Minimum br required at NL 25 for a solid player at lower levels

Ironic · #1 08-14-2007, 01:36 PM

Hello, in your opinions what is the minimum br required at NL 25 for a solid player at lower levels. I play on PS full ring no limit.

My ptbb/100 is 14.98 over 12K hands. If I do go bust I can reload but it would be nice not to as I'm trying to see how far I can build my initial £20 deposit.

I am confident I am a winner at this level and not lucking out since I am not getting saved by the river etc or chasing straights, flushes with incorrect odds.
And all the usual bad beats have hit me etc but I just play through them.

So what do you guys think? Am I being greedy and foolish? I am aware of the 20 buyin rule...

Jouster777 · #2 08-14-2007, 01:42 PM

At that win rate you should have $900+ by now. What's the catch?

Ironic · #3 08-14-2007, 01:51 PM

Oh sorry I should have made more clear those stats are spread out over 0.02, 0.05 and 0.10. They all play so similar I kind of count them as one... When I multitable I play 2-3 of each. So my winnings are about $180.

corsakh · #4 08-14-2007, 01:52 PM

500

ReNoRyan · #5 08-14-2007, 01:58 PM

If you don't mind going busto I think you could go a little lower than 20 buyins and move down if things start gettting bad.

Antinome · #6 08-14-2007, 02:16 PM

I play 25NL occasionally on PokerStars, but not regularly. I really only registered to play in a SSNL HU donkament. I stuck ~100 dollars in there. More there now (250ish), but in a sense, I'm underolled for that site and that limit. However, I'm overrolled for 100NL on FT, and I have a slightly undersized dedicated roll for live 1/2, so overall it works out.

I understand what you are saying; higher winrates (provided you have average sd^2) imply a smaller risk of ruin. Chen and Ankenman cover the math behind the bankroll adjustments you could legitimately make in Chapters 22 and 23 of 'The Mathematics of Poker'. It is far too dense to cover here.

In practice, 2000BB is tested, and works.

#7 08-14-2007, 02:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
500

[/ QUOTE ]

Pokerdemic · #8 08-14-2007, 04:08 PM

I moved to NL25 with 10 buy-ins. But I waited until 20+ to move to NL50. I only did this because I read somewhere that playing lower than NL25 can build some bad habits that will take time to break when you move up.

Well, i found that playing @ NL25 builds some bad habits that take time to break. But if you can reload (much more of a pain in the but for the Americans), I think 20 is a bit conservative.

Have you only ever played 12k hands? If that's the case, I would keep getting experience and build toward the 20 buy-in mark.

Ironic · #9 08-14-2007, 04:42 PM

Yes only 12K hands so far. I started a couple of weeks ago. I think I will aim to hit 10 buy ins and then have a pop at NL25. If things get hairy I will move down and replenish my br. Pokerdemic is there any advice specific to NL25 you have learnt? Should I keep with my tight game or should I start c-betting more? Any little tips would be handy. cheers.

And thank you all for your opinions. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Pokerdemic · #10 08-14-2007, 04:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Yes only 12K hands so far. I started a couple of weeks ago. I think I will aim to hit 10 buy ins and then have a pop at NL25. If things get hairy I will move down and replenish my br. Pokerdemic is there any advice specific to NL25 you have learnt? Should I keep with my tight game or should I start c-betting more? Any little tips would be handy. cheers.

And thank you all for your opinions. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are only 12k hands deep, then I really think you should wait until 20+ buy-ins, simply for the experience. I forgot to mention that I made my first monies playing a ton of micro sngs, after I played for quite some time on the free rolls, so I am guessing I had a lot more experience than 12k hands. I suggest moving up with 20 buy-ins; poker is a helluva lot more fun when you are winning and when there is less variance.