Bankroll Management

mrdavies

I have seen a few posts lately about this and still not sure what is right or wrong and what percentage I should be playing with.

For example..

If my bankroll is £300, what limits do you suggest I sit at ?

Same If my bankroll is it £800 what do you think is a comfortable limit?

devonfish5

Hi mrdavies,

I was waiting for someone else to give you a good answer but as no one has, i'll 'chip in'  he he
there is no 'right or wrong' percentage, it's down to each individual.
some players are happy moving up levels with say 20 buy-ins others might want 30 or 40.
some 50-100.

I look at it like this, with £300 playing cash say, if I was playing nl10(30 buy-ins), I could afford to lose 2 0r 3 no worries.
now if I lost say 5 or more then that's £50 gone, which is 1/6th (17%) of my br, which isn't good, and my br is now £250.
ok, it's by no means the end of the world, but another 1 or 2 losing sessions would then become uncomfortable.
but of course, that's worse case, so may not happen.. but it could.
I would play nl10  and if I dropped to below £200 would then drop back to nl4.

£800. that's fine for nl20 I would think (40 buy-ins), but even then, it only takes a little bad run and that would quickly drop to £500. if it was me I would play here and if my br dropped below £400 move down to nl10 and rebuild.
but who's to say you are going to lose, I'm just thinking worse case scenario.

in a nutshell; as long as when you lose you can go to bed at night and not worry about it, then you are fine.
if it keeps you awake, then you are playing at to high a level for your bankroll.

hope that helps a little, best wishes,
dev

edit; didn't give any percentages, did I. you should ideally never lose more than 5% of your br in any 1 session.
       so with £300 that's £15. you could argue that losing 10% is ok that's £30.
again, it's all about how it makes you feel. if losing 10% £30 seems ok then that's fine.

mrdavies

Thanks for the response Devon,agree with that to be fair.

I like nl20 so I will stay with that for the time being, I am only now beginning to use brm! 

So I hope I can stay disciplined ! 

devonfish5

In Response to Re: Bankroll Management:

Thanks for the response Devon,agree with that to be fair. I like nl20 so I will stay with that for the time being, I am only now beginning to use brm!  So I hope I can stay disciplined ! 
Posted by mrdavies

no worries mate,  you Have to stay disciplined or else brm doesn't work.
on my dym challenge I once dropped from playing £3 games to 60p & £1 games because one night my bankroll took a beating
 I'd give myself a 'drop down' figure, if I got to say £400 it's a deffo drop, maybe even £500.
why continue playing at a level when you are losing?
gl,dev

LARSON7

If you are 1 /2 tabling, playing a tight/ risk avesre way, i'd say 15-20 bi's is fine.

Playing more tables, i would say more 40 bi's, and generally 50 is seen as being the best.

But it's just down to yourself, your style of play, and how many tables you play.

GELDY

In Response to Re: Bankroll Management:

If you are 1 /2 tabling, playing a tight/ risk avesre way, i'd say 15-20 bi's is fine. Playing more tables, i would say more 40 bi's, and generally 50 is seen as being the best. But it's just down to yourself, your style of play, and how many tables you play.
Posted by LARSON7

why does the number of tables matter?

dev's very sensible suggestion doesn't care about how fast you go up or down, just what to do along the way. as long as you move down once you slip below £x that's all that seems to matter whether single tabling or 20 tables. just don't lose track of where you are in a session (and if losing a lot you probably know about it!)

DOHHHHHHH

350 buyins, just to be safe

Always buy in for the max Mrdavies, in a lot of the hands you post you are well below the minimum.

Or at least use 100xbb to come up with your bankroll strategy, 20 buyins @ 50nl = £50 x 20, not £25 x 20.

Go with 20ish @ micros, 30 @ modest levels, more higher up.

Losing/Reloading 20 x £4 isn't too difficult.

Reloading 20 x £100 would sting a lot more.

Lambert180

Number of tables does matter, your overall win rate will be bigger, but your edge in each game will decrease the more tables you play and so the variance will increase. 

Also depends how good you are, the smaller your edge = the bigger the swings = the bigger the BR you need.

Pretty much what dohhh said 20 BIs for <10nl, 20nl+ then 30-40 BIs, and prob 50+ at like 50/100nl+

GELDY

In Response to Re: Bankroll Management:

Number of tables does matter, your overall win rate will be bigger, but your edge in each game will decrease the more tables you play and so the variance will increase.  Also depends how good you are, the smaller your edge = the bigger the swings = the bigger the BR you need. Pretty much what dohhh said 20 BIs for <10nl, 20nl+ then 30-40 BIs, and prob 50+ at like 50/100nl+
Posted by Lambert180

at very high numbers yes, but moving up from few is meant to improve your edge as you stop playing hands just to be involved. but regardless, as long as you move down when your bankroll falls, why is the number of tables very important?

LARSON7

Geldy, really because if 1/2 tabling we have a lot less risk to buy in's versus playing 6 tables.

If we run bad playing 6 tables, we could lose 4 plus BI's for talking sake.

If we are starting with 20 bi's, and lose 4 it's a big hit, financially and psychologically.

If we are 1/2 tabling by comparsion it would be a lot more difficult to lose 4 bi's.

So the more tables i was playing, i'd want a bit more behind. If we have 40 bi's and lose 4 bi's, it's not going to overly affect us. Lose 4 bi's of 20 then that is going to sting.


I feel number of tables played is quite important in BRM.

Imo, more tables = higher level of bi's required.

Lambert180

Well I was working on the assumption we're playing our A game in all scenarios. If we're playing our best then our edge (per table) will always be biggest 1tabling. That thing only comes into play if we're playing hands we shouldn't cos we're bored/lack patience but then that's our own leak, not due to table numbers.

salazar

Comfort level is a big thing, each person is different, losing a few buy ins not only affects people financially, it affects people psychologically. I thought Devonfish gave a good answer. Some people are fine with 20 buy ins, I think Doyle Brunson played with 10 buy ins. Others prefer close to 100 or more than 100. So there is no exact number, it's a case of what you feel comfortable with. 

You want to be at a level that allows you to play your (A) game. You can't be scared money which is basically when you are afraid to put your money in the middle even though you know it is the correct move, but you also can't be at a level where the money doesn't mean anything and you are just throwing it around and not taking the game seriously. 

Think of bankroll more like this rather than a specific number of buy-ins.

MP33

I remember a few years ago wtaching on tele and Chris "Jesus" Ferguson said he always used the 5% rule so i pretty much followed that rule myself although since time has gone on i don,t even use that much although i am self-confessed BR nit. The one problem i find is that mr BR has increased quite a lot but my cash game hasn,t improved as fast so for that reason i.ll use a lesser percenatge when playing cash.

Everyone has there own prefernces on BR management but being such a nit , i know i,ll never go skint. On the other hand i know i,ll never make a living from Poker but that suits me fine as the main reason i play is for enjoyment and to be able to play my favourite hobby for free or a little profit on the side which is a bonus. I guess what i,m saying is it depends want you want from the game. If you want to move up stakes and have a chance of going pro you will have to take more risks than i do myself

Ps If you finish a session a few buy ins down it shouldn,t be a big deal. If it is and gets you down then i,d say you need to tighten up your BRM
GL