Deciding when to move up

I was just running some numbers regarding rakeback and spoons suggest bankroll requirments per level and it got me wondering if we should include rakeback as a factor when determining when to move up.

As an example, if we're rolled for $50NL we should have $1750 (35BI) and not move up to $100NL until we have $4000 (40BI) or need to make $2250 before moving up to $100NL.

Looking at rakeback calculators and using FullTilt as an example, if we play 1500 hands a day at 6-max we're getting back $862 in a month, or over a 1/3 of what we need to add to out bankroll to move up.

The question is, given the number of hands less we have to play to meet our bankroll requirements for the next level from including rakeback in our bankroll calculations, are we harming ourselves by not playing those extra hands.

If we're a 4ptBB/100 winner at $50NL it would take us 21550 hands to make that $862 in winnings....how can this not be a hindrance to improving our game?

Bankroll is bankroll, IMO. It is made up of winnings, rakeback, and bonus. Let your BI determine your stakes, regardless of how you 'earned' the money.

As a suggestion, we could pay ourselves from the rakeback and make a withdrawal. Then only move up to $100NL once you have earned the required bankroll strictly from playing profit. But if you have the confidence and feel you can compete at $100NL, might as well go for it and keep the rakeback cash in your BR because you'd expect to earn more $/hour sooner.

$'s man, $'s.

I dont get how any of this is a hindrance to improvment?

He made a guideline, not rules. If you don't think you're ready to move up then don't. If you're questioning it "take a shot" and just play until you've hit a stop loss (which may be up 8, down 10 BI who knows).

I still do this being "overrolled" for the next level because it's necessary for my mental health (as it relates to poker). If I'm not comfortable and drop a couple buy-ins (even if I'm up overall) I drop down and get my head straight.

swiggidy - how and when do you determine to take a shot at the next level?

I consider RB as part of my BR for determining max buyin and when to leave a table because of risk. I don't consider bonus unless it's definitely going to be earned. I know a few players (including me) who never finished clearing a bonus on abs or UB because it wasn't worth it.

Ok, few different responses here to what I was expecting

I guess the point I was trying to question was if we stress:

* bankroll management as a sound idea to reduce risk of ruid
* that people should work from the micro's up to get a good grasp of the game and learn new facets at each level that they most likely haven't seen at the levels below
* that people really shouldn't move up until they are beating the game over a reasonable number of hands (most laugh at 10k hand checkup's)

then should we really be using rakeback as a legitimate bankroll addition to move up if it's cutting 20k+ hands from our database and experience.

yes we should be using it as funds and counting towards our overall bankroll no question, but shouldn't we be discounting it from calculations when determining how much we have beat the current level for to work out our winrate and if we are in fact beating the current level?

Originally Posted by Knytestorme

yes we should be using it as funds and counting towards our overall bankroll no question, but shouldn't we be discounting it from calculations when determining how much we have beat the current level for to work out our winrate and if we are in fact beating the current level?

Of course. But that wasn't your original question (or at least it wasn't the one your original post asked).

For the purposes of deciding whether we're rolled for the next level, our roll is our roll no matter how we got it. Thats because this requirement is solely to ensure that you have enough $$$ to weather the potential swings at the higher level. It has nothing at all to do with how well or even whether you have beaten the lower level.

If you want to impose a requirement on yourself that not only must you be rolled for the next level, but you must also have beaten the level you're at, then that extra requirement is an entirely different issue that is wholly independent of your bankroll. For that bonuses and RB are irrelevant - only your table winnings will tell you how well you have beaten the game.

Originally Posted by Knytestorme

yes we should be using it as funds and counting towards our overall bankroll no question, but shouldn't we be discounting it from calculations when determining how much we have beat the current level for to work out our winrate and if we are in fact beating the current level?

Yes.

Keep in mind this is a subjective topic. Suppose you played at a game with 10% rake. You'd have to beat the other players for roughly 7ptbb/100 just to break even, but in a tracker you would be breaking even. If they lowered the rake to 5%, suddenly you're running +3.5ptbb/100. Rakeback is like adding another 1-2ptbb/100. Since most of us are playing games with 5% rake, that's what all the WR guidelines are drawn from. When anyone talks about hitting a 'safe' WR in order to move up, they're usually not calculating rakeback in there.

Originally Posted by kb coolman

Let your BI determine your stakes, regardless of how you 'earned' the money.

this is very wrong, if you cannot beat your current stakes but made enough through RB to move up, that does not mean you can beat the next level.

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

Originally Posted by kb coolman

Let your BI determine your stakes, regardless of how you 'earned' the money.

this is very wrong, if you cannot beat your current stakes but made enough through RB to move up, that does not mean you can beat the next level.

If rakeback is the only margin of profit you have, then I would agree. I don't play on any sites with rakeback yet, although I'll make a push with FTP when I go to $50NL.

But my point is still valid. If you have a BR to move up without the skills, your BR will quickly have you back down to the proper level.

Remember there were several suggestions made in bigspenda's recent post about moving up. I think it is good that you are thinking about RB seperately although it does help. You still need to answer the other questions to really make an honest assesment as to if you are ready to move up. You really only have 25% of the equation complete once you've answered the BR questoin!

1. Am I winning money at my current stakes?

2. Why I am a winning player?

3. Am I properly bankrolled for a full shot at the next level?

4. Am I prepared to move down if I lose?

Originally Posted by kb coolman

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

Originally Posted by kb coolman

Let your BI determine your stakes, regardless of how you 'earned' the money.

this is very wrong, if you cannot beat your current stakes but made enough through RB to move up, that does not mean you can beat the next level.

If rakeback is the only margin of profit you have, then I would agree. I don't play on any sites with rakeback yet, although I'll make a push with FTP when I go to $50NL.

But my point is still valid. If you have a BR to move up without the skills, your BR will quickly have you back down to the proper level.

This makes perfect sense... if you're a masochist.

If you're not good enough to win at one level up, then it makes absolutely NO sense to move up. Hence, WR trumps BR.

Dev - Isn't that why we practice BR management in the first place? Who really knows if they're good enough to move up or not? You can be properly rolled, move up, get crushed, then move back down, regardless of your winrate at the lower level.

I'm not being a masochist, or hard headed. I'm just saying that some folks may need to learn the hard way within the safety parameters of bankroll managment. If you're rolled, take a shot.

Originally Posted by bigspenda73

Originally Posted by kb coolman

Let your BI determine your stakes, regardless of how you 'earned' the money.

this is very wrong, if you cannot beat your current stakes but made enough through RB to move up, that does not mean you can beat the next level.

IMO this is probably a moot point as your losses will either cancel out or be greater than your rakeback +bonus rate.

With that said I agree with the principal that if you are losing money at one level you will only lose more money at the next higher level.

Originally Posted by kb coolman

swiggidy - how and when do you determine to take a shot at the next level?

After realizing that I have to accept that a 10 BI downswing will happen, I decided that I need 30BI. But even then I'm a nit (as of last month) so if I don't upswing (i.e. start downswinging) then I'll move back down to the lower stake and regrind what I just lost.

Note:
1) I'm not saying this is the right approach. Just what I've determined, or guesstimated is right for my mental health.
2) If you're really concerned about switching levels this would be an epic fail. Mentally I don't think it's a bid deal for me.