what % of your roll are willing to risk in taking a shot at a higher game?

understanding the general broll mgmt rolls of XX BBs for NL or LHE, but let's say ur in vegas or a invited to a home game but the min buyin is 10% or 25% or 50% of ur roll - would u try it?

i bring this up b/c u always hear (or experience) risking ur entire roll in a big game and going broke. but this risk could lead to huge rewards rlative to ur roll. its how the "name" players both move up limits faster and go broke more frequently...

just wondering what fellow BTPers would feel comfortable with...

thoughts?

i think there has been quite a bit of discussion on similar topics in this forum.

the first issue is how replaceable is your BR? if it's easy to replace, go for it. if not, be more conservative.

likewise with "running up" a BR. you can take two buy-ins to a given game (e.g., NL50), and run-it up as high as you want to play just so you can get some experience at higher levels. ultimately your BR is intact other than that $50. there are debates about exactly what you are risking (won money is won money), but the idea is that one can peter principle out for experience for a relatively low risk.

in your case, for a substantial BR, i wouldn't risk more than 20% for a juicy big bet game, but i'm conservative. and i would want that to give me a few maximum buy-ins . i can imagine blind structures and table textures in which i was OK with the min buy-in, but i think these cases are rare. if you play well, it is possible just to get unlucky in a short time span. i wouldn't want to put a large part of my BR at risk if the amount involved can't handle natural variance and/or if it will possibly make me play scared.

for limit games, i would not want to risk more than 10-20%, but i would want AT LEAST 50 big bets to play with, preferably 100. limit can have a lot of variance, and i like to be aggressive, so i need ammo.

also, some people who "go broke" are not really broke. they may have non-poker savings, they may have a back-up BR, they may be able to borrow to play in a regular game they know they can beat, etc.

i hope you're not thinking of doing something crazy.

no im not thinking of doing anything crazy. just curious what others felt was a lot of their roll to risk. and yes, my roll is generally pretty replaceable. i play 100/50 NLHE online. but now also focusing on getting better at PLO(25) and other games.

but i have been thinking long-term and more strategically lately. my take a shot next year, for now im going into a forced hibernation starting in a few weeks. i think i agree with ur 10-20% number.

good point about those who have gone broke...and about borrowing $$ that could be a whole nother thread. ive loaned to players but never borrowed.

You need to be completely willing to lose 5x of the new level in order to take a shot.

BK 5 buyins or big bets?

Buy ins. I'm assuming this is NL; if I'm wrong...sorry. Take a shot with 100BB for limit that you're completely willing to lose and still have a COMPLETELY adequate BR for your normal game.

I think one reason I have never 'taken a shot' is one of fear of the psychological damage that moving up and losing a sigificant portion of my roll (even as little as 10% of it) would cause. I really am a bad loser and not at all a 'gambler' at heart. I like the psychological comfort blanket of booking winning weeks. I haven't had a losing week (after adding back bonuses) this year. This helps me stay positive about my game..

I play $100 and $200 tables at the moment and get down and often take a day off when I lose as little as $250 in a session.

The three times I have lost $300-450 in a session it meant 3+ days off whilst I calmed down.

I have never lost more than $450 thank god..or finished a week more than $200 down..

If I took a shot at $2-4 and lost a couple of buy-ins ($800) that would be twice as bad as any session I have ever had and I'm not sure how long it would knock me out of circulation for..

The very desire to 'gamble it up' by taking a shot indicates to me that you may be better off trying some biger MTT's rather than moving up to a higher cash game..

Excession, I understand your uncomfort with variance, and I think it must be caused by thinking of money as real money. If you are "willing" to lose $200 at 50NL, then only $200 at 100NL, then $200 at 200NL it's going to affect your game.

At 200NL I don't want to make a different play than I usually would because I already lost $200 today, and I don't want to have a -$400 day... You have to think of it as buyins, realize what a reasonable variance is (maybe 5 buyins every few weeks), and accept that. Just like you accept that once in a while you lose AA vs KK allin pfp, and you made the right play.

It sounds like what you describe is bankroll fear, same as if you were not properly bankrolled, and you have to get passed it somehow if you want to play your best game and play higher stakes at some point.

One suggestion I have found in an article is trying to be less affected by your results, both positive or negative. Don't be too upset when you have a worse day than usual, tell yourself that it happens and you had a bad run. Don't be too happy when you have a better day than usual, just tell yourself that it happens and you had a good run. Getting too attached to either of these experiences will make losing days more difficult.

yeah, i recently finally jumped backed into 100nlhe after dropping 3 buyins my first time 'round a few months back. and finally i can play my normal game there. the psychology of variance vs. roll must be mastered and one must be at piece or else u cannot win.

i was more interested in hearing what others think is too large a% of their roll to risk in a good game. And more importantly have any BTPers risked it all and won/lost. not as means to encourage this behavior - but just figure there probably some good/bad stories out there. if anyone feels like bearing their soul...

me personally, the most i have risked was about 10% of my, awhile back with no real impact one way or the other. not a big broll gambler i guess.

Amen...2 is hard enough...draw the line at 3 for me.