| Author |
Message |
|
Posted: Tue, 14 Dec 2004, 12:55am Post subject: Comments: Bankroll Management 101. Important to new players.
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 24 Sep 2004
Posts: 1553 WPP: 132
Location: Nest of Douchebags
|
|
{Comments on http://www.flopturnriver.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=4971}
Good post `rilla. I'd just like to emphasize the fact that you should be comfortable having losses within the realm of your game. The number of BB's and buyin ratios can be a general guideline. However, I think that the real importance is that if you get cleaned out 3 games in a row (bad playing, beats, whatever) you're not going to lose sleep over it. That's the importance of BR management and you will not find a more important skill. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 14 Dec 2004, 1:07am Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 22 Sep 2004
Posts: 1102 WPP: 80
Location: Wastin' away again in margaritaville....
|
|
I understand the 10-20 buyin for nl ring games and the 10-15 buyin for SnG and the MTT 30x+ idea. But what if you want to play all of these?
If I want to play 25$ NL, 20$ SnG and 10$ MTTs do I need a $750-1100 BR or Is it just the idea that you limit your buyin for any game to the appropriate percentage of your stack. IE to play a NL table don't join unless 5-10% of your stack is greater than the max buyin. So really one could comfortably play all these with a 400$ BR?
no eating my banana -rilla!
- sed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 14 Dec 2004, 1:09am Post subject:
|
|
|
LAME HUMOR THAT MAKES FISH LAUGH

Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 8092 WPP: 75
Location: This room is a good place to be
|
|
You can have 300 BB for limit and have that be the same exact bankroll for NL and for your MTT experience. Like you said, just don't risk more than 10% of your bankroll on any given day.
-'rilla |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 14 Dec 2004, 1:16am Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 3580 WPP: 80
Location: emo-kid
|
|
| just to be conservative, it wouldn't hurt to recommend 5% risk for the beginner. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 14 Dec 2004, 1:17am Post subject:
|
|
|
LAME HUMOR THAT MAKES FISH LAUGH

Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 8092 WPP: 75
Location: This room is a good place to be
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 14 Dec 2004, 2:02am Post subject:
|
|
|
Not a thinking person

Joined: 14 Oct 2004
Posts: 2425 WPP: 138
Location: My ice is polarized
|
|
| Oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooops |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 21 Dec 2004, 2:51pm Post subject:
|
|
|
LAME HUMOR THAT MAKES FISH LAUGH

Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 8092 WPP: 75
Location: This room is a good place to be
|
|
I would also like to note. Toastee and some other short handed limit players were discussing the horribly fun swings of 6max limit. Toastee considered boosting the BR to 500BB noting that 100BB swings might not be too uncommon. I was merely an observer.
-'rilla |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 21 Dec 2004, 4:50pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 1254 WPP: 83
Location: Sweden
|
|
Is a 340BB swing uncommon? After making 1300$ in the last week of play winning 7 consecutive days i now lost 340$ in 4 hours of play.
I got 3xAA, KK, QQ all cracked in big pots among other very unfortunate hands. Its like as today the only thing i can get is trap hands. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 21 Dec 2004, 5:41pm Post subject:
|
|
|
LAME HUMOR THAT MAKES FISH LAUGH

Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 8092 WPP: 75
Location: This room is a good place to be
|
|
*spits water on computer screen*
*sips and rereads*
*spits water on computer screen*
I sincerly hope not.
-'rilla |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 21 Dec 2004, 9:32pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 17 Dec 2004
Posts: 260 WPP: 120
Location: Sweden
|
|
| Quote: | | You can find the accurate numbers for a proper bankroll all over this great forum of ours. But I like 12-15 buyins for No Limit (Maybe even 20 for 6max), 300BB for limit and 20-30 buyins for tournies. |
Buy-in = max buy-in?
That would mean that on the 0-05-0.10 tables I play, I would be comfortable with a bankroll of $120-$150.
My bankroll is now ~$75. For how long do you think I should play these tables before I can move up? 15 x $20 for the 0.10-0.20 tables would mean a BR of $300. So, should I win $225 more before I can feel comfortable moving up to those tables? Feels like itīs gonna take a while... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 21 Dec 2004, 10:04pm Post subject:
|
|
|
LAME HUMOR THAT MAKES FISH LAUGH

Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 8092 WPP: 75
Location: This room is a good place to be
|
|
You'll thank me after you experience your first big downswing. You can easily drop your entire bankroll in one week of bad play, tilt and bad cards. Also when 1 buyin is 1/7th your whole bankroll, it may be a mental block between you and making the right move. NL is a game about putting your opponent to tough decisions, you're not making it any easier on yourself by raising the stakes and having it represent a larger portion of your bankroll.
-'rilla |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 22 Dec 2004, 3:13am Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 1254 WPP: 83
Location: Sweden
|
|
| Well, I just managed to lose 550$ or 11 buy ins in one day! I don't feel I made many mistakes either. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 22 Dec 2004, 3:16am Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 1254 WPP: 83
Location: Sweden
|
|
CARDSON
Last hand of the day against a 'maniac' player pretty much sums it up.
***** Hand History for Game 1332574897 *****
djlew1969 has left the table.
0/0 TexasHTGameTable (NL) - Wed Dec 22 02:06:48 EST 2004
Table Cool Club (Real Money) -- Seat 4 is the button
Total number of players : 9
Seat 1: TheGuavaJuic ( $19.9)
Seat 2: Anthony71 ( $54.47)
Seat 4: Hfeldstein ( $218.93)
Seat 5: sean204 ( $49)
Seat 6: Boonaru ( $49.5)
Seat 7: bellacosta ( $48.45)
Seat 8: twoskinneejs ( $56.05)
Seat 9: momomoshi ( $61.2)
Seat 10: DirtyLo ( $124.91)
sean204 posts small blind (0.5)
Boonaru posts big blind (1)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to Boonaru [ Ac, 8c ]
bellacosta folds.
twoskinneejs folds.
momomoshi folds.
Anthony71 calls (1)
Hfeldstein raises (4) to 4
sean204 folds.
Boonaru calls (3)
Anthony71 calls (3)
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 3c, 8s, 6c ]
Boonaru bets (6)
Anthony71 folds.
Hfeldstein raises (12) to 12
Boonaru calls (6)
** Dealing Turn ** : [ 2s ]
Boonaru checks.
Hfeldstein bets (15)
Boonaru calls (15)
** Dealing River ** : [ 6s ]
Boonaru checks.
Hfeldstein bets (18.5)
Boonaru calls (18.5)
Boonaru is all-In.
Creating Main Pot with $100.5 with Boonaru
** Summary **
Main Pot: $100.5 | | Rake: $3
Board: [ 3c 8s 6c 2s 6s ]
TheGuavaJuic balance $19.9, sits out
Anthony71 balance $50.47, lost $4 (folded)
Hfeldstein balance $269.93, bet $49.5, collected $100.5, net +$51 [ 6h 4h ] [ three of a kind, sixes -- 8s,6h,6c,6s,4h ]
sean204 balance $48.5, lost $0.5 (folded)
Boonaru balance $0, lost $49.5 [ Ac 8c ] [ two pairs, eights and sixes -- Ac,8c,8s,6c,6s ]
bellacosta balance $48.45, didn't bet (folded)
twoskinneejs balance $56.05, didn't bet (folded)
momomoshi balance $61.2, didn't bet (folded)
DirtyLo balance $124.91, sits out |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 22 Dec 2004, 3:54am Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 1254 WPP: 83
Location: Sweden
|
|
I kinda feel that it does not matter what hand I have or how I play it. The end result is always the same, I lose the hand if the pot is big.
I lost 3 all ins with AA and won 0. I flopped a set 4 times, won 2 small pots, lost an all in to a flopped straight from the blinds and one with set of kings to a river flush.
I had QQ twice against KK on a board with no overcards.
I won a grand total of one big pot! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 22 Dec 2004, 11:53am Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 11 Oct 2004
Posts: 1117 WPP: 67
|
|
Rilla but lets take me as an example for SNG's, my BR is 130 and I play 3+.30 SNG's, if i fail to place 3 times then im already using over 8% of my BR, so wouldnt tha be breaking the rules?, I just think that loosing 3 SNG's in one day is nothing IMO, so couldnt I risk lets say 11% in a day? or would that just be way over the top?...
-anto |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 22 Dec 2004, 12:07pm Post subject:
|
|
|
LAME HUMOR THAT MAKES FISH LAUGH

Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 8092 WPP: 75
Location: This room is a good place to be
|
|
The idea of the 5% was to make sure that people knew how little they should be gambling with each day. The idea was keep it low and safe, the number might not be accurate (seeing how I completely pulled it out of this here ass of mine) but the lesson is there. Just don't go too far. I may go back an edit it up to 10%.
-'rilla |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 02 Jan 2005, 10:46am Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 17 Dec 2004
Posts: 260 WPP: 120
Location: Sweden
|
|
| Quote: | | You can find the accurate numbers for a proper bankroll all over this great forum of ours. But I like 12-15 buyins for No Limit (Maybe even 20 for 6max), |
Was thinking of this again. I usually take a quarter of the max buy-in to the table. That is $2.5 at the $10 max tables, and I do this to keep the variance low. My bankroll is now a little less than $100, so, even if I lose my whole buy-in 20 times in a row, thats just half my roll.
My question is this: What numbers should I count with in my case? Should I still try to have a bankroll at 12-15 max buy-ins or can I count lower?
Thankful for answers,
W. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 02 Jan 2005, 11:10am Post subject:
|
|
|
LAME HUMOR THAT MAKES FISH LAUGH

Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 8092 WPP: 75
Location: This room is a good place to be
|
|
I don't advise buying in with a quarter of the max. You become a push-over to anyone willing to push. You don't have enough money to make camping worthwhile and you definitly don't have enough cash to make any sort of bluff work.
-'rilla |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 02 Jan 2005, 11:14am Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 28 May 2004
Posts: 456 WPP: 95
Location: Bawmer, Merlin
|
|
If you're buying it at less than the max, the primary thing you're doing is limiting your winnings on hands - the protection against losing a lot of money in one hand doesn't justify coming in shorthanded if you think you're a winning player. Also, because you're limiting your winnings, you're really not doing anything to variance (cutting away from both sides).
As rilla says above, you also take away any advantage you might have whatsoever in terms of stack leverage (your ability to make people fold because you have a lot left in your stack that they don't want to risk playing against).
If you're finding that you lose your entire stack often on big hands, you might be wise to move down a level or seriously analyze your game and work on getting out of hands (even the big ones) when you're likely beat. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 02 Jan 2005, 12:45pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 17 Dec 2004
Posts: 260 WPP: 120
Location: Sweden
|
|
First: The reason I do this is because I am already at the lowest limits and my bankroll is not yet 12-15 buy-ins. And since Iīm winning, I donīt see a reason to move down in levels by changing poker room or something like that.
| Quote: | | the primary thing you're doing is limiting your winnings on hands - the protection against losing a lot of money in one hand doesn't justify coming in shorthanded if you think you're a winning player. |
Why would I cut down just the winnings and not the losses? This is what happens:
a) If I have the best hand and I know it: I win less, because I donīt have anough money to put in.
b) If I have the best hand and think I have the best hand: There is no problem for me going all-in, because I only have put 1/40 of my stack to the table. At max buy-in, I would have put in 1/10 of the stack and I would probably be scared to push all-in with a hand Iīm not sure of.
c) If I donīt have the best hand but think I have: If Iīm forced to go all-in, I lose less than I would do with the max-buyin.
a): -
b): +
c): +
| Quote: | | Also, because you're limiting your winnings, you're really not doing anything to variance (cutting away from both sides). |
If Iīm not totally disinformed (does that word exist? ), variance means the curve of ups and downs.
up up up up up down down down down down down up up up up up up up up down down down
If I could change that curve to something like this:
up up down up up down down up up down up up down down
then Iīm doing something about my variance. My $100 bankroll is slowly moving upwards and the swings are smaller.
| Quote: | | As rilla says above, you also take away any advantage you might have whatsoever in terms of stack leverage (your ability to make people fold because you have a lot left in your stack that they don't want to risk playing against). |
Correct, but instead I can make a call when a big stack bets hard and I think I have the best hand. I am less scared of big bets than I would be if I had a larger stack. If someone with a big stack thinks he can make me fold because I donīt want to risk my small amount of money, then I have the advantage.
| Quote: | | You become a push-over to anyone willing to push. |
If there is a lot of pushers, I just change table. I think that is a minor problem. If someone pushes and I have AA, then they are welcome! But if I would buy in with 1/10 of my BR, I would be more likely to fold in that situation.
I believe that max buy-in is the best choice in general. But given the fact that my bankroll is little I think my way is smarter. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 02 Jan 2005, 1:28pm Post subject:
|
|
|
LAME HUMOR THAT MAKES FISH LAUGH

Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 8092 WPP: 75
Location: This room is a good place to be
|
|
If you're doing it from a soley BR building persepctive, that's fine. You might wanna look into Bonus whoring for a little help. I just think sitting down with a quarter stack won't help your game at all. The only way I learn is through experience and difficult decisions. You're taking the difficult right out of the decision (apparently). It sounds a lot like limit from a theoretical standpoint.
As for your original BR question. 10 max buyin should be more than enough if you want to continue to make your decisions very small with respect to your BR.
-'rilla |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 02 Jan 2005, 2:58pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 3580 WPP: 80
Location: emo-kid
|
|
| Waggho wrote: |
a) If I have the best hand and I know it: I win less, because I donīt have anough money to put in.
b) If I have the best hand and think I have the best hand: There is no problem for me going all-in, because I only have put 1/40 of my stack to the table. At max buy-in, I would have put in 1/10 of the stack and I would probably be scared to push all-in with a hand Iīm not sure of.
c) If I donīt have the best hand but think I have: If Iīm forced to go all-in, I lose less than I would do with the max-buyin. |
a) why would you wanna win less when you know you have the best of it?
b) if you're scared to push you should be playing at a lower max buyin.
c) play at a lower buyin then. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon, 03 Jan 2005, 7:28pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 17 Dec 2004
Posts: 260 WPP: 120
Location: Sweden
|
|
| Quote: | If you're doing it from a soley BR building persepctive, that's fine. You might wanna look into Bonus whoring for a little help. I just think sitting down with a quarter stack won't help your game at all. The only way I learn is through experience and difficult decisions. You're taking the difficult right out of the decision (apparently). It sounds a lot like limit from a theoretical standpoint.
-'rilla |
"The only way I learn is through experience and difficult decisions."
This was a very good advice, 'rilla. I had not thought about it that way. I am now playing max buy-in as I have >10 buyins and growing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 05 Jan 2005, 1:23am Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight

Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 131 WPP: 69
Location: Eastern Oregon
|
|
Poker is not a lot different from trading futures or options and there are plenty of excellent books giving good money management rules that would be pertinent to poker as well.
Poker is gambling but it should be in the context of taking risks with skill or becomming highly skilled risk takers. You will not be around very long if you are under capitalized. 90+% of all new small businesses fails in the first two years for this reason alone.
Another very important aspect is dollar cost averaging your bank roll. IE how much of a SET AMOUNT am I putting into the fund from outside sources on a PRESET DAY EACH MONTH ? After all, you should be looking at this like an investment. It IS going to cost you to learn and you WILL experience recessions. Sometimes you will be making a deposit on hot streaks; sometimes on cold ones; sometimes on dead even. But overall you should be meeting your previously defined expectation of return or finding out why not.
In futures trading if you EVER are down more than 50% of your bank roll, you STOP playing altogether until you can define the problem, make the necessary adjustments, THEN AND ONLY THEN continue to play; if need be wait until your outside infusions of money catch you back up.
First and foremost is to have a WELL DEFINED set of rules BEFORE you begin play and NEVER, EVER, FOR ANY REASON break them. History is repleat with the carcasses of many a risk taker that chose to either not have rules or break their rules and to their ultimate, inevitable and certain demise. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 05 Jan 2005, 1:38am Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 28 May 2004
Posts: 456 WPP: 95
Location: Bawmer, Merlin
|
|
| Waggho wrote: |
Why would I cut down just the winnings and not the losses? This is what happens:
a) If I have the best hand and I know it: I win less, because I donīt have anough money to put in.
b) If I have the best hand and think I have the best hand: There is no problem for me going all-in, because I only have put 1/40 of my stack to the table. At max buy-in, I would have put in 1/10 of the stack and I would probably be scared to push all-in with a hand Iīm not sure of.
c) If I donīt have the best hand but think I have: If Iīm forced to go all-in, I lose less than I would do with the max-buyin.
|
You may limit losses if you're playing weak poker. The way you put this is as if a/b/c are all equally balanced. In fact, if you consider yourself a strong poker player, b & c should be far less frequent.
| Quote: |
If Iīm not totally disinformed (does that word exist? ), variance means the curve of ups and downs.
up up up up up down down down down down down up up up up up up up up down down down
If I could change that curve to something like this:
up up down up up down down up up down up up down down
then Iīm doing something about my variance. My $100 bankroll is slowly moving upwards and the swings are smaller.
|
I'd debate that the swings aren't smaller, though - with your short stack, does it make you more inclined to call with a mediocre hand or more likely to (incorrectly) shove all your chips in? If it changes the style of play to something that is too passive or too aggressive, you're actually increasing your variance.
| Quote: | | Correct, but instead I can make a call when a big stack bets hard and I think I have the best hand. I am less scared of big bets than I would be if I had a larger stack. If someone with a big stack thinks he can make me fold because I donīt want to risk my small amount of money, then I have the advantage. |
Shouldn't you be calling regardless of stack size when you think you have the best hand? Does being less scared cause you to lose more pots because you're not afraid to lose $7? I'm not saying this is the case, but it's something to consider. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 13 Jan 2005, 9:19am Post subject:
|
|
|
Straight

Joined: 16 Nov 2004
Posts: 144 WPP: 75
|
|
| Cocco_Bill wrote: | CARDSON
Last hand of the day against a 'maniac' player pretty much sums it up.
***** Hand History for Game 1332574897 *****
djlew1969 has left the table.
0/0 TexasHTGameTable (NL) - Wed Dec 22 02:06:48 EST 2004
Table Cool Club (Real Money) -- Seat 4 is the button
Total number of players : 9
Seat 1: TheGuavaJuic ( $19.9)
Seat 2: Anthony71 ( $54.47)
Seat 4: Hfeldstein ( $218.93)
Seat 5: sean204 ( $49)
Seat 6: Boonaru ( $49.5)
Seat 7: bellacosta ( $48.45)
Seat 8: twoskinneejs ( $56.05)
Seat 9: momomoshi ( $61.2)
Seat 10: DirtyLo ( $124.91)
sean204 posts small blind (0.5)
Boonaru posts big blind (1)
** Dealing down cards **
Dealt to Boonaru [ Ac, 8c ]
bellacosta folds.
twoskinneejs folds.
momomoshi folds.
Anthony71 calls (1)
Hfeldstein raises (4) to 4
sean204 folds.
Boonaru calls (3)
Anthony71 calls (3)
** Dealing Flop ** : [ 3c, 8s, 6c ]
Boonaru bets (6)
Anthony71 folds.
Hfeldstein raises (12) to 12
Boonaru calls (6)
** Dealing Turn ** : [ 2s ]
Boonaru checks.
Hfeldstein bets (15)
Boonaru calls (15)
** Dealing River ** : [ 6s ]
Boonaru checks.
Hfeldstein bets (18.5)
Boonaru calls (18.5)
Boonaru is all-In.
Creating Main Pot with $100.5 with Boonaru
** Summary **
Main Pot: $100.5 | | Rake: $3
Board: [ 3c 8s 6c 2s 6s ]
TheGuavaJuic balance $19.9, sits out
Anthony71 balance $50.47, lost $4 (folded)
Hfeldstein balance $269.93, bet $49.5, collected $100.5, net +$51 [ 6h 4h ] [ three of a kind, sixes -- 8s,6h,6c,6s,4h ]
sean204 balance $48.5, lost $0.5 (folded)
Boonaru balance $0, lost $49.5 [ Ac 8c ] [ two pairs, eights and sixes -- Ac,8c,8s,6c,6s ]
bellacosta balance $48.45, didn't bet (folded)
twoskinneejs balance $56.05, didn't bet (folded)
momomoshi balance $61.2, didn't bet (folded)
DirtyLo balance $124.91, sits out |
That flop reraise from him seems like he thinks you might be trying to buy a raggy flop, I would seriously considering reraising him or maybe putting all your chips in the middle, because honestly his min raise just seems weak as hell. If someone flops 2 pair or a set with that flop you will probably end up paying them off anyway. If they have an 8 they have a worse kicker so you'll want all your money in and let the cards fall. And if they have mid/bottom pair it prevents them from sucking you out. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 08 Feb 2005, 12:07am Post subject: yet another example....
|
|
|
High Card

Joined: 03 Feb 2005
Posts: 6 WPP: 197
|
|
Recently had a great rush on nickel tables, five dollars to 200 in 2 days. Moved up to .25/.50 NL tables, another week I was at six hun.
Moved up to .50/1.00.....
I like to buy in with half the max buy in at my site, max being 100, so 50 is my buy in.
Played tight as Hell.
Hit AA, all in, busted by flush, down to 550
The very next all in, hit ace high flush on flop, all in, opponent hit straight flush., down to 500.
Buy in, play like a rock...(feeling a bit tilty, tighten way up). Hit aa, bet big before flop, like ten bucks or something. flop comes a44, i flop full house, all in. Opponent calls with four of a kind fours. Down to 450.
Buy in, play rockier than Rocky, hit ace high flush on flop, no pairs, no straight flush, all in, opponent calls, catches the full.
Down to 400.
Similar occurences on the next 3 all ins. I had the best possible hand each time, lost 7 consecutive all ins in the space of a day, for a total loss of 350 despite playing the best possible game. I am back to .10/.20 NL, and I won't be moving up to .25/.50 until I am well over 500. I nearly quit poker. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 08 Feb 2005, 12:40am Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 29 Apr 2004
Posts: 1064 WPP: 108
Location: San Francisco
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri, 11 Feb 2005, 11:52am Post subject:
|
|
|
3-of-a-Kind

Joined: 20 Aug 2004
Posts: 86 WPP: 50
|
|
| Great post 'Rilla. Bankroll is the one area of my game that I just don't pay enough attention to. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 17 Feb 2005, 7:21pm Post subject:
|
|
|
High Card

Joined: 17 Feb 2005
Posts: 10 WPP: 151
|
|
Just felt compelled to address a couple points here.
| astrodon wrote: | Another very important aspect is dollar cost averaging your bank roll.
|
Dollar cost averaging is a concept that applies to the accumulation and distribution of "variable priced assets" (prime examples are stocks and mutual funds) Your bankroll is not a variable priced asset. We play poker for money, and a dollar is the same today, tomorrow, next week, next year ... you get the point.
This is only a "very important aspect" of poker if are converting your bankroll to and from another currency. In other words, play for euros from the US or vice versa.
| astrodon wrote: | | In futures trading if you EVER are down more than 50% of your bank roll, you STOP playing altogether |
This also is not an accurate statement. Most successful traders utilize the concept of fixed fractional trading and optimize this utilizing some sort of optimal f evaluation. For the truly successful risk takers, a swing of 50% is not unheard of ... they simply call it draw down.
In poker, you can implement this type of fixed fractional strategy by having rules for moving up and down in stakes.
The other items mentioned are fairly accurate similarities between speculators and poker players. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 19 Feb 2005, 4:11pm Post subject:
|
|
|
3-of-a-Kind

Joined: 12 Feb 2005
Posts: 56 WPP: 101
Location: Mt. Hood Oregon
|
|
| Quote: | | Was thinking of this again. I usually take a quarter of the max buy-in to the table | .
I have a chapter about this is my "Poker Nutz" book. Bro you are killing yourself going into a game at 25%. What happens if you land the nuts, and your sitting on a couple bucks? Your gonna wish to god you put more money in. Here's the deal, if you got a bank roll of only $100, you sit down with as much of it as the table will allow. Now, you are not freely gamble this away, continue to play the game as if you deposited $10, but always have that extra stack there in case you hit nuts. Just becaues you sit down with the entire $100 does not mean you have to wager it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun, 27 Feb 2005, 1:22pm Post subject:
|
|
|
3-of-a-Kind

Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 62 WPP: 64
|
|
| Bah, Bankroll Management, I'm too elite for that. Anyone ever see those chinese movie series called God of Gamblers? The main character, that's right, it's me. 8-) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 09 Mar 2005, 12:20am Post subject:
|
|
|
LAME HUMOR THAT MAKES FISH LAUGH

Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 8092 WPP: 75
Location: This room is a good place to be
|
|
Well, after encountering a monster downswing THIS BIG. *holds his hands out really far apart to illustrate*
I've decided to do some heavy reinforcements to the structure.
I have it at 15-30. 15 buyins is for one table players, and you should be safe with that. But as you add tables, you'll have more of your bankroll in play and it's a good idea to beef up the roll.
You don't have to live by a certain number. Everyone can take what they feel comfortable with. For most people who only play 1 or 2 tables. 15 buyins should do you well.
But a month ago, I thought a 15 buyin downswing would have been ludicrous. Now I think that the idea of it being ludicrous is ludicrous!
Input please? Is it a bit too much, you think?
-'rilla |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 09 Mar 2005, 6:03pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 17 Dec 2004
Posts: 260 WPP: 120
Location: Sweden
|
|
| Exactly how big was your downswing? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 09 Mar 2005, 11:27pm Post subject:
|
|
|
High Card

Joined: 17 Feb 2005
Posts: 10 WPP: 151
|
|
I use 2000-times the Big Blind as my bankroll figure for any game. I'm a firm believe that the blinds drive the action, not the size of the buy-in.
My bankroll strategy is pretty simple. When i reach 2000 times the Big Blind for the next level, I move up. If it ever drops to 2000 times the Big Blind for the PREVIOUS level, I move back down.
This is similar to fixed-fractional [url=http://www.flopturnriver.com/Bankroll-Management-101.html]Bankroll Management[/url] used for most high-risk endeavors. Doing this allows you to work bigger profit potentials with a smaller bankroll while simultaneously greatly reducing your overall risk of ruin. With 2000 times the Big Blind, and more than one level to play at, my total risk of ruin is currently like 1 in 100,000 ... just crazy low.
As for multi-tabling, I make NO adjustment (and I usually play 3+ tables). Each table is mutually exclusive from the next, so theortically, you don't have any more than 1 tables money in play ... you just play the hands faster. That said, if your play deteriorates with extra tables, your bankroll needs to increase to accomodate the increased risk of playing badly (not because you 'have more money' in play). I track my play pretty thouroughly, and I don't notice any change in my win rate or standard deviation from multiple tables (I just have to think faster ).
There's my $0.02 worth. Hope it's helpful. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 10 Mar 2005, 3:51pm Post subject:
|
|
|
3-of-a-Kind

Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 62 WPP: 64
|
|
| Due to lots of requests (not really..), I am now writing BR Management 102: Playing Outside The BR!! Coming soon! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 10 Mar 2005, 4:14pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 23 May 2004
Posts: 611 WPP: 82
Location: Crypto 6max 100NL
|
|
| I disagree with gdaviet, the size of the buy in dictates the feel of the game completely, If you play with 200BB stacks (VC) the game is more of a limp/draw fest compared with 50BB (Party til last week) where the game was much more aggressive and getting all in was easy. It seems that all sites (except VC) now have 100BB stacks so then the argument that blind size dictates the action is valid. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 15 Mar 2005, 1:29am Post subject:
|
|
|
High Card

Joined: 17 Feb 2005
Posts: 10 WPP: 151
|
|
I agree that different structures will alter bankroll requirements. I should have stated that point.
My current bankroll and play strategy is based on a max buy-in of at least 100xBB.
I was very happy to hear that Party changed their structure. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 22 Mar 2005, 2:39am Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 12 Dec 2004
Posts: 1296 WPP: 54
|
|
| I'd say once you've an established winning player, 200 bb is fine for limit, and 10 buyins for NL. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 22 Mar 2005, 3:20am Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 3462 WPP: 153
Location: Ellicott City, MD
|
|
| jmontis wrote: | | I'd say once you've an established winning player, 200 bb is fine for limit, and 10 buyins for NL. |
'Rilla just had a month long -30buyin downswing if I heard right. Is he not an established winning player?
The tips herein are to help account for the natural variance you'll see. Sure, if you're awesome you can beat the game enough to make huge profits relative to a small BR, but you're liable to lose it all doing this.
'Rilla pwns j00! {edited for content - a500lbgorilla}
- Jeffrey |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 22 Mar 2005, 4:24pm Post subject: Bankroll vs cashout
|
|
|
One Pair

Joined: 21 Mar 2005
Posts: 20 WPP: 91
|
|
How much do you guys cash out of your winning and how much you add to your bankroll? Let's say you put in $200 and get it to $500? Do you consider that part of your playing bankroll or you take out some profit for yourself?
I personally want to take out some of the wins so I see it's real money, not virtual money you want to be careless with. Any thoughts? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 22 Mar 2005, 5:13pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 22 Sep 2004
Posts: 1102 WPP: 80
Location: Wastin' away again in margaritaville....
|
|
I would recommend against taking out more than 10% so you won't psychologically change how you play your game...
Until I get my BR to a health state (~10K) I'll probably not take any profit. after that whenever I win 10% or more of the BR I'll take out all but a 5% increase to keep the BR growing steadily until I can play at soupie's stakes.
- sed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 22 Mar 2005, 6:32pm Post subject:
|
|
|
4-of-a-Kind

Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 3462 WPP: 153
Location: Ellicott City, MD
|
|
Agreed. I've withdrawn the amount needed to buy Poker Tracker out of my winnings. Other than that, everything is still in my BR, though now it's spread out to a few different sites.
- Jeffrey |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue, 22 Mar 2005, 7:16pm Post subject: Re: Bankroll vs cashout
|
|
|
LAME HUMOR THAT MAKES FISH LAUGH

Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 8092 WPP: 75
Location: This room is a good place to be
|
|
| poker2006 wrote: | How much do you guys cash out of your winning and how much you add to your bankroll? Let's say you put in $200 and get it to $500? Do you consider that part of your playing bankroll or you take out some profit for yourself?
I personally want to take out some of the wins so I see it's real money, not virtual money you want to be careless with. Any thoughts? |
I didn't withdraw from my account until it was a substantial ammount.
But that's just a college student with no expenses for yah.
-'rilla |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed, 23 Mar 2005, 9:12am Post subject: Re: Bankroll vs cashout
|
|
|
Flush

Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 504 WPP: 88
Location: Wild Bill's Backyard
|
|
| poker2006 wrote: | How much do you guys cash out of your winning and how much you add to your bankroll? Let's say you put in $200 and get it to $500? Do you consider that part of your playing bankroll or you take out some profit for yourself?
I personally want to take out some of the wins so I see it's real money, not virtual money you want to be careless with. Any thoughts? |
If you want to take out steady withdrawals to reward yourself but still want to continue to build a roll, use a double/half approach.
Take your 200, when you double it to 400, then take out fifty percent of your profit, leaving you with 100 in your pocket and 300 in your roll. Play again until that 300 is at six hundred, (300 profit). Take out 150 and add 150 to the roll. Repeat as appropriate.
This rewards you for good play but also allows the building of a bankroll. If something were to happen and you were to move up a limit and end up losing it all, you would have nothing to show for all your hard work. This allows you to take profits but still move up in levels, although it takes longer, which is not always a bad thing.
I would also take any bonuses you clear and use then entirely for the bankroll. These should not count as profits and not be incorporated into any profit calculations. They are there to build a bankroll. Use them for solely that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 31 Mar 2005, 2:56pm Post subject:
|
|
|
|
|
| Actually, no limit tables can kill you very fast. I usually play $1/$2 table, then once you have at least 10 times the upper limit on your current table, you go for the next level (in this case once you reached $20, you switch to play $3/$6 ones). Unless you are tight in cash (or just started up), always have two full buy-ins in your account and ready to pour in in the middle (Not Applicable to tournaments). I was able to go from $5 to about $140 in a couple of weeks in partypoker.com with this strategy. |
Last edited by daniel101111 on Thu, 31 Mar 2005, 5:49pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 31 Mar 2005, 3:06pm Post subject:
|
|
|
LAME HUMOR THAT MAKES FISH LAUGH

Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 8092 WPP: 75
Location: This room is a good place to be
|
|
| daniel101111 wrote: | | Actually, no limit tables can kill you very fast. I usually play $1/$2 table, then once you have at least 10 times the upper limit on your current table, you go for the next level (in this case once you reached $20, you switch to play $3/$6 ones). Unless you are tight in cash (or just started up), always have two full buy-ins in your account and ready to pour in in the middle (Not Applicable to tournaments). I was able to go from $5 to about $1400 in a couple of weeks in partypoker.com with this strategy. |
What are you talking about?
Once you've made $20 dollars at the 1/2 NL tables move to 3/6?
That's too stupid to be what you meant.
And a bankroll of two full buyins?
-'rilla |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu, 31 Mar 2005, 3:13pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Season II

Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 1697 WPP: 68
Location: MI
|
|
| daniel101111 wrote: | | I was able to go from $5 to about $1400 in a couple of weeks in partypoker.com with this strategy. |
Could you further explain your strategy, I guess I don't understand. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 09 Apr 2005, 5:31pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Full House

Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Posts: 647 WPP: 126
|
|
this threads real long didn't take the time to read all of it..
but, my BR is at like 230 now after a couple of days of ring...
When can i move up to the 50 level?? when i hit 500 or somethin?
I have been winning consistently at the 25 ring game, but I don't knowwhether its beginners luck or what |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat, 09 Apr 2005, 6:57pm Post subject:
|
|
|
LAME HUMOR THAT MAKES FISH LAUGH

Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 8092 WPP: 75
Location: This room is a good place to be
|
|
| ender555 wrote: | this threads real long didn't take the time to read all of it..
but, my BR is at like 230 now after a couple of days of ring...
When can i move up to the 50 level?? when i hit 500 or somethin?
I have been winning consistently at the 25 ring game, but I don't knowwhether its beginners luck or what |
750 should be enough. Better safe than sorry.
You're a little under bankrolled for 25 as is, but not dangerously by any stretch.
-'rilla |
|
|
|
|
|
|