makes up 50% of your income, then the risk of taking shots at games you are underrolled to play is significant, regardless of what others here say. I'm sure some of you will call me a nit, and that's fine, but I simply disagree.

[Quicksilvre]

[ QUOTE ]
I've seen some posters here say that 100-150BB roll will suffice for, say 10/20 stud8. Doubtless they say this because they've not experienced losing streaks that large.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wouldn't stud-8 naturally demand a smaller bankroll, since it's a split-pot game?