So I've read from the upswing lab that I'm to have 100 buyins for online no limit cash games. Is that for real? It used to be that the standard was 20 buyins. How am I supposed to move up in stakes fast when I have such a mountain to climb?

So right now I'm starting at 10nl but that means I need to have $1000 first? Then if I want to move up to 25nl, I have to win $1500 at 10nl to reach 25nl with a $2500 bankroll? Let's do the math.

If I'm a 5BB/100 winner (and that's being generous) at 10nl and I need to win $1500 there to move up to 25nl, that's 150,000 hands. Given I play about 30,000 hands a month (~1,000 hands a day), that will take me like 5 months. Is this seriously the path I'm supposed to take? Sorry, it's just hard for me to grasp playing for such low stakes for that long amount of time without getting bored out of my mind.

.. play the smallest stakes u can until youre sure ur winning over a decent sample,and then move up.



if ur gonna get bored honing ur craft at micros, its not gonna work out in the long run for you anyway. kuz news flash : playing for profit isn't fun at all whether it's 5nl or 400nl ;/

if ur a confirmed winner shot taking is fine if ur disciplined ..

100 buy-ins seems WAY too conservative and it's probably a good safety net for degens with absolutely no self-control.
If you are consistently profitable at your current level and you want to take a shot at the next level, I would say 30-40 buy-ins are more than enough, as long as you have a reasonable stop-loss and respect it. Let's say 5 buy-ins downswing.

The thing is, you must be honest to yourself. Are you really winning at your level or just running good? Are you willing to step back as soon as you reach your stop-loss? Some people have no self-control and for some reason see stepping down as a major defeat, refusing to do it.

Example. This is my 5NL graph (I have a goal of 50k hands before moving up).



See the downswing from hand 10k to hand 16k? That's 15 buy-ins. So it would be half my bankroll if I was taking shots with 30 buy-ins. It would be 15% of my bankroll if I was taking shots with 100 buy-ins.
The thing is, it started with this single session:



6 buy-ins in 1000 hands, but the EV line is break-even. Let's say this is my first session taking a shot at a higher level. I lose 6 buy-ins in a session in which I ran like literal ****, so I blame it all on bad luck and keep playing.
A couple days and half my bankroll is gone.

So if you are disciplined and step back to your comfortable level right after this initial losing session, you can take your shot with 30 or even 20 buy-ins.

If you aren't confident enough in your sense of discipline, then you need a bigger bankroll.

There is no single “right” number of buy ins that is a magic number that will make you safe from going bankrupt during a downswing. It’s a matter of risk tolerance and risk management. No matter how big your bankroll is there is a nonzero chance of going bankrupt from a downswing. The number I typically see discussed, 30 buyins, is based on certain assumptions about win rate and variance, the size that gives you about a 1% chance of busting. Obviously if that’s too high a chance for you, use a bigger roll.

This probability can be decreased July being willing to drop down in stakes. For example, suppose you have a $900 roll and play 25nl. You go on a downswing where you lose 8 buyins. You now have a $700 roll , 28 buyins. The probability of busting given above is based on the assumption that you will continue to play 25nl. Notice, though that if you drop to 10NL after losing those 8 buyins, you now have a 70 buyin roll, and you are less likely to bust than you were before your downswing. Again, there’s no magic number - the more you have when you drop down, the less likely you are to bust.

I will add something about how I handled my bankroll size back in the glory days of online poker. Because play is tighter now (much tighter), you may need to adjust.

I always played over-rolled. I kept 20K online at a minimum regardless the stakes. Usually played 100NL or 200NL full ring (which really should have less variance since you fold PF so often)

Playing over-rolled allowed me to NEVER play with scared money. That has a profound affect on how you react and feel about your game. You don't worry about getting sucked out on, or running bad bluffs against stations. It clearly allowed me to play simply to make the best decisions. Eliminate scared money and I bet anyone would play better.

This cannot be overstated. When you get your stack in as a huge favorite and get drawn out on, there's nothing better than being able to shrug it off saying "who cares, it's only 1 buy-in."

Literally makes it easier to play better.