Similar to this, let's determine the right strategy for bankroll management into cash games.

What do you think about 25x and even 30x or even 100x bankroll management rules ? (eg. When you have 25 x BI then move to that limit ---> that means 25x)

How these rules are determined ?

What do you think about this and other rampage strategy ? Is it a good one ? Are they good ?

How do you determine the right bankroll management strategy for cash games ?

Thanks !

20x is pretty average. If you are playing for a living I'd want at least 100BI. Personally, I'm comfortable at about 30 or 35 bi and ready to take shots.

Kelly criterion, using nominal reasonable values for winning edge and acceptable risk of ruin. Those variables are different for different people and different game types, of course, so it's worth plugging in your own numbers.

Kelly criterion is one of those universal formulae. It is used for many different investment decisions where risk is involved from gambling to how diverse a business should be. You've probably heard "don't put all your eggs in one basket" - this tells you how many baskets you should use.

Without mentioning it by name, the following link (which is included in the FAQ) uses the Kelly Criterion for calculating when to move up: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...1&postcount=10

Just reading the bankroll management thread arty linked. I'm struggling to understand! Say the normal comfort level is 3. So for me with a WR of 20.42 BB/100 (only over a sample of 2.9K hands, so obviously not my true win rate I do realize!) and my Standard deviation in BB/100 is 45.78 . Using the equation 3*45.78^2/20.42 = 308BB. What is that telling me!? My role had to only be 308BB deep?! I'm very confused :S

Poker is a way to speculate and take risk, no different than trading.

In trading, we risk no more than 5% of our capital on any given day, and keep it at 1% usually.

5% = 20BI
1% = 100BI

If you are a recreational player, the amount you lose should have no material impact on your financial life. ie) Losing $1.5k on 2/5 sucks, and no one wants to lose that, but losing that amount should not impact your life (ie. cause trouble w/ bill payments, dip into savings etc).

This is not only financially prudent, but also improves your play. When you stop thinking of the chips as money, but mere as tools for waging psychological warfare, you will make much better decisions.

Cheers,

S

That is correct. If your true winrate was that high (20BB/100 is ridiculously high!) you could play with a roll of just 616 big blinds (six buy-ins) and have almost zero chance of going broke.
Typically, winrates are closer to 5BB/100 (10bb/100) or lower in the longer term, while SD is usually around 80bb/100 or 40BB/100 for typical TAGs. The SD (which is a way of representing variance, or the "swingyness" of your play) will tend to be lower if you play a nitty shortstack style, and greater if you play deepstacked and LAGgy.

Let's say your true winrate is 5BB/100 and your SD remains at 46BB/100 long term. With a comfort factor of 3, the bankroll required to prevent you risking ruin would be 3*46^2/5 = 1297BB or 25.94 buy-ins of 50BB or 100bb. Thus, a typical winning player will need around 26 buy-ins to be safe from ruin.

As an aside, you're probably enjoying running at 20BB/100 over 2900 hands. Enjoy it now, because it sure won't last! Expect some sick weeks of bad luck (and bad play) in the near future. If you're still at that winrate after 10k, I'll anoint you a prodigy!

What do you think about THIS bankroll management strategy ?

That's more of a shot-taking challenge than a bankroll management strategy. The poster says "this is going to be backed by the rest of my bankroll" - meaning if he goes bust, it's no problem because he still has a bankroll. Therefore, he can afford a very high risk of ruin with this small part of it.

I expect his $150 starting stake for this challenge is less than 5% of his overall bankroll - it does demonstrate that their are more imaginative ways of doing good bankroll management while having some fun though!

One thing though - this strategy involves keeping a very close eye on your profit/loss while you're playing because losing just 2 buy-ins means you have to move down. For most people this would be disastrous for their game - which is another reason why most keep a smaller stake:bankroll ratio so they can play without thinking about the money and can manage their bankroll away from the table on a daily or weekly basis.

I'm not sure there is an ideal BR strategy for everyone. My BR strategy is all about comfort level for me and what will keep me from tilting if I lose a certain amount of BI's.

Normally, I like to play with 25+ BI's at a certain level. If I lose 10-15, that will usually drop me back down to around 25+ BI's at the lower level and I'll play at that level again. This keeps me from tilting too bad and allows me to play optimally at whatever level I am at.

For some people, their ego gets in the way and they are unable to play at a lower level, so for these people playing with 50+ BI's might be an optimal strategy.

I am confused too.
Let's make the following statements:
1. Supposing you play poker very well.
2. You tilt easy too. So your comfort has to suffer.
3. Let's say that if even you play very well poker, you cannot beat the luck/variance.
By variance I mean:
- You have KK and the board comes with an aces and your opponents starts betting into you... (other similar situations)
- You have a set and enter allin on the flop and your opponent has a flush draw which completes on the river.
- You have a better hand and you lose against you opponent on the river or on the future streets
- You don't have good hands too often and you must pay the blinds each round they come to you.
- you want to play a hand and invest money and the board becomes scary and you need to fold losing that money you invested on the pot.

ALL of these are against your bankroll and even you set up a stop loss at 2 BI you could lose more than 2BI just because of these.

Ok. All of these been said. What do you play with $1000 ?
What limit ? What bankroll management you are gonna set up ? What stop loss are you gonna have ?

Thank you !

All your statements are true - that's how variance works.

The ratio of buy-in to bankroll relies on two variables - your comfort factor, and your edge.

For most winning players, who can stand to go bust but would rather not do it too often, a bankroll:buyin ratio of 20 is fine.

For professionals who cannot afford to go bust, a ratio of 100 is more normal.

There is no right answer!

It all depends on the player but 20+ buyins is recommended

A friend of mine said to me that he respected that 6BI rule.
He played just one table at a time and pay attention on every detail, on everything, table selection and so on.
He says that he started from $1000 and into almost 200 sessions he made that way $187.000.
What do you think about ?
Would be this a very good bankroll management in order to increase your bankroll faster ?
Imagine how many sessions he would have to play if he decided to start 20+BI rule...
What you think about ? Was him just lucky ? What is your opinion about ?

Thank you !

Yes. Go read the whole thread again - a lot of people with a lot of knowledge and experience have taken the trouble to give you very good answers...

...Or just believe what you want to believe and get on with it.