100 buyin brm... your thoughts

[wtf5]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i agree 100+ especially at 5/10+. yea standard variance isnt necessary for that, but there DO exist LONG stretches where you play bad and will lose a lot. if you think those stretches dont exist, you are either naive or amazing.

[/ QUOTE ]


Those are the stretches you should move down for imo.

[/ QUOTE ]


only if ur not playing the same as were when u were a strong winning player.

[Black winter day]

Gaucho was referring more to HU, i think 100 bi there is reasonable, cause the swings are crazy.

For normal 6max, i think 50 BI is enough.You can also move down if you lose like 20 BI, to rebuild.

[snowbank]

i keep hundreds of buy ins. works for me [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[Hattifnatt]

I think 100 buy-ins is a good rule for many ppl that play proffesional and mainly 6-max and HU (esp the latter), esp if you have a high variance style of play. at least at 5/10+

[MDMA]

Man, this thread is out of control. Almost all people here saying "100 buyins is good!" are just plain bullshitting. I can promise you that 99.9% of people in here saying they want 100 buyins for a level would move down after if not 20, then 30 buyins. So, what does this mean? It means they are AT MOST playing with 30 buyins, and the 70 in excess are of no interest at all really. Unless you do not plan to move down even after you are down 60 buyins or whatever, then 100 buyins is just plain [censored].

Yes, people can have their 100 buyins to feel "safe" or whatever, but it has nothing to do with actual bankroll calculations, and thus it's only a preference of their own.

Since that is the case, recommending anyone else to "use 100 buyins" is just retarded given it's only something you've set for yourself in terms of what you feel "secure" with networth-wise, if you are moving down when running bad, then you are not playing with 100 buyins, and this is basically true for almost everyone.

Stop this BS, and learn that people claiming to use 100 buyins are in reality using a 20bi stoploss and thus playing actively with only 20 buyins, never to touch the other 80 on the same limit.

You are all free to have this kind of mental cusion, but stop recommending it to everyone else when it has no mathematical foundation.

[Unarmed]

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

[mephisto]

Good point MDMA. I think the willingness to move down after a bad run makes the 100 BI suggestion a moot point. I'd like to think of a more dynamic BR management where you are willing to move up/down based on your results. I don't think there is one definite answer out there as to what is the best BR strategy. I believe the best strategy is to take the general guidelines listed found in many articles and apply it your own personal needs/ambitions and risk tolerance.

Bill Chen spoke a little about BR management on the wcoop radio yesterday night and discussed the Negreanu cardplayer article. He surprisingly agreed with Negreanu's thoughts that every great player might go broke more than once in order to reach the heights of poker. I personally disagree with that thought as I believe you can construct a dynamic enough BR strategy that lets you take the shots you need while ensuring you have enough left over to play lower stakes comfortably. Those are my 2 cents.

[john kane]

i have over 100 buyins for 5-10nl but that doesn't stop myself wanting to jump off a cliff everytime i lost a buyin at 5-10nl.

your bankroll should be defined as the number of staggered buyins you have. so say you have $30k, you play 5-10nl. you don't have 30 buyins, as you will move down likely when you get to 20k by losing 10 buyins and play 3-6nl, and then if you lose 10 buyins there so your down to $14k, then you move down to 2-4nl and if you lose say 20 buyins there then you move down to 1-2nl with a roll of $6k. thus you have at least 40 buyins for 2-4nl and above.

BR management is only important in that you should have enough that you can play your regular game comfortably and can deal with the variance. anything above that should be using for shot taking.

i wish i did do this shot-taking in a rational manner, but i have severe mental problems which mean i do not and instead grind 2-4nl with a bugger load of buyins.

[Lefort]

MDMA wins. If you have 100bi, you might as well put 60bi in a money market to get interest because the nature of "moving down" means you'll never touch it.

Think about it this way. You have $100,000 to play 5/10. Oh [censored], you lost 20 buyins. You move down to play 3/6. Now you have 133 buyins. Oh [censored], you lost 20 buyins. Move down to 2/4. Now you have 170 buyins. If you lose another 20 buyins there, you should probably quit the game, but you're STILL left with $60,000. So the $60k might as well have been getting 5%/year while you donked off the $40k.

[ogdundar]

100BI is so nitty and so not useful if you are able to move down. And if you arent able to move down, just quit playing poker. Put your money in something that at least gives interest.