Money Management

[Youda02]

I have a question regarding money management. If I play $1/$2 blind cash tables: 1. How much of a bankroll do I need (i.e. if max buy in is 100 x the big blind so in this case $200 and as a rule of thumb you should only buy in at 5% of your backroll then that would mean I need a $4,000 bankroll); 2. How much do I buy into a cash game (i.e. I threw 5% out there as an example but should it be 4% or lower. To clarify if we say 1% instead then that would mean that if I have a bankroll of $4,000 then I can only buy into a cash game of $40 which at 100x the BB would mean that the SB/BB would be $0.20/$0.40. Just trying to get a sense as to what size bankroll determines the size cash game; 3. When to quit the cash game (i.e. after a certain number of hours have passed, when I have made a certain return say double your money or when you lose a certain amount say lose 1/2 your money; 4. What detail of stats would I keep on myself (i.e. Date, time of day, number of hours, amount invested, amount cash out, hourly rate ect).

[dying2win]

you cant beat 1/2 online if you do not know these things i doubt very much.

[ICMoney]

I'm assuming you are talking about NLHE.

I would have a minimum of 25 buy-ins.


As an aside, I'm not sure if you are use to playing 1/2 live and want to try this online thing.

Be warned that a live $1/$2nl game plays like a $.1/.25 game.

An online $1/$2 prob plays like a live $5/10 skillwise.

Online players >>>>>> Live players.


I don't play min-bet poker and can't comment.

[basementproject]

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a question regarding money management. If I play $1/$2 blind cash tables: 1. How much of a bankroll do I need

[/ QUOTE ]
When someone asks how to play top pair, the answer is, "It depends," because it depends on many factors. When someone asks how large of a bankroll they need, the answer should be, "It depends," because it depends on many factors. Unfortunately, many people just give some number of buy-ins, and no number is right for most players.

Bankrolls are for winning players who don't want to deposit any more. Losing players will not become winning players by getting a large bankroll. A bankroll does not give you skill. Losing players will burn through any amount eventually. If you aren't sure that you are a winning player, you should set a budget, not try to manage a bankroll.

If you are a winning player, the amount you need depends on how much you win. A marginal winner needs a much larger bankroll than a solid winner to have the same level of safety. In microstakes games, you can have a very high win rate compared with what is sustainable in higher stakes games. So, an expert needs far fewer buy-ins in microstakes games than in high stakes games. Someone who tells you to buy in for some fixed percentage of your bankroll is telling you that playing with professional and semi-professional players and a couple of half-decent donators is just as easy as playing with 5 novices who don't care if they win or lose. In fact, a player who is safe playing on a bankroll of only 10 buy-ins in a microstakes game might need 50 buy-ins or more in a NL $1000 game.

A good formula to use for a wide variety of advantage gambles is

bankroll = comfort * standard deviation^2 / win rate.

Standard deviation and win rate should be measured in the same period and units, e.g., both in BB/100, or both in $/hour. The standard deviation in full ring NL cash games is often about 80 big blinds/100 hands, but this depends on your playing style. In a 6-max table, the typical standard deviation is more like 90 big blinds/100, but there are larger deviations due to playing style. Some winning players experience standard deviations over 150 big blinds/100 due to a loose aggressive style.

No one can tell you your win rate, which obviously depends on your skills. It's a good idea to get software like PokerTracker, which can help you to identify your leaks and to study your opponents in addition to determining your overall win rate. If you want to know which win rates are possible, you can find some discussion in the FAQs of the NL strategy forums, and some past statistics threads.

The comfort level has many meanings. The comfort level you find acceptable depends on your personal risk tolerance and your ability/willingness to move down when you hit a bad streak. Most people are happy with a comfort level between 2 (aggressive) and 4 (conservative). If you play at the same level without withdrawing or learning, your risk of ruin is about e^(-2*comfort) ~ 1/7^comfort. If you are using a fractional Kelly system, comfort is the reciprocal of the Kelly fraction.

Note that this formula does not depend on how many tables you are playing, or how long your sessions are, except to the extent that these affect your win rate and standard deviation.

Buying in for less than the maximum might look great if you are following an arbitrary rule restricting the percentage of your bankroll you have on the table. However, buying in for $25 at a NL $25 table is very different from buying in for $25 at a NL $50 table. You need to look at how buying in short affects your win rate and standard deviation.

Examples:

If your win rate is 10 big blinds/100 with a standard deviation of 100 big blinds/100, and you want to start with a comfort level of 3, then you need 3 * 100^2 / 10 = 3000 big blinds = 30 buy-ins.

If your win rate is 25 big blinds/100, with a standard deviation of 80 big blinds/100, and you also use comfort=3, then you need 3 * 80^2 / 25 = 768 big blinds < 8 buy-ins.

Note that the sustainable win rates of experts in NL $200 are closer to the former than the latter.

[Wardfish]

yeah i know