Bankroll and Moving up
 

Some general thoughts on moving up for a winning SSNL player:

--The accepted wisdom is that you should have 20-40 full buy-ins for the level that you are playing at. I believe this is sound advice. This guideline should keep you from ever going broke. The higher the level, the higher the variance, the more buy-ins you need. You want to play optimally at all times, with bankroll NEVER being a consideration for an in-game decision.

--Determine your base comfort level (bankroll and limit). Say you've been a NL50 player all year. You've been winning at an OK rate. You feel real comfortable, by personal experience, with a 22 buy-in bankroll, $1100. This is your base comfort level. It'll be different for everyone.

--But, you want to move up. Do you wait til you have $2000-$2500 in the bankroll to make the move to NL100? NO. Start taking shots sooner. Say, when the bankroll hits $1500, move up and take a shot. If you lose, and find yourself back at $1100, go back to NL50, and grind away til $1500 again. Rinse, repeat.

--Know that when you hit your base comfort level, you'll go back down to the level you are comfortable with. But, you don't need a full bankroll to take shots at moving up.

--Make the move permanent when you are fully rolled for the next level. But, you would be wise to think of yourself as being in a range when it comes to limits. Don't think of yourself as a NL100 player. Feel comfortable in a range NL50-NL200. Play where your instincts tell you to play. Playing real well. Play at the high end. Playing crappy at a bad time of the day, play on the low end. Etc. (TWP)

--The mid and high guys will tell you that all SSNL is full of donks and fish and all levels are basically the same. Pffft. Don't kid yourself. Each level is more difficult than the one below. If you are beating NL50, NL100 will be more difficult. There's less fish and more skilled players as you move up. HOWEVER, the difference in play is not that great. If you are beating one level, you should be able to be a winning player at the next level. It just takes time to get acclimated.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

Good post AJ. What are your thoughts on the # of tables to try when moving up? I tend to just jump in and try get hands in, but my winrate is very low/negative for the first few thousand hands at a limit.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] im a over bankrolled nit..

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

good post, i agree with the moving up earlier. i think that taking stabs at a higher level is good when you have say, $1500 for 100nl/$6000 for 400nl/etc. Take shots, and if you run well, then stay at the level...run bad, move back down to rebuild. rinse, wash and repeat and you'll eventually get it.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

1 buy-in is plenty. If you need more than that, then you have no game.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
Good post AJ. What are your thoughts on the # of tables to try when moving up?

[/ QUOTE ]

You usually are advised to play less tables at the beginning when you are first moving up. IMO, I don't think that that's a must. Sometimes, part of the reason you are a winning player is that you 4-table. You play tight and the more tables you play, the more hands you see, the less you try to force things when you are card dead. And you stay focused because you are constantly making decisions.

IMHO, when moving up, try and play the same amount of tables you are playing at the level you are comfortable with.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

I like to take shots when i have 22 buyins for my current level...IE $550 @ 25NL now is one buyin of NL50 and keeping the rest the same.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
IMHO, I would say to try and play the same amount of tables you are playing at the level you are comfortable with.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. I took some shots at NL$100 this weekend, and only played 2 tables at a time. I normally play at least 6, sometimes as many as 9 tables of NL$50 6m, so only playing 2 tables was a horrible idea. I lost focus, got board, and got away from my ABC tag game. When you are used to 500-700 hands per hour, it's tough to play 150/hour.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

AJ, good post.

One thing I'll add, for those moving up : have confidence in your game and keep playing your game. Don't feel like you need to make more moves or that you're outclassed - you might just be having a bad run of cards or you might just be nervous from playing the higher stakes. Just play good poker like you always do. This really screwed me up the first few times I took shots at NL200, I felt like I had to play "more advanced" and started over-thinking and getting burned by FPS.

[ QUOTE ]

IMHO, when moving up, try and play the same amount of tables you are playing at the level you are comfortable with.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm.. for me this wasn't a good idea. Also, I disagree with people who suggest playing a few tables at your regular level and one at the higher level. Mixing levels like that can be really confusing. For me, I now 4-table NL100 and am pretty lazy about taking notes because I have a really good read on how typical villains play. I don't have the same read for people at NL200 and it helps me a lot to play that level and take more notes, pay more attention, which I can't do with 4 tables, I usually just 2-table it right now.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

I take shots with 15 buyins for the level I'm shooting for. I play 4 tables there to limit losses, if I'm in the mood to 9 table then the rest are tables for my current level. I play this way until I lose 5B (net) at that level (leaving 20B for my current level).

About half the time it works and I stay at the higher level. The other half of the time I run breakeven for a while then eventually end up -5B from what I started with, and move back down.

This approach does wonders for your skill (opponents get better, robot-stacking donks does nothing for your game), and of course, your bankroll grows exponentially. This is why I've always said that if you are serious about using poker as a source of income, you are a fool to cash out of your bankroll in the early stages of your career (i.e. SSNL).

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I disagree with people who suggest playing a few tables at your regular level and one at the higher level. Mixing levels like that can be really confusing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Playing multiple levels totally screws me up.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]


One thing I'll add, for those moving up : have confidence in your game and keep playing your game. Don't feel like you need to make more moves or that you're outclassed

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT. This is very, very, very important.

On playing multiple levels
 

I had a good experience playing multiple levels. I usually play 3 tables, leaving me one corner of the screen to have a good look at HH's. So when I moved up the last time from 50 to 100, I started with one table 100 and two 50, and when I'd have some more money, I'd switch another table, etc.

The upside of this is that you can focus better on the higher table, because you're playing 2 tables at your comfortable level where you can do a lot of things on automatic.

And another thing: when I played two tables of 50NL, I could mimic that at the 100. Because I tended to play a lot more cagy (especially preflop) at the higher limit, where-as I'd have no problem raising SC's or KTo from LP at the 50-table (5-max). So, this gave me a solid feel of knowing that I should do something and 'forcing' myself to do it, and slowly getting used to it.

It took quite a bunch of hands actually, but at one point, I saw a buddy at a 50NL table, but I didn't care to play with him, because of the lower limit, and ever since I've played 3 tables of 100nl, and might add another table soon.

Re: On playing multiple levels
 

also, already stated by db, try your best to not cash out early on. try to keep as much $ in your BR as you can and the real money will come once you move to the bigger levels in midstakes.

Re: On playing multiple levels
 

[ QUOTE ]
also, already stated by db, try your best to not cash out early on. try to keep as much $ in your BR as you can and the real money will come once you move to the bigger levels in midstakes.

[/ QUOTE ]

quiet, you!

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

Something I've been doing recently is following my buddy list people when I see them at the next higher level. That adds a little bit of comfort, psychologically, for me.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
Something I've been doing recently is following my buddy list people when I see them at the next higher level. That adds a little bit of comfort, psychologically, for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Y, good tip. Good thing I have a buddy who plays 100 through 1K!!!

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
Y, good tip. Good think I have a buddy who plays 100 through 1K!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Make sure they play just as poorly, though! I have a guy on my buddy list from a time I played NL100 with him, but now when I see him he's always 6 tabling at the 600+ level, so I suspect he was donking it up when I played with him.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, I disagree with people who suggest playing a few tables at your regular level and one at the higher level. Mixing levels like that can be really confusing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Playing multiple levels totally screws me up.

[/ QUOTE ]
I've had some moderate success playing both above and below my current level. That is, the last time I moved up to the $100s, I played 1-2 $100 tables and 1-2 $25 tables. I used the $25 tables to remind myself what "pure ABC poker" was so that I didn't get too tricky at the $100s.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, I disagree with people who suggest playing a few tables at your regular level and one at the higher level. Mixing levels like that can be really confusing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Playing multiple levels totally screws me up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I use to mix up tables when moving up and also found it too confusing. Maybe if you are playing less then 4 tables it is ok, but for an 8 tabler like me I found that I was wasn't time differentiating the different levels from each other and was losing EV.

When I move up I just take the big leap and run all my tables at the new limit. It's worked ok so far.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

I always thought it was 500 bigbets or 10 buy ins to be properly rolled.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, I disagree with people who suggest playing a few tables at your regular level and one at the higher level. Mixing levels like that can be really confusing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Playing multiple levels totally screws me up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Totally agree with this. Used to do this when playing limit, where all you have to decide is to decide F/C/R. But playing 5 tables of different levels of NL, can lead to bad bets in the heat of action. Raising it to $2.5 at $50 NL might be good, but at $100 it doesn't really cut it... [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

BTW, very nice post OP.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

all,

there's been quite a few really good threads around here of late (of which this is most certainly one), and I for 1 am not happy about it. Are you trying to make the fish play better??? I was pretty sure the point of this forum was to give out bad advice so that you could dominate the tables more easily, and now good posts are springing up all over the place. This a trend that HAS to stop. Thanks

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
all,

there's been quite a few really good threads around here of late (of which this is most certainly one), and I for 1 am not happy about it. Are you trying to make the fish play better??? I was pretty sure the point of this forum was to give out bad advice so that you could dominate the tables more easily, and now good posts are springing up all over the place. This a trend that HAS to stop. Thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

You can take a horse to water...

Don't be so paranoid you dolt.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
You can take a horse to water...

Don't be so paranoid you dolt.

[/ QUOTE ]

who has a horse in this day and age?

And if I did, why would I take it to water?

And what has this got to do with SSNL? I play texas, not HORSE

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

I read the first few posts...

At what point you move up is largely dependent on how good you are, not your BR. If you take a solid 5/10 player, he doesn't need 20 buy-ins to play NL 50 from NL 25--it would be a freak of nature for him to drop 10 buy-ins before having grown his roll significantly.

I started NL cash games in February of this year, and my rule was 20 buy ins for each level because that's what people recommended. I started at NL 50, and only played about 1200 hands b/c I had a good BR dedicated to NL to start. NL 100 is where I did a lot of learning, and when I had 20 buy-ins for NL 200, I moved up. For NL 400, I actually waited a little longer than 20 buy-ins because the money intimidated me a bit. I believe I had 30-35 buy-ins. And then for NL 600, I had over 40 buy-ins because I didn't want to ever risk going below NL 400. But through all of this, the biggest swing I ever had was under 8 buy-ins, and that swing was when I already had won a lot at that level, so it wasn't like I lost 8 of the 20 buy ins, it was more like 8 off of 32. So the 20 buy-in rule is definitely safe for the lower levels assuming that you are a good, winning player; it's perhaps even conservative.

If I had to do it again, I would be willing to play NL 25 with 8 BI's, NL 50 with 10 or so, NL 100 with 12-15, 15 for NL 200, 20 for NL 400, and 25-30 for NL 600. For 5/10, I'd want 20 for 5/10 + 30 for 3/6.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]

And what has this got to do with SSNL? I play texas, not HORSE

[/ QUOTE ]

Jane, you ignorant [censored]! Isura was subtly hinting that the HORSE games are the juiciest of them all. Just be glad I'm telling you this in a PM instead of broadcasting it all over SSNL.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

And what has this got to do with SSNL? I play texas, not HORSE

[/ QUOTE ]

Jane, you ignorant [censored]! Isura was subtly hinting that the HORSE games are the juiciest of them all. Just be glad I'm telling you this in a PM instead of broadcasting it all over SSNL.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like to point out that AJ has once again made a great OP.

and also that the only truly juicy HORSE games are the ones I am sitting at - as not only can I not play 7stud to save my life - there are TWO rounds of the dam game and 1 of them is a hi/lo split.

If you ever see me at a HORSE game sit immediately on my right - just expect me to do really well in the Razz section...

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

AJ and Dust,

Great [censored] posts. Through your advice I played 200NL today and played good poker for the first time in a while (and actually ran ok too [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]).

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

I'm going to guess that for most people, bankroll isn't a huge issue when playing the lower limits of SSNL. Taking 20 buy-ins as a guide you only need $2k to play $100NL. I'll apologize in advance to anyone reading this in a 3rd world country, but I'd imagine most teenagers with a part-time job could come up with this.

However, the reason they should grind it out at through 25 and 50 is to learn the game and prove to themselves that they are winning players. I'd guess by the time they have done this they will have the 'necessary' BR for $100NL.

Bankroll becomes a more serious consideration at higher limits. A 20 buy-in downswing at $1000NL starts to amount to serious cash for most people and can easily happen to a winning player.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
Bankroll becomes a more serious consideration at higher limits. A 20 buy-in downswing at $1000NL starts to amount to serious cash for most people and can easily happen to a winning player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't the point of a good bankroll to avoid that very feeling? I'm not sure what it's like to play at high stakes but...

Playing at 1-2c and $50-$100 NL should have the same "money value" if you're properly rolled for both, no?

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bankroll becomes a more serious consideration at higher limits. A 20 buy-in downswing at $1000NL starts to amount to serious cash for most people and can easily happen to a winning player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't the point of a good bankroll to avoid that very feeling? I'm not sure what it's like to play at high stakes but...

Playing at 1-2c and $50-$100 NL should have the same "money value" if you're properly rolled for both, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

In a way, yes. This is something that poker player have to learn to get used to. I am sure the high stakes players have to detach themselves from the $$ value of their chips in order to stay sane. I am assuming that higher stakes games have bigger variance, so you will have bigger swings in terms of buyins... but there is still the psychological difference between $20,000 and $20.

-Tick

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bankroll becomes a more serious consideration at higher limits. A 20 buy-in downswing at $1000NL starts to amount to serious cash for most people and can easily happen to a winning player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't the point of a good bankroll to avoid that very feeling? I'm not sure what it's like to play at high stakes but...


[/ QUOTE ]

Me niether [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I guess I could afford to lose 20 buy-ins at $1kNL, but I'm not going to take a shot at any level, until I'm damn sure I'm a winning player at the level below. I figure I'd need to make 30-40 buy-ins at a lower level before being confident that I wasn't just running good. Moving up isn't really a bankroll consideration IMO this is what people should worry about, not whether theoretically they could go broke playing a higher limit.

[ QUOTE ]

Playing at 1-2c and $50-$100 NL should have the same "money value" if you're properly rolled for both, no?


[/ QUOTE ]

It depends on what your alternative sources of income are. If poker is the only way you have of making comparable money, then I agree. But that isn't true at the lower limits. 20 buy-ins at 1c-2c is $40. I'd suggest for most people 1c/2c is little better than play money. They would be better off starting at $25NL.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

AJ, nice post.

One "problem" I am having is that at some point bankroll starts going up much faster than skill. I followed the basic guidelines from 25NL to 100NL, and in the process learned how to play ABC TAG poker. Now that I understand these basics, it's really easy to multitable 100NL and rake in money, without necessarily learning what I need to do to move up further. So despite not playing THAT much at 100NL, my bankroll is nudging $8000. Maybe I'm just being a wimp, but I feel like it's a good idea to work your way through the limits, playing at least 20k+ hands at each before moving up, even if bankroll outpaces this.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

20k hands is about on pace for someone learning to get rolled for the next level. at a winrate of 5ptbb, you win a buyin every 1k hands. win 20 buyins, now you have 40 buyins, or 20 for the next level. maybe you are on a hot streak? but 80 buyins in less than 20k hands, that is a hell of a run.

I had the same attitude as you - I was playing 100nl around christmas and was scared to move up to 200nl, because I had some glaring holes in my game. Then I realized that in spite of the holes, I'm still a winning player, and I will still win, on average, about twice as much, while I work on fixing those holes.

you'll fix the holes wherever you play, so why not move up and double your hourly while you learn? jumping from 100nl to 400nl is a huge leap, but jumping from 100nl to 200nl isn't all that big of a leap.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

Maybe for the mega/multitablers this would be different. Star with 4 for example, and go up to 8 after some thousand hands.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
20k hands is about on pace for someone learning to get rolled for the next level. at a winrate of 5ptbb, you win a buyin every 1k hands. win 20 buyins, now you have 40 buyins, or 20 for the next level. maybe you are on a hot streak? but 80 buyins in less than 20k hands, that is a hell of a run.

I had the same attitude as you - I was playing 100nl around christmas and was scared to move up to 200nl, because I had some glaring holes in my game. Then I realized that in spite of the holes, I'm still a winning player, and I will still win, on average, about twice as much, while I work on fixing those holes.

you'll fix the holes wherever you play, so why not move up and double your hourly while you learn? jumping from 100nl to 400nl is a huge leap, but jumping from 100nl to 200nl isn't all that big of a leap.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I should probably just not be such a wimp...I've logged about 35k hands of 100NL at about 7.5PTBB/100, plus a few hundred hands of very successful fish-chasing up to 600NL, to get me about +6k (started 100NL w/around 2k). It just feels like I haven't learned much at 100NL but that money just pours in without me really improving much, but perhaps actually moving up is required before I can get much better. I've been playing 200NL lately every time I feel on my A game, so I guess I'll see whether or not I've improved or not.

One issue that comes up with moving up to mid-stakes for me and perhaps many other players is that the absolute value of the money starts to make itself felt. When poker income is small compared to job income, losing a bunch while moving up isn't really a big deal -- losing $300 when taking a shot at 100NL is roughly a day's salary, so no big deal. But losing $1k in a day (or more as I can imagine at higher stakes) is another matter. I know that in terms of the poker bankroll it's exactly the same issue each time you move up, but when the bankroll is small compared to your job income it's very different than when it's comparable or larger.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

Yad,

You have to view your bankroll as a long-term investment. Your goal is to earn a 'return' on your investment. You really should not have to 'withdraw' your principle balance for day-to-day needs. If you do then you should make sure you are playing a level that you are rolled for.

One thing that I do is track my YTD return on investment. I look at dollars earned through poker, rakeback and bonuses as a % of my starting bankroll. Now a pro would also want to factor in an hourly rate so he can evaluate the utility of his time.

It would be interesting if we could get a high limit poster to post how they approach bankroll management.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]

It would be interesting if we could get a high limit poster to post how they approach bankroll management.

[/ QUOTE ]

How about cardshark.

Re: Bankroll and Moving up
 

[ QUOTE ]
I had the same attitude as you - I was playing 100nl around christmas and was scared to move up to 200nl, because I had some glaring holes in my game. Then I realized that in spite of the holes, I'm still a winning player, and I will still win, on average, about twice as much, while I work on fixing those holes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gold. Also, I have been a culprit of cashing out my SSNL winnings instead of moving up [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]