Quote:
Originally Posted by hedgecock
I get your point completely Adam, but as no-one here seems able to say what size a good bankroll is for this game I don't think I'm being 'disingenuous'?
The above sentence showcases your understanding of the game of poker really. Not to be mean but come on...
If you're a losing player you need an "infinite buy-ins bankroll". If you play Hu and your opponent is folding every hand preflop you need a 1BB bankroll.
If you wanna know how many buy-ins you need as a winning player, you need to know your winrate, your standard dev in the game at hand and the risk of ruin you're ready to go with,then you can calculate how many BI you're going to need.
So no, noone will tell you how many buyins you need for these types of games because : it depends (tada!). Not 'even to mention that your winrate and the std dev are not fixed numbers, they change over time (even more true when 2competent players play each other). Noone will ever be able to answer your question without data because, it's not some magical number you can pull out of your head on a sunny morning and be like "yes thats it" ... no, it's math. So no i wouldn't have said disingenuous, I feel sorry but can't help to think you genuinely don't know what you're talking about.
Also @ lion, what makes the article tabloid-ish is the fact that for entertainment purposes you're ok writing something at the detriment of someone. I could alaso point out the click-baity title but it's already been adressed.
It's true that none of what you said isn't fact but the logic behind it is fallacious, as someone pointed out if I sit at NL100 and lose 100b on the 1st hand, is it correct to say I'm losing quicker than Gus ? Well factually yes. But does that make it the Truth? Prob not.
It actually reminds me of this for some reason.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unexpe...anging_paradox