[WutRUTryin2Hit]

The OP that lists reasons you shouldn't play with 20 buyins should actually be called "reasons you should not be a pro" or at least "things you have to fix before you can be really successful". They aren't bankroll-related things, they're just standard psychological leaks, and (I guess snorer pointed this out in his excellent post), if you can't handle the pain of losing often, in painful ways, HU SNGs are probably not for you.

Bankroll requirements can be calculated mathematically, as some people here have been doing using the Kelly criterion. I don't know how this formula works yet, (I did see that book about it the other day and almost bought it), but I do know how to calculate BR needs/risk of ruin for cash games, and there's obviously a mathematical method for SNGs/tourneys as well, I just don't know where to get the right numbers offhand in PT. So people can sit and argue "you need 20!" and "you need 100!" for hours, but it's a solvable thing, you just plug in your winrate and standard deviation into a formula and decide what risk of ruin you want, and ta-da. If you are a casual player who has a job and deposited $100 to play, you can (and should imo) choose a much higher risk of ruin and build up more aggressively than a pro who has built up a bigger bankroll but can not lose it or they'll have to go get a real job. My guess is that 10 buyins will result in a pretty low risk of ruin for anyone with a decent winrate, and 20 should be more than enough.

I'm rambling. This thread got my goat a bit. Snorer is right, there is a lot of bad advice in this forum. I hope not too many people from this forum are coaching just based on the fact they post here and lot and play higher than the average player here. I sharkscoped someone here a short while ago who was winning $7/game at 55s, then moved up to 110s and now makes $3/game.. but still plays them as their reg. game. It's stuff like this that makes me not take a lot of bankroll/other advice as seriously in this forum.