So I've always been a "deposit $50-$100 and see what happens" kind of player, using little or no BR management, or at least no sticking it very well

Anyway, after my 2nd kid was born, I decided to take a few months off and save up an actual bankroll and start playing again after that. So I did, and am now the proud owner of a $500ish bankroll, which is certainly a meaningful amount of money for me.

The problem is now that I'm more scared than ever. Because the amount is meaningful, I'm constantly scared of losing it. And with my preferred game(PLO) being so swingy, it makes it even worse.

So I guess my question is: What's a reasonable number of hands played to where you can get some kind of idea of whether or not you're beating a certain stake. My thoughts are, if I start out VERY small(like 4PLO) and play XX amount of hands showing some kind of profit, then I should have the confidence needed to absorbs the swings that will inevitably come with poker.

CLIFFS: Finally have a BR$$ that I care about, needing confidence, want to know what number of hands played can be meaningful as far as win rate.

First off: I wouldn't play more than 10PLO with your roll...I'd advise somewhere in the 30-40BI range for PLO cash even at microstakes.

Second: About 50k hands is a pretty good barometer if your winrate after that sample isn't super marginal.

Third: If you play 4PLO for 50k hands and make some money, realize that 10PLO (and subsequently 25PLO etc.) are more difficult. Your winrate will likely go down and your swings will increase.

First of all I wouldn't start off with PLO if you don't have enough confidence in your game or if the swings affect you. But if you do PLO10 is max I'd go (50bi) but I'd personally play PLO5(I'm a nit when coming to brm) because as you said it's a very swingy game and you need more cushion for your BR and would perhaps help you with confidence. That being said 50k is about the sample size I'd look for as the person above me said.

Well I was hoping that by showing a profit after 50k hands, I'll have the confidence to not let swings bother me.

And of course I know the games will get tougher as I move up, but I guess maybe I just need a baseline.

So you think after showing profit after 50k hands there's a switch that will turn on and the swings won't affect you as much? What if a hard swing will hit you before you play 50k hands?
Also what is the reason why you play? To make money? For fun? If it's the first do you think you have a bigger advantage in PLO than in NLH ?

Well no, I don't expect some magical switch to turn on. I just figured that if I can prove to myself that I'm a winning player, or breakeven or whatever, then I wouldn't be as concerned about the cause of the downswing. I'd know that it was just variance and not my bad play(assuming I didn't let the downswing affect me.........)


Well, I'd like to think of poker as one day being a lucrative hobby. I don't ever want to live off the money I make, but I don't want to be a lifetime loser/break even payer either.

I enjoy PLO a lot more that NLH. I love the action, even if it does come with swings.

I´m showing profit after 100k hands and i'm at a preety gross downswing at the moment and it is affecting me a bit.

I think it boils down to confidence in your game.

Now that I think I'm definitely lacking. I guess that just comes with experience??

The thing is you'll never be 100% it's not you even if you showed profit after 1 mil hands, I remember some coach (I think WiltonTilt) from DC had a over 200k hands downswing (IN HOLDEM) and thought about quitting, and keep in mind he was a coach at the time. The thing is, I was usually VERY results oriented nowadays I just study as much as I can and say this to myself "The only thing I can do here is play my best game" and that's what I do, even if I lose I know I made the decisions I thought were right, try it maybe it will help you as well.

I like this a lot

Thanks!

No problem, glad to be of help.

50K hands will tell you how you're playing (i.e., how well or not well you play specific situations), but you can't draw any reasonable conclusions on winrate from that sample. Winrate is the last stat to converge, and in a game like PLO, well...

You have to view your $500 as gone. That's the only way you can focus on your play and not your results. If results are what's important, you will never play correctly. That little voice will keep you taking passive lines. In poker, you have to play to win, not play to not lose.

I loved that part, mind if I use it as my signature?

EDIT: my bad it seems there are no signatures allowed here?

I completely agree with this. You need to think of your chips as simply the points you're using to keep score in the game. Or think of them as BB.

2 cents is 1BB in a 2NL game, and $2 is 1BB in a 200NL game, but you'll see people easily stack off with 2 dollars because... well, it's just 2 dollars. They have a much harder time stacking off with 200 dollars. In both cases it's 100 BB.

If you're playing at a level where the amount of money is stressing you (you're afraid to lose it) then you're probably playing too high.

I'd personally start at the lowest limits (I'm a BRM nit too) and work your way up after you prove to yourself over a significant sample you can beat each limit.

So what's a "significant sample" size.

Thanks for the advise guys.

I'd say around 70k for PLO.

Check out my bankroll management video on dc and see the variance simulators. You'll be amazed.

I'd love to. What's it called?

Leak Buster recommends at least 50k to properly analyze your leaks and recommends 100k. I would say when you are at the point when you can accurately analyze your leaks, then your at a point where you know if you're playing winning poker or not. Of course as pointed out in this thread, there are exceptions.

http://www.deucescracked.com/videos/...oll-Management

I'm still trying to figure out how $500 can be considered a bankroll. If you walk into the bellagio, $500 will get you one buy-in.

We're talking about online poker here, micro stakes.

10,000 minimum.

Why do you expect to win? What is it your opponents do worse than you?
Where is your edge?
Once you know why you should win you will have all the confidence you need, and you start to get better at it

this is a great answer! i would definately agree with this advice.