Poll: # buyins for BOTH full and short-handed NL play

[IbrakeFORrivers]

say you like playing both full and short handed... what # of buyins allows you to play comfortabally and aggressively when needs be...

[ML4L]

Where's the option for >30 buy-ins?

ML4L

[HoldEmKillah]

more than 30 for sure. I say 40 for true comfort level.

[turnipmonster]

I like to have at least 25 buyins. pretty confident I could get away with a lot less as I've never had a swing near that, but I'm cautious.

--turnipmonster

[AZK]

depends on depth, opponents, stakes.

[fsuplayer]

i play short and aggressive, so i like an absolute minimum of 25, and usually more like 30-40.

[TheWorstPlayer]

I think the answer really depends on whether you're saying "How much should I budget for my playing bankroll at the level I plan on playing at for the foreseeable future and how much can I budget to cover expenses?" or if you're saying "How many buy-ins do I need to be able to comfortably move up in stakes on my progression towards higher stakes?"

If you want to know how much a player should have as their stock bankroll for playing a game like 5/10 or 10/20 consistently, then I agree with the people who are saying 30 or close to it. But if you are just interested in knowing when you can move up comfortably on your way up the ladder or whatever, then I think 15-20 is definitely sufficient. If you are a winning player at the new stakes you will build up to 30 relatively quickly with adequate safety to handle normal run-of-the-mill variance. And worse comes to worst you can just move back down to rebuild.

[edge]

20-30, and I only play short. I think my biggest swing ever was about 12 buy-ins and that sucked hard.