[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]

a solid winning longterm player would already have a good grasp on variance and general bankroll management.

[/ QUOTE ]
Usually not. What I see is that people hear nothing but "20 buy-ins," which they apply religiously and out of context. Experienced players often have misconceptions about bankroll management. It would raise the level of discussion if the FAQ were not wrong.

[ QUOTE ]

Recommending 20buyins at the microstakes is good for the less experienced players FAQs like this are geared towards.

[/ QUOTE ]
If it is right to recommend 20 buy-ins for NL $25, then it is wrong to recommend 20 buy-ins for NL $5 with a $0.02 big blind, and for NL $400. The one-size-fits-all recommendation is wrong in both directions, and suggesting that there is a uniform guideline is misleading.

If you think recommending 20 buy-ins is good to protect less experienced players, why not recommend 100 buy-ins? Or 1000? It's bad advice, it misleads people, and you lose credibility, and that is what happens now because the FAQ says the common $50 deposit is not enough to play for pennies. (I doubt any decent player has ever had a $50 downswing playing with a $0.02 big blind in the history of online poker. $100 is ridiculous.) The FAQ should be correct and it should state the context of its advice. The FAQ should say

[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Bankroll management is for winning players, not for experienced players. A bankroll does not give you the skills you need to win.
[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Those who play in tougher games, and those who have a lower win rate, need a larger bankroll to be safe. Not a fixed 20 buy-ins.

The FAQ should also answer the common question of whether multitabling affects your bankroll requirements.