Bankroll Management

[Boobie Lover]

Am I the only one that believes some people take this term a little too seriously? Sure, it is an important concept to minimize the risk of ruin, but I am reading more and more people who are stressing bankroll management while playing .01/.02. What's the point? What is your bankroll $5? Are there people so broke that $5 is a lot of money to them? The risk of ruin should not even be considered for this amount of money. If you lose that, reload.

Basically, all I am saying is that if your bankroll is at a current level that you cannot very easily reload, you should stress bankroll management. But, if you are playing with a sum of money that you can reload your entire bankroll at a whim without any financial constraints, then you should play over your bankroll and risk ruin. In my opinion, it is much better to risk ruin if you can advance to a higher level than to grind out some miniscule amount of money and waste your time in the process.

[kkirk1329]

Agreed, if my bankroll is under 15$, i will be willing to put it all on a table and test my luck and if i fail, then so what, its 15$ yea its hard for me to get money online but i find that sometimes taking risks like that can be fun, i think of it the same way i do live poker, when i go to a game i normally only bring 1-2 buy-ins, because we only play around 10-20$ buy ins.

[ashmc2]

I don't agree guys. I started out with little of nothing on the penny tables. Though most of the fags call everything and their game totally sucks, which can sometimes be counter-productive to learning. It is still needs to be treated as a place to learn proper bankroll skills. But now that I think back on it, my game really isn’t where it’s at today. I got to learn a lot of basic concepts and moves and play massive amounts of hands exceedingly cheap. I will be the first to admit that I take bankroll management to the extremes. But I personally feel if you use the 15 to 20 max buyin rule, you will have the necessary skills learned to play at that next level. (Yes, even at the penny level.)

[kkirk1329]

its not that i dont understand where ur coming from ash, i really do understand that that can be a very helpful and inexpensive way of learning the basics of poker, but i dont know something about the penny tables just makes me bored and i cant seem to really get interested and pay full attention, while if i get into a table with a decent amount of money to me, i will pay more attention and play my best poker.

Edit : lucky number 777th post.

[Boobie Lover]

What's to stop someone from utilizing proper bankroll mangement when the stakes matter to this person? That is the point I am trying to make.

[thrash1294]

I agree ash even for pennies it is important. I think JD started with A micro bankroll for selling play chips and look at the guy now

[Boobie Lover]

What does this have to do with the post I made? I'm saying that it shouldn't matter if you go busto if you can replentish easily, not a bragging post about who has won the most money starting from basically nothing.

[thrash1294]

I was thiking if you cant reload

[ashmc2]

Relax Boobie, did you not post this to get others' opinions?

We see what you are saying, we just think that if you don't over-step your bankroll (No matter how little that eggroll may be or how easily you can rebuy,) you won't have to buy back in.

If your bankroll is so small that it doesn't matter to you, then you didn't buyin for enough. It's not all about taking risks, it's about growing in your game. If you are playing above your bankroll, you are likely the fish at the stakes you are playing.

If you put your whole bankroll on the table for any reason it is wrong. IMO.

[Akverno]

Just tell that to Mike McDermott

[PShabi]

And he didn't do it by playing within a bankroll!!!

Hell, he still doesn't!!!

[thrash1294]

I have been corrected....

NH

[MathBabe]

I never looked at as 'what level do I want to play, therefore what bankroll do I need'... I started with the maximum amount of money I figured I could afford to deposit and lose, and worked backwards from that bankroll to figure out what level I could play at.

I think the point is that if I have $300 on deposit, technically the 300BB rule means I can play .50/1 limit... but only if that $300 is truly my bankroll. If I can afford to lose another $2,700, I just don't happen to have deposited it, then that's really my bankroll. If that were the case I'd feel free to play 5/10 if I felt like it.

When I had $60 at one site and $240 at another, I didn't play .01/.02 at one and .05/10 at the other... I figured my bankroll was $300 and played .50/1 at both.

[Talking Poker]

This is how I look at it - The last paragraph of yours is a no brainer, IMO, but I meant the earlier part.

I think the key is that each person have a general idea of what their bankroll is - and this doesn't necessarily mean "how much can you afford to lose?" Sure, you may be able to afford to lose $3000, as in your example, but how are you going to feel if that happens? If the answer is "really, really shitty," then don't give yourself a $3000 bankroll. Just because you can afford to lose it doesn't mean you should. If you are more comfortable with $500, or $50, or whatever, that should be what you "work backwards" from.

I do understand what Boobie is saying though. At some point in this backwards bankroll figuring out logic, you reach numbers that are ridiculously small. If you are playing $.01/.02 and grinding out a massive 5 BBs per hour, that's still only 10 cents per hour!!! Go work at Wal-Mart and give yourself a 50 fold raise! This only applies if you are indeed trying to "make money" by playing poker... If you are playing for fun or playing to try to improve and move up slowly, or if not having to reload is very important to you, then by all means, stick to playing withing your bankroll at the $.01/$.02 game.

As for me, I don't even know what my bankroll is. Really. I could come up with a number that I'm up lifetime and I could come up with a number of how much I can afford to lose, but I'm not comfortable using EITHER of those numbers as my bankroll (they are both too high). I could also come up with a number for how much money I have online in various poker sites right now, but that's not a good number for me either (this number is too low). My bankroll is the amount that I am comfortable gambling with, and it's somewhere in between the numbers I just mentioned... It's more than I have online right now, but it's less than EVERYTHING I can afford to lose.

It really is a personal decision, but what it comes down to is this: If you don't want to bust, stick to strict bankroll management guidelines. If you can easily reload or just don't care, then by all means, move on up.

[Zybomb]

I am in a weird spot to respond to this thread -- for several reasons

Although I think bankroll management is extremely important, I have done everything I've done in poker, basically ignoring most of the general advice.

A big issue is that I never had (and still don't have) an official "bankroll". As in if you asked me how much money I had set aside to play poker, I couldn't answer you... I could tell you how much money I had at the time. I never seperated the two.

Im also in a unique situation currently, where I have little bills (since I've moved back in with my parents after graduating college and thus avoid rent and utility bills) that only total $300-$350 a month. So technically I could go complete broke (not poker money, I mean everything) just pick up a shift here and there and make my money I need in 2-3 days if need be.... sure it'd be a bitch getting back some $$ to have for poker but whatever.

In addition, (more so live than online.... )I chose my game based on it's potential (earnings) and skill level.

The Club I go to frequently has a 1/2 NL and a 5/5 NL as their hold'em games
I played 1/2 for a while, then moved up to 5/5, had some good sessions, realized I was good enough to beat the game and the earning potential was immensely higher than 1/2...I became comfortable with the raise amounts flop bets etc and that was that. The max buy in is 1K, although most players buy in for 500-800 unless there is an unusual amount of $$ on the table...so the stacks are generally in that area. Sticking to 20x max buy in rules, I should have 20k to play right in this game (which I certainly do not) Adjusting the buy in to a more realistic 700, that still says 14k, which is also not in my roll.

To go back down to 1/2 would be crazy for me though. The play is so different (its two different games when a raise is 10 bucks vs 35 bucks), moves work differently, bluffs arent as intimidating, etc. Its a different game which needs readjustment to...I'd feel weird going back to it, even if I took a hit.

Sure it's not optimum for my bankroll to think like this -- but Im not playing with 3 or 4 buyins, where it's to the point where if I lose two in a row im through...Im dealing with variance ok (and for some reason the bad beats live happen 50 times less often than online)

Of course keep in mind my "roll" goes up and down from things beside poker wins and loses...when I work, that gets added, when I go out, that gets subtracted, when I pay bills, that gets subtracted...considering I don't have an official bankroll... just the amount I have at the time, and technically if I did lose all of it, while it'd suck, It wouldn't kill me...I could get my bills taken care of in 2-3 days, then start makin some money and rebuilding.

I do track all my poker sessions (live and online) so I know exactly how Im doing for the year, and at what stakes etc.

When I first started online poker, I had some extra money and threw $200 in pokerstars. I sat down at the .50/1.00 tables, simply because I couldnt see myself playing for much less, it'd be kind of pointless to me. I had maybe 1k at this point, but if I lost 200 bucks, it didn't matter. I did fairly well and once my stars account got to 800 I switched to the 1/2 tables and played there for a while with mixed success...I went on a tear about april/may of last year (online) moved up to 2/4 and 3/6 (never got beyond that though) and won 10k in 2.5 months. I made frequent withdrawals from my pokerstars account and gave myself a set number to cash out down to. (that number would go up as my winnings did and the stakes did) eventually it was at $2100, and in a two day session I dropped that $2100. I was still up roughly 10k overall in my stars adventure. I took a few weeks off from online play before redepositing. I had mixed success, played some partypoker, a little full tilt, and mostly stars.

Now 75% of my play is live, since I have a cardroom (several actually, though not exactly legit) close to where I live and my online bankroll is smaller.

Do I reccomend people take my route? Absolutely not

But I think people need to redefine their defination of bankroll

IMO, NO poker player should be bankrolled for .01/.02 NL. None. Simply because I refuse to believe that anyone has a bankroll of only $40. If losing $40 (keeping in mind thatd require losing your whole bankroll and doing so in $2 increments) would kill you, I don't think you have the spare money to be playing poker, and you should not be risking any money at all. Choose another hobby like chess or something else that doesn't involve money.

I can't imagine grinding it out at the tables for an hour, just like TP said to make .10 makes sense to anyone...if its not about the $ then play for play money. It's simply a waste of time. Minimum wage is 6 bucks an hour now. If you can't average that assuming you play well, I mean whats the point.

I don't mean to sound too hard or harsh to anyone and if im coming across that way sorry...

Ok rambling done