Question for those with $1K+ bankrolls

[JMX]

Did you start from scratch (freerolls) or make a small deposit ($100 or $200) and build from there, or did you deposit a few K right away?

Lately I've been trying to build a BR from scratch on FTP and I'm sitting at around $100 right now, but grinding the $1 SnG's has become hell for me, and I'm wondering if it'd be easier just to deposit money and play at higher SnG's and ring games such as NL50 and NL100.

[Jzo19]

i started with 300 deposit (if u havent get the bonus at full tilt) and get rakeback , played nl10 until i was rolled for nl25 , now my roll is over 1k and i play nl25/nl50, i would suggest u dont jump into nl50 or nl100 immediately , you need a lil bit of exp beating nl25 before beating nl50 which is a lil bit tougher

[AKQJ10]

Made a couple of $100 deposits in different sites, ground (first microlimits then SSNL), got a lot of bonuses, and definitely took advantage of rakeback. Proud to say I never had to reload on any given site, other than Netellering funds around back when it was safe.

Getting to $1000 wasn't too bad, but getting past $2500 (using some of it for B&M) has been a hard slog. Although candidly using some of my Foxwoods winnings for living expenses didn't help me keep things straight!

[ChaseHigh]

I started with a $25 deposit after seeing a couple thousand flops on play money tables.

I started off playing limit which I think is a good way to begin, especially because I figured out the mathematical part of the game before I jumped in. I even had 5 typed pages of stats next to me: the order of best hands against 9 random hands, pot odds, all that stuff.

You can steadily build a roll up to the few hundreds just by playing like a programmed computer at .25/.50 Limit.

Then, if you crave more cash and more excitement, move to Pot-Limit or No-Limit (not much of a difference in strategy, but Pot-Limit can feel safer for someone starting out). If you can play a solid game at 25NL or PL and take advantages of bonuses/rakeback, it's only a matter of time (a few months maybe) before your roll is in the quadruple figures - then it's just about maximizing your profit by finding the best limit, and perhaps multitabling.

[AKQJ10]

Actually I'm pretty adamant that there's no value to starting limit if your long-term goal is to learn NL. The certainly support each other, but you don't set out learning Spanish if your goal is to move to Brasil.

[ChaseHigh]

I sort of agree with you... I'm one who prefers to be a master of one trade than a jack of many.

However, limit proved to be a low-risk, profitable bankroll builder when I first started out.

I find Limit can also teach you the importance of mathematics, as I said before, you can basically just play according to the numbers, and you're almost assured to be a winner in the long run at low limits.

Limit is certainly not a prerequisite for NL, it's just the way I started.

But, it might help a bit considering how many new NL players I see who think the game is all about who can outbluff whom (like they think they see on televised tournaments).

[raze]

Started with $5. How come grinding the SNGs has become hell? You aren't making gains in your bankroll, or they are boringly easy? If it's the former, don't bother putting more money into your roll; focus on improving your skills. If you're beating them, definitely move up. When I had $100 I was playing $3+ .45 SnG's - if you're doing OK at the $1's you can surely take a shot at something a little higher.

[sputum]

Deposited $70 and played 10c-25c limit holdem badly but $20 was the lowest it got. In my ignorance took $200 to play PLO8 25 and the gods smiled on me again. It took me a long time to realise how lucky I'd been and how badly I played. First poker book was WLLH 2nd ed and I thought it was a bit loose [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
Did you start from scratch (freerolls) or make a small deposit ($100 or $200) and build from there, or did you deposit a few K right away?

[/ QUOTE ]
I started with $5 from a royal flush jackpot at a play money table on UB. I probably would have made a deposit if I hadn't gotten lucky like that in my first couple of weeks of playing. I ground my way up starting with $0.01-$0.02 limit -> NL $2 -> $5 SNGs -> $10 SNGs. After 6 weeks I was up to about $600, and moved it to Party while looking for bonuses on other sites. On the first day at Party, I tried two MTTs, for $5 and $10, and made the final table of each, which took me over $1k.

[ QUOTE ]

Lately I've been trying to build a BR from scratch on FTP and I'm sitting at around $100 right now, but grinding the $1 SnG's has become hell for me, and I'm wondering if it'd be easier just to deposit money and play at higher SnG's and ring games such as NL50 and NL100.

[/ QUOTE ]
It sounds like you have been listening to some overly conservative bankroll advice.

You don't need 100 buy-ins to play low stakes SNGs. This is because

[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Your balance is not your bankroll. Your bankroll is supposed to be all of the money you can afford to lose playing poker. Losing your bankroll is supposed to be a disaster. You sound like you are considering depositing, which means you can afford to lose more than your balance. This is typical for those with balances under $1000. It is very different for a pro trying to play and pay the rent out of a $100k bankroll.

[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Low stakes games are much softer than high stakes games. Much higher win rates are possible when your opponents don't really care. A higher win rate means your bankroll requirements are lower. A pro is playing in higher stakes, tougher games, and has a win rate which is smaller in proportion to the level. If your win rate is good for low stakes, you don't need as many buy-ins as a pro.

So, take shots at higher levels if you hate the thought of trying to grind your way up at something like $0.50/hour. If you lose your balance, deposit more.

[Sigurd]

Freerolls --> microstakes SNGs --> Fixed limit and bonus whoring --> No Limit