|
|
#21
11-02-2006, 05:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Statistical Survey: Bankroll Size
I thought I was a bankroll nit with 45. Why are you guys sticking at a level with 50+? Is it just that you don't have enough hands at that level that you trust your winrate? That your winrate isn't where it is supposed to be?
|
|
#22
11-02-2006, 05:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Statistical Survey: Bankroll Size
[ QUOTE ]
I thought I was a bankroll nit with 45. Why are you guys sticking at a level with 50+? Is it just that you don't have enough hands at that level that you trust your winrate? That your winrate isn't where it is supposed to be? [/ QUOTE ] I first started in 1/06 with $40 on PS .01/.02 NL and moved up accordingly. I played FR though, and the 400NL FR games are nitfests so I just printed $ at 200NL up to maybe 100 buyins. Recently trying 6M (last few months), played 400NL/600NL on Party but I'm trying to get a better feel for PS before I move up.
|
|
#23
11-02-2006, 05:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Statistical Survey: Bankroll Size
[ QUOTE ]
I thought I was a bankroll nit with 45. Why are you guys sticking at a level with 50+? Is it just that you don't have enough hands at that level that you trust your winrate? That your winrate isn't where it is supposed to be? [/ QUOTE ] For myself, it's an artifact of the definition of bankroll. I have a pretty well paying day job and a decent bank account, stock portfolio, etc.. I have strong confidence that I will become very good at this game and am willing to invest a pretty substantial amount of funds into learning it if that becomes necessary. Thus, theoretically speaking, my bankroll for poker is very large. From a more practical point of view, I started playing online NLHE a few months ago with a deposit of $800. I've run that up to $2900 now moving from NL25 through to NL100. I consider that, for all practical purposes, to be my online poker bankroll. It's part of the exercise in my own poker education to start reasonably small and work my way up through the limits, building the roll as I go.
|
|
#25
11-02-2006, 06:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Statistical Survey: Bankroll Size
[ QUOTE ]
I thought I was a bankroll nit with 45. Why are you guys sticking at a level with 50+? Is it just that you don't have enough hands at that level that you trust your winrate? That your winrate isn't where it is supposed to be? [/ QUOTE ] Most of my roll came from other games so I wanted to spend at least a month beating the current level over a decent sample of hands before moving up.
|
|
#26
11-02-2006, 06:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Statistical Survey: Bankroll Size
[ QUOTE ]
50+ [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#27
11-02-2006, 07:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Statistical Survey: Bankroll Size
Somewhere between 25-30 for NL100. That is more than enough. When I double that up, I'm gonna move up if stats look ok. I cash out all the bons and rakeback though so it's not that fast, but keeps me from moving up too quick.
|
|
#29
11-02-2006, 08:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Statistical Survey: Bankroll Size
Just to update you guys on my situation. Most of you know how I came into SSNL all cocky because I ran my bankroll up super fast to $600nl (I think it was like 6 weeks from 25nl -> 600nl) before I crashed and burned. Basically I started at 25nl and moved up whenever I felt I was beating the level and had at least 20 buyins. I came up too quick without really ever experiencing a true downswing (although I had numerous set backs and such nothing very major.) I hit that downswing and also the worst tilt of my life when I hit the highest stakes I had ever played (3/6NL). I was up almost $20,000 at one point, IIRC, before I took an $11k nosedive.
After all I've been through in my poker career this was the most devestating. It completly shattered me. I know that somewhere inside of me there is a poker player that has potential to reach the highest levels in the world. Right now I just can't find him. One of my biggest problems has always been bankroll management. I mean, I've heard of the guidelines where people say 20 buyins. 20 buyins is fine assuming the following statements hold true: 1. You have a high long-term winrate at the level (PROVEN - not just that you THINK you do) 2. You are playing mentally optimal (not tired, drunk, angry, irritated) 3. You are not scared money (the money has to have no affect on your play at all) 4. You understand variance and can successfully handle downswings. 5. You are willing to drop down a limit if your short term results are negative. These are 5 fundamental assumptions that you have to make about a person to tell them that "20 buyins is fine", in my honest opinion. 20 buyins isn't a whole lot, and I am sure that most of you will agree with that. And even if all of these assumptions do hold true, you won't have 20 buyins very long. If these statements hold true, you will have much much more than that within only a few weeks. Poker is such a money maker, but you have to handle it well. Number 1 is easy to acheive. It just takes time and a lot of practice and experience. If all of the other statements hold true, number one will come eventually. But what I have learned is that the mental side of poker is the true barrier for anyone who participates on these forums. Anyone who plays poker seriously understand pot odds, implied odds, reasons for raising/betting, reasons for calling, when and why to bet, etc. The fundamental aspects can be learned. The mental side of things, especially the monetary weight, are the aspects of the game that hold players back. I didnt plan to write anything that big about this subject but whatever. Take it or leave it. -Tickner
|
|
#30
11-02-2006, 08:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Statistical Survey: Bankroll Size
Yes, good post.
With the advent of multitabling, BR almost always grows faster than skill level, and if all you do is move up whenever you got 20BI for the next level, you will get [censored] eventually.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
