Typical bankroll requirements for NL-games

[THEjDonk]

I usually play micro- or small-stakes NLHE. For this example, I'll assume that I can choose between games with a $25 buy-in and a $50 buy-in(max. buy-in = 100xBB). How big should my bankroll be to play in the biggest of these games?
I think I use about 10x the buy-in. Is this too small or can I consider to play in bigger games than this allows me to do?

I'm a relatively tight player compared to most of my opponents, so I tend to win more often than not when I invest much chips in the pot. I suppose that this makes my winnings less than they could be, but reduces the variance. This should probably allow me to play in bigger games, right? Can you specify the difference in bankroll requirement for a loose player that wins 4 BB/h and a tight player that wins 4 BB/h?

Right now I'm clearing a bonus at a site. I'll clear it faster if I play in a bigger game. I don't intend to risk too much of my bankroll in the process, though. Let's assume that I can afford to play in an imaginary $30-game. Would it be better to play with a reduced ($30) buy-in in the $50-game, or should I still be playing in the $25-game? If there isn't a definite answer I'd like some input on the pros and cons for the two alternatives.

[cts]

You are playing way underrolled. Having only 20 buyins for a limit is pushing it.

[checkmate36]

[ QUOTE ]
You are playing way underrolled. Having only 20 buyins for a limit is pushing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Go with 30 to be safe?

[llleisure]

I agree 20 buyins for NL is low - but at some point at the stakes go down, doesn't taking a shot at a bump in stakes - in this case from .10/.25 to .25/.50 - make sense? I mean the worst case is he finds he doesn't get the same action at the higher stakes that he gets at .10/.25 but I can't imagine there being any big difference in how people play between these two stakes in reality. Has online play got that much harder since Party bailed?

[kslghost]

You should definitely be playing the smaller game, and if you are a 4BB/hour winner, you should be playing with a minimum of 20 buyins. However, bonuses and rakeback help slightly reduce this number, as a normal good clearing bonus should make you around an 8BB winner (though I have to say making assumptions about your own winrate is relatively risky).

Stick with the smaller game and I hope you can afford to go broke if the 10+% or so chance of it happening occurs.

[THEjDonk]

The part about 4BB/h was only a guess. I haven't recorded my winrate at all. Perhaps I'll get serious about recording and analysing my stats in 2007. I suppose that it would be easier to answer my questions if you had a winrate and standard deviation, but I'll have to get back to you about that later.

[True]

[ QUOTE ]
You are playing way underrolled. Having only 20 buyins for a limit is pushing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont agree at very low stakes

[Speedlimits]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You are playing way underrolled. Having only 20 buyins for a limit is pushing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont agree at very low stakes

[/ QUOTE ]

define very low.

[llleisure]

[ QUOTE ]
define very low.

[/ QUOTE ]

A bowl full of the stakes he's talking about containing more than his bankroll is sitting on my kitchen counter. Works for me anyway. [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]

[gimmetheloot]

I dont think you need 30 BI for anything less than 400NL. 20 is fine for 100NL
10 is fine for anything less, if you beat them handily.