Building a Bankroll as a Rock

Bankroll management topic, figured it belonged here...

I don't remember where I read this but someone had this idea that you should focus on increasing your bankroll by only 1% per session when trying to grind your way up to higher levels. Depending on how many hands per session here, this is some serious grinding away as a total ROCK.

I can't EVER fathom playing this tight-passive for more than a session or two. It's just not in me. I always play for a 5-10% bankroll increase per session but I am very aggressive post-flop, so variance occasionally knocks me down.

I am the type who ALWAYS buys in for the max-amount, even when I was grinding away in the micros. But in this case, and especially if you are multi-tabling, I don't necessarily think this is the best road to go down.

I suppose what I'm asking opinions on here are:

1) Does anyone know what author I'm referring to?
2) Has anyone ever implemented this style to build their roll?
3) At what level does this style become a break-dead-even ploy?
4) What amount do you buy-in? Single-table or Multi-table?

I have never done this, and I don't ever intend to. But the thought just popped in my head and thought it might be a good discussion.

[AlphaKennyBody]

I've never heard of doing this before, but it sounds like you'd be stuck at your current level for an insanely long time.

This kinda reminds me though what I did when I started playing online a little over a year ago. I'd buy in to .05 limit tables with $2, and would play until either I doubled up to $4, or went bust (never reloaded). After that I'd leave to find another table. Both my retarded method and this method really feel like you're playing with scared money (and hell, I know I was). Plus, I don't see how you'd ever improve your game like this, and it seems like you'd be super exploitable by anyone half decent.

[sarbox68]

you should focus on playing increasingly better poker.

...the rest tends to take care of itself...

you should focus on playing increasingly better poker.

...the rest tends to take care of itself...

This I know. I am at least curious to find out who came up with this idea or better yet, who uses it. This is not for my own benefit, just merely for my own entertainment.

This sorta fits in the category of short-stacking I guess.

[sarbox68]

Understood, and not intended to be a smart-ass... My point (from personal experience...) was the tendency to get results focused and bankroll is an easy target metric for this.

1) Is playing like a rock (tight, passive) good poker? I'd say, in general, no -- so what short term (i.e. < 25K hands) impact it might have in grinding my roll doesn't matter to me.
2) Is buying in half stack good poker? I'd say it depends... if I'm trying to build increasingly better short stack skills, then sure. If that's not my mindset then same as #1.
3) Can I consistently get a solid win rate multi-tabling 4 or 6 tables 'cause I play goot? Or do I not know what impact these added tables are having on my roll and why 'cause I'm trading robo-poker for reads, ranges and righteous play? I've sure as sh!t been in the latter -- and gotten mad happy when my roll luckboxed up and then bummed out when I ended up giving it back over another 10K hands.

That's all was saying FWIW...

I agree with all points and I suppose this could only work with $25NL and below. So I guess I just answered my #3 original question. :P

How about this. Why is a rock a rock? Is it because they enjoy camping out for the top 16 hands or so? I doubt it. My answer would be is that rocks are generally easy to tilt, their post-flop play sucks, and they can't deal with negative variance (which kinda goes hand-in-hand with tilt).

this method really feel like you're playing with scared money

It does. However, I can't see this style working unless you're playing well under your bankroll, like playing $10NL with a $1K roll. Buy-in for $5 - cash out when you hit $15 at each table. If you're playing two tables, this would be a 2% BR increase, 3 tables = 3% and so on.

Stupid, yes. Could take forever, yes. But does it work at the low-limits, I'd tend to think so... but who knows. But then again, why would anyone be playing $10NL with a $1K roll...

[Robb]

But then again, why would anyone be playing $10NL with a $1K roll...

Playing like a rock is high variance, too. You wait 100 hands for AA or KK, then get them cracked. Poker is just high variance. Wesrman is the "rockiest" micro grinder I know on FTR right now, but he plays mostly FR and still plays 12% of his hands, give or take.

For grinding and bankroll management, read this: BR Management for People with Balls. It's one of Spoon's funniest rants, and it has some good discussions.

BankitDrew gives suggestions for grinding a roll at the micros, and he knows what he's talking about (approximate - can't find his post right now):

Deposit $50, grind at 2nl until $125.
Grind at 5nl until $300.
Grind at 10nl until $1,000.
Grind at 25nl until $2,000.
Grind at 50nl until $5,000.
You're now a well-rolled 100nl player with good poker fundamentals.

His basic recommendation (again, this is from memory, so I may have it slightly wrong) is to play:

2nl with 25 BI minimum
5nl with 30 BI
10nl+ with 40 BI
100nl with 50 BI

His suggestion is to keep a LOT more BI's on hand as the games get bigger because (a) the games are harder, so variance and swings are bigger, and (b) it shouldn't take very long to grind those sized bankrolls if you're actually a solid player at the limit you're grinding. Good advice from someone who started with a little and now plays for much bigger stakes.

Also, guys like ISF talk about multiple 30 BI downswings in their careers, even though they're very much winning players at their level. Miffed had something sick like a 50 BI downswing. If you're not properly rolled, that will kill your whole poker stash.

Well I never said this style would work or that I was ever going to try it. I'm on a downswing so my brain is working overtime.

I've read spoon's post about BRM for people with balls and agree with everything he said. I like to have well over the norm of 20 BI. I play at 50NL with over a 3K roll. I play 100NL only when I'm feeling froggy. Casino/Cardrooms I'll play 2/5 though without blinking.

Anyway, forget about this crap discussion I've started... I'm heading on over to your operation post to read some of your "articles". I was skimming them over earlier and wanted to give them the complete once over. Seems they're more for beginner's but they looked well written, and hell, I'll read anything when it comes to poker... at least once.

TG I found FTR!