I was reading this thread called Expected Downswing $0-$22 BI MTTs here is the link http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/61...66/index2.html

But I'm not sure if I understood this correctly where a few posters said this


Are they saying average buy in roughly $10 to $15 and they have had downswings of $10,000 which would mean roughly 700 to 1000 buy in downswings?

Yes

I'm reading some old threads on downswings and BRM and often see posters asking how many buyins is required for MTTs, and the standard replies are around 100 buyins while some suggest 200 buyins.

But given the discussion in that thread where three winning players have said they have had 700 to 1000 buyins downswings, I don't get how 100 to 200 buyins is still then recommended for BRM for MTTs? can you explain this as obviously I'm misunderstanding something?

BRM doesn't guarantee you never go broke. It just reduces the risk to what one considers and acceptable level. The risk no one single number of buyins that is correct for all people for three prime reasons:

1. Not everybody has the same risk tolerance.
2. Not everybody has the same winrate.
3. Not everybody plays with the same variance.

The two people you quoted could have an unusually high variance play style, or they might be unusually unlucky.

Because generally people who lose way above that (which happens) in MTTs tend to quit tourneys anyways.

Big field tourneys have such insane variance that 1k-2k BI becomes much more reasonable than 100-200 BI, especially when your edge isn't huge.

You saying there's players who use 1000 or 2000 buyin bankroll management for MTTS?

No (although some do just because they binked a big tournament or are extreme BR nits), I'm saying that the ones that don't run good in tournaments (and go on such a sick downswing) simply stop playing at some point.

You need to play well and run good in tourneys to actually win. Running bad will destroy your results for such an insane period of time it is actually sickening.

To give you a example how weird BRM is from a noobs point of view if you ask about BRM for MTTS in the sticky in the small stakes MTTS forum where the suggested bankroll for big fields tournaments is 50 to 100 buyins.

And when someone asks how many buyins should one use for MTTS -- a regular with a 56% ROI and moderator for the Tournament forum and the poster who I posted itt who had the 1000 buyin downswing says this..

Then in another thread when the discussion is 100 to 200 buyin BRM he says this..

So from a noobs point of view BRM is a bit

not everyone experiences the most egregious downswings. the people who do are just more likely to post about it

So how do these regulars who have 700 to 1000 buyin downswings keep playing? in another thread they mentioned 1000 was standard for big field tourneys but obviously not often but do regularly have 400 buyin downswings

100bi is just a vague estimate of what you can play, when you should move down or take shots as your bankroll fluctuates.

The best thing to do is start at the lowest stakes and beat those and move up when you have x buyin for the next stake, what ever xbi you feel your comfortable with.

He means people have different skill sets, game selection, preferred field size and people can start playing bad when they lose or win, therefore there is no set in stone rule that when you have X bi you move up and down, its up to the player to gauge what there BI rule is. Just dont play the Sunday Million when you have 3k roll. I.E 100BI rule is a good place to start.

People have big roll/backers and have been playing alot of games to know how things go. No doubt many good players have been lost as they ran really bad 1st few months and never returned as it crushed them, poker variance is huge and you need to be mentally tough to keep coming back a firing day in day out.

Saying that, when your losing dont just blame it on bad luck, you need to be pushing yourself everyday to improve so youre not like all the other guys who are losing or break-even and kidding themselves that it will turn for them soon.

They don't have the downswing at the beginning of their career. Most of them started out getting very lucky.

Also a bunch of them have backers who can help mitigate the downswings.