Bankroll for full time play

baztalkspoker · #1 11-04-2007, 03:50 PM

I've been a semi-pro now for over a year and was a serious amateur for years before that. Now I've come to a point where I will be full-time pro. My bankroll discipline is something I've been working on a lot lately. I've been working off a 1% risk of ruin requirement to move up stakes. This I think was fine for when I didn't 100% rely on my poker winnings. But when factoring in that I now will be relying on poker for virtually all of my income and so I will be looking to remove $4k a month from my bankroll I think it's no longer strict enough.
Is there any Risk of ruin formulas formulas available which could factor in withdrawals from yoiur bankroll?

Rampage_Jackson · #2 11-04-2007, 03:56 PM

50-100 buyins is good depending on how comfortable you are with it.

baztalkspoker · #3 11-04-2007, 04:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
50-100 buyins is good depending on how comfortable you are with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cheers for the reply.
Hmm sounds bout right. Going to have drop down a level then [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

I also just checked the mathematics of Poker book and read in the bankroll section to factor it in to your winrate. So I'll have a play around with some of the formulas there then.

tozzy · #4 11-04-2007, 05:16 PM

if you need 4k/month to keep your current level, id suggest youd have at least 20k in your bank account and no less than 100 BIs for whatever limit you are playing.

baztalkspoker · #5 11-05-2007, 08:51 AM

I'm looking to put a fairly rigid mathematical formula together to work it out. I noted that in Mathematics of Poker they use a risk of ruin with uncertain win rates. Though I have a mathematical background I'm a bit rusty so I could have done with seeing the formula with some practical examples displayed. Not sure how to implement the formula in practical terms yet. Anyone know of any examples?

Scipio · #6 11-05-2007, 09:06 AM

100 BI Bankrollmanagement is very bad.
IF you loose the first 50 BI´s you will loose the next 50, too.

My biggest downswing was ~13 Stacks, so if you have the right winrate a bankrollmanagement of 20-30 stacks is no problem.
If you loose to much, simply move down in the limits.

baztalkspoker · #7 11-05-2007, 09:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
100 BI Bankrollmanagement is very bad.
IF you loose the first 50 BI´s you will loose the next 50, too.

My biggest downswing was ~13 Stacks, so if you have the right winrate a bankrollmanagement of 20-30 stacks is no problem.
If you loose to much, simply move down in the limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think 100 buyins is strict too but not crazily so. 20 to 30 buy-ins is not enough either for someone like me who will need to be making monthly withdrawals from the roll. For someone who doesn't need to withdraw yeah sure 20 to 30 buy-ins is fine.

Personally I think I will be looking at in the region of 50 buy-ins. But I want to make sure my thinking is sound on this before I totally decide that's the right amount. Hence at the minute trying to decipher chen's RoRU formula. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Maulik · #8 11-05-2007, 09:18 AM

50 is fine, but without knowing your stakes, the number of hands you plan to play, you're throwing a dart in the dark.

baztalkspoker · #9 11-05-2007, 09:47 AM

[ QUOTE ]
50 is fine, but without knowing your stakes, the number of hands you plan to play, you're throwing a dart in the dark.

[/ QUOTE ]

My current bankroll is a little over $20k. I have money in the bank too but I really hope to never touch this - not least of which my wife would kill me [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]. I play a few different games online. NLH, PLO , Fixed limit holdem and Sngs. My current maximum stakes are 3/6 at both PLO and NLH and ~$200 sngs(I play the 220 ones on full-tilt too). I know everybody says this but I am a winning player in all of these - at least that's what PT and sharkscope tell me.

I think I will have to make sure I will play at least 90 table hours a week and drop down to 2/4 nl and plo for a while. I guess that would mean in the region of 90x70 =6300 hands a week. My win rates are 4.25 ptBB perr hour in nlH and 4.85 per hour in PLO. Note I'm using per hour not per 100 as it's the bottom line I'm interested in. My win rates in sngs are high over 10% ROI on most sites, but as always no doubt I need to play some more to be more confident on these results.

So I think the important thing is to try to ensure I put in plenty of table hours a month. I think 50 buy-ins is the minimum I need really and i realise I might even be taking a gamble on this figure but if things start to look in anyway bad I can make money from other sources so no major problem.

Also what I didn't say is I have been living off poker winnings exclusively already for the past year. So it's not a total new experience for me and I'm at least semi tried and tested I would hope it's fair to say. My other income that I had has not been touched in regards to day to day expenses and has been banked and used towards buying a property.

edit: One positive factor that I nearly forgot is rakeback. My win rates don't include this. Rakeback alone should be giving me a sizable % of the income I need.

LuckyLloyd · #10 11-05-2007, 10:08 AM

The advantage of a 100 BI roll is purely psychological. If you are a long term winner at a particular level it is unlikely that you will have a 50 BI "downswing". Not saying it cant happen - just saying that it would be rare case of extreme variance if it did.

However, 5 - 10 BI swings will happen. And it is easier on a mental level to not get stressed and play normally through such things when it equates to 10% of your total roll than 33%!! Which will probably need to be a consideration given that the option to redeposit // make up losses through other forms of income is now removed.