Advanced search

How much is an adequate bankroll

The all important concept of not going broke.

Moderators: k3nt, LPF Police Department

How much is an adequate bankroll

Postby The A Train » Sat Apr 23, 2005 1:33 am

It's unlucky to be superstitious
User avatar
The A Train
Enthusiast (Online)
 
Posts: 178
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 1:28 am
Location: Bluff, Australia

Postby kennyg » Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:44 am

Depends. If it's just a hobby that you want to learn from and maybe make a little supplemental income...then 20 buyins should be fine.

If you want to make a complete living it's a whole different story. But I don't think that's what you're asking.

Of course...it doesn't matter how big your bankroll is if you're not a winning player. A read that quote by Rolf Slotbloom on cardplayer the other day and frankly...it's very true.
"I'll take KennyGs advice before Sklanskys every time. "
-Iceman

Proud contributing member of the Poker Player's Alliance.
Poker Journal:
forum/viewtopic.php?p=14017#14017
User avatar
kennyg
<b>BTP Benefactor & Tourny #1 Winner</b>
 
Posts: 6223
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 4:16 pm

Postby The A Train » Sat Apr 23, 2005 3:20 am

Thanks for that. I am a winner at this stage. Am playing very low limit NL ring games and want to start moving up. 20 times buy in sounds good as my current fluctuations have not been nearly that severe, however, I do like to plan for the worst case scenario (eg:a horror bad run)
It's unlucky to be superstitious
User avatar
The A Train
Enthusiast (Online)
 
Posts: 178
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 1:28 am
Location: Bluff, Australia

Postby excession » Sat Apr 23, 2005 6:12 am

my worst horror bad run as a newbie was 28 buy-ins (took my roll down from $1200 to $500 at the old Party $25's). I'd like to think that I have more a clue now - but I move up now when my BR hits 40x buy-in for the new limit (just moved up to $100 tables)
User avatar
excession
Enthusiast (Online)
 
Posts: 3872
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2004 3:52 pm
Location: manchester uk

Postby iceman5 » Sat Apr 23, 2005 10:12 am

iceman5 [As]
User avatar
iceman5
Semi Pro (Online)
 
Posts: 13875
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 6:49 pm
Location: Texas

Postby kennyg » Sat Apr 23, 2005 11:33 am

"I'll take KennyGs advice before Sklanskys every time. "
-Iceman

Proud contributing member of the Poker Player's Alliance.
Poker Journal:
forum/viewtopic.php?p=14017#14017
User avatar
kennyg
<b>BTP Benefactor & Tourny #1 Winner</b>
 
Posts: 6223
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 4:16 pm

Postby Felonius_Monk » Sat Apr 23, 2005 1:33 pm

The Monkman J[c]

"Informer, you no say daddy me snow me Ill go blame,
A licky boom boom down.
Detective mon said daddy me snow me stab someone down the lane,
A licky boom boom down." - Snow, 1993
User avatar
Felonius_Monk
Semi Pro (B&M & Online)
 
Posts: 7243
Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2004 10:40 am
Location: Yorkshire, UK

Postby The A Train » Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:11 pm

It's unlucky to be superstitious
User avatar
The A Train
Enthusiast (Online)
 
Posts: 178
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 1:28 am
Location: Bluff, Australia

Postby gdaviet » Sun Apr 24, 2005 8:14 pm

I prefer to use a multiple of the Big Blind rather than a number of buy-ins. That said, with the current most common structure (buy-in equals 100 BB's), the result isn't really much different.

I keep my bankroll above 2,000 x Big Blind for the level I'm playing at. I drop down if my bankroll drops to 2,000 x Big Blind for the next lower level. That's the plan anyway. The reality is that I usually can't stomach my bankroll shrinking by more than 500 or 600 x Big Blind at any given level, and will drop back a bit earlier. I'm just not playing my best poker when I'm thinking about the hundreds of dollars I've tanked :? .

As you can see, with a 100 BB buy-in, this equals the normal 20 buy-in recommendation. I think you need a biggger bankroll (in terms of buy-ins) for games with a smaller buy-in relative to the Big Blind (eg. the 'old' party structure). Similarly, if you find a structure with a large buy-in (maybe 300 x Big Blind), I don't think you need as many buy-ins.

My reasoning: In NL, the size of the pot and the style of your opponent should be driving your betting decisions, not how much money you have in front of you. The size of the pot is driven by the size of the blind, not the buy-in. If you are the type of player where your entire stack is regularly at risk regarless of pot size, I recommend limit :-) .

There's my 2 cents worth.
User avatar
gdaviet
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 7:39 pm

Postby AAcheckraise » Fri May 13, 2005 12:00 pm

User avatar
AAcheckraise
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 10:39 pm

Postby briachek » Fri May 13, 2005 12:12 pm

Brian [Js][9s]
Anyone who gets in a fair fight, has no tactical skills.
User avatar
briachek
Semi Pro (B&M & Online)
 
Posts: 6322
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 3:22 pm
Location: Ewing, NJ


Return to Bankroll Management

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron