[Jezza]

To continue the discussion from a couple of other threads in the forum ive made this post....

It is pretty hard (and almost impossible I think) to give a CONCLUSIVE and "correct" fixed figure for a bankroll figure for NL cash games. Every single bankroll has a chance of going bust even in the hands of a winning player. A 10 million dollar bankroll has a chance of going bust in the hands of phil ivey at 50NL. Its just that the chance of that happening might be 0.000000000001% (theres still a chance tho). A 100 dollar bankroll has a chance of going broke in the hands of your little sister playing 5/10NL as well. Its just the chance there might be slightly higher than the chance of ivey busting .

You are basically trying to balance a couple of things with your personal bankroll management. 1) Keeping the risk of going broke acceptably low to you versus 2) Making your money as profitable as possible (assuming you are a winning player then the higher you play, the more you win). There are so many factors that affect both of these things that its impossible to cover them all. For example a TAG player will experience less swings than a LAG player thus if they both run at 5ptbb/100 then the LAG will have a bigger chance of going broke w a 10k bankroll then the TAG would w the same 10k bankroll. Game selection (agaisnt what player types, shorthanded or full ring etc etc) all make a huge difference as well. Its impossible to place a precise figure on it all.

Buying in short or max obv affects the whole thing as well. That is a completely seperate discussion that I have already made my feelings clear on but this is probably the place to do it again if you want (Im a bit tired at the moment for that tho seeing as I have been playing all evening and all night!)

The one thing that most players fail to realise is just how bad a downswing can be. Almost every single poker player believes that they and they alone are the unluckiest person in the world at some point in there career. Its bullshit I am sorry. Downswings can last for years let alone months or weeks. If you think you are are unlucky because you lost 20 coinflips out of 25 then I am sorry but you have no idea, absolutely none at all. People have taken 5% outdraws for millions of dollars and WSOP championshops let alone your smushy 10,000 or whatever it is youve lost in a month. If you dont like it then go and play chess where there is no luck involved its as simple as that. Personally I have lost over 40,000 in a month playing poker (at limits no higher than 5/10NL). This was mostly due to outdraws but its just part of poker, I dont care and I am not particularly unlucky that this happened tome. Once you come to realise this truth you will also realise how big serious bankroll requirements have to be.

Of course there are the recreational players who dont really need bankroll requirements. These are the players who have wages coming in every month from other endevaours or whatever. Of course they want to win at poker and are not going to throw there money away but neither do they have to be cautious with their bankrolls. If they lose then its ok, they can still pay the bills and theres always next month. If you are one of these players then as long as you can afford to lose whatever you put on the table then feel free to play whatever stakes you want, if you win then shaweet, if you lose then theres always next month to try again and this experience to learn from. If you are one of these guys then you shouldnt worry about anything other than you if you can afford to lose the money your playing with or not

You then get the semi-serious players. These guys aint full time pros with their sole income from poker but they still want to treat it almost business like. If you are one of these people then you probably aspire to move up the limits as you progess in skill level and as your poker roll increases. You also probably hate redepositing and like to build your roll up without adding/taking from it, moving up as it allows. This kind of player knows about bankroll management and wants to exercise it properly. however they CAN afford to be a bit more carefree than someone who soley relys on poker as they can replenish their roll whereas the full time pro cannot. I would suggest for this sort of player that playing at a level where you have 20times the max buy in is a good rule of thumb. If you REALLY fancy a shot then I suppose 10 times would be barely acceptable but you must drop down again if you even lose 1 full buy in. You stand a very good chance of going broke at some point otherwise but its not the end of the world if you do.

You then finally arrive at the full time professionals. If you are one of them then your bankroll cannot be replenished from any other source. If you go truly life broke then well your poker dream is over and its find a job time . Many of this category dont exercise proper bankroll control but if they dont they will find themselves wiped out constantly. Such are the huge swings of poker I would suggest 50 times the max buy in of whatever level you want to play would be a reasonable rule of thumb. An ABSOLUTE minimum of 25 times would be ok provided you dropped down as soon as you hit 20 buy ins. Anyone who thinks this is too cautious does not understand the variance involved in this game, either that or they dont care and get a kick out of living life on the edge I guess (which playing poker for a living is enough of without adding in a high % chance of going broke into the equation). Personally? I dont move up until I have 100 times the max buy in for a level. I realise this is completly over cautious and probably to the extent that my money making ability is limited. But I like my life, I dont want to put it at risk. I have been hit by huge downswings before and I realise what is possible. I let out any gambling urges I have through other means where I am safe to anyway. PLaying overrolled gives you a huge sense of confidence at a level that someone taking a shot just doesnt have. I do not care about playing gigantic pots with just a draw or calling a ...TO BE FINISHED I HAVE TO GO lol

[Napoleon Solo]

Nice write-up Jez, been meaning to ask about stuff like this for a while.

Currently playing semi-serious on $0.10/0.20 tables with just over 10 max buy-ins so really looking to increase that significantly before moving up levels.

Cheers!

[Yen_Sid]

Good write up Jez, very interesting.

The paragraph quoted below is definitely where I fit in.

Originally Posted by Jezza

Of course there are the recreational players who dont really need bankroll requirements. These are the players who have wages coming in every month from other endevaours or whatever. Of course they want to win at poker and are not going to throw there money away but neither do they have to be cautious with their bankrolls. If they lose then its ok, they can still pay the bills and theres always next month. If you are one of these players then as long as you can afford to lose whatever you put on the table then feel free to play whatever stakes you want, if you win then shaweet, if you lose then theres always next month to try again and this experience to learn from. If you are one of these guys then you shouldnt worry about anything other than you if you can afford to lose the money your playing with or not

[Betfly]

That's me too! Right on the money!

[Doc]

I wouldn't describe that as overly cautious Jez, in fact it is moderately aggressive!

The variance in limit poker is generally (and I believe correctly) seen as lower than that at no limit. Similarly the variance is larger for short handed play, and larger for aggressive play (you or your typical opponents). Also, a lot of people don't realise that when you multitable - your variance goes up (and that is even before taking account of the fact that your average profitability per table tends to drop as you're trying to concentrate on more).
An often quoted figure for limit poker (playing full tables) is that you want 300 BB (big bets, where 1Big Bet=twice the big blind) PER TABLE.

So if I want to 3 table some $1/$2 tables in limit poker (the buy-in would typically be $50 for these tables), I want a bank roll of $1800. If you were playing 6 handed tables I'd double that, so more or less $3500

The equivalent for NL might be a $5K bankroll if you want to 3-table 15c/25c blinds on 6 max tables

No doubt there'll be a string of posters who will think this is stupidly cautious and will talk about how they play these tables with a $200 bank, but as you've indicated above, it is more a case of when not if they go bust. Everyone gets bad beats, everyone gets cold decks and everyone tilts (to some degree) at some stage. You need the bankroll to ride those out.

[raisin man]

I haven';t read much of this thread yet but you need a good bankroll to really have a go at cash games.

Once you get to the stage where you are not playing well because the money on th etable is close to the end of your bankroll then your going to lose.

I've learnt over the last month to be carefull. I've moved back bown to 1/2 since I dowpped about a third of my roll at 2/4. It stopped me playing well.

Now I'm comfy again, I comfortably 30 buy ins which I think is fine.

[Yen_Sid]

Originally Posted by raisin man

I haven';t read much of this thread yet but you need a good bankroll to really have a go at cash games.

If I decided to commit x amount of hours per day/week to playing cash of course I would follow all the roll management rules and find the correct level to be playing. But I have no intention of doing this, very rarely do I take the mood to play cash so with this in mind I only play now and again when the mood takes me. If I play way above my level etc then of course I'm risking going bust, in fact I've been close to doing just that on a few occassions. But what is bust for a recreational player like me? As I mentioned previously, I started 18 months ago with a £20 deposit, have never re deposited and have withdrew probably close on 5 figures. Please don't regard this as a trumpet blowing mission because it certainly Isn't, to me it's just a bit of fun and if I can win a bit along the way great. I fully understand all the stuff Jez, Doc etc have said and wouldn't dispute any of it as I'm well aware that these guys know their stuff. But myself and probably Betfly who I've played with many times are here for different reasons to the serious guys who need to follow all the rules etc as it is their bread and butter, whereas we can take risks with really not much to lose if it goes belly up.

With regard to % of roll to sit down with, I've sat with my entire roll many times, and, yes I know that is dumb, but as I already mentioned, just a bit of fun and if i lose it then no harm done.

[mrmuzeman]

The equivalent for NL might be a $5K bankroll if you want to 3-table 15c/25c blinds on 6 max tables

This sounds like my worst nightmare

[raisin man]

Okay, had a good read now. I reckon I'm one of these semi serious players with other income but poker is still a significant source of income too.

I hate redepositing, had to do it last month for the first time in ages. But I reckon thats because I keep my bankroll in the bank (got a separate bank account for poker roll). I don't like to keep more than 2k in the poker account at a time, don't want no Neteller money freezing scam happening to me. Probably won't but it makes me feel more comfy when its out of there and in my own bank.

I count it a waste if I don't win over a week. This is due to me spending about 20 hrs a week playing. I think this would be a huge watse of time if I wasn't winning consistently and at least £5 per hour over a month.

Also, I'll tell you the one thing that made me from an average player (breaking even mostly) into a winning player (making decent money recently, except last few weeks. lol). That was moving up levels. The problem is that people don't play like you expect them to at 0.25/0.50 or lower. People will play anything and will not mond putting money in with crap. This led to me playing so badly cause I got tilted a lot by people beating me with shit. Of course if you play super tight you can make money off this but it takes a while cause you really have ot wait for good hands.

Up the stakes a bit and you can do a lot better. I reckon you can easily make money playing simple ABC poker at 1/2/ and 2/4.

[Doc]

Up the stakes a bit and you can do a lot better. I reckon you can easily make money playing simple ABC poker at 1/2/ and 2/4.

Fraid not IMO - Jez has posted extensively on this in the past. The 'if only players would do the normal thing' syndrome - you make money in poker when your opponents make less mistakes than you do (or more correctly make more expensive mistakes than you do). Any game type (fast, slow, loose, aggressive, passive etc) requires you to adjust to it. Thinking that it is easier to win at higher levels is a fallacy IMO - you need to work more on your game so that you can adjust better to the players weaknesses. The reason to up stakes is when you have the game AND the bankroll to win more at the higher level. If you are having trouble at the lower level, then sooner or later the flaws in your game will be exposed at the higher level.

[raisin man]

Fair enough but i've been drinking so I'm not thinking too good.

lol

yoooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But i'm right!

yooooooooooooooooo

maybe

[Beanie]

I know I just said I was off to bed but if ur wrecked lets go play some 50/100 NL heads up...u chicken!

I'm waiting on Full Tilt with $10,000 to pwn ur drunken Irish ass.

I'm not really, I'm going to lie in bed and watch Newsnight with cheddar and crackers

[raisin man]

I play my best when i'm wrecked, i'll [lay you HU for $10.99 and you can [lay with a joker.