Mankroll Management - Ideal number of buy-ins

Jónas SJónas S Red Chipper Posts: 202 ✭✭✭
I'm very interested in finding out the ideal number of buy-ins recommended for various games and formats. I found the following table on PokerNews for online-games:

Game (Online) - Minimum - Medium - Cautious
No-Limit Hold’em (6-max.), cash game - 30 buy-ins - 50 buy-ins - 100 buy-ins
No-Limit Hold’em (full ring), cash game - 25 - 40 - 75
Pot-Limit Omaha (6-max.), cash game - 50 - 100 - 150
Pot-Limit Omaha (full ring), cash game - 30 - 50 - 100
No-Limit Hold’em, 9-player sit-n-gos - 30 - 50 - 100
No-Limit Hold’em, 45-player sit-n-gos - 50 - 100 - 150
No-Limit Hold’em, 180-player sit-n-gos - 100 - 200 - 500
No-Limit Hold’em, multi-table tournaments - 100 - 200 - 500
No-Limit Hold’em, multi-table tournaments (large field) - 200 - 400 - 600

The way I see it the minimum number is ideal for recreational players who can afford to re-buy meanwhile the cautious numbers are ideal for professionals who can't afford to go broke with their poker-bankroll.

Do you notice any serious errors in the recommended numbers in the table? Are there any numbers you think are far off and do they depend heavily on being live or online?
As pointed out in the article the number of buy-ins varies between individuals but I'm curious in what you think as a general guideline.

How many buy ins do you have for the games you're playing and which games are that? Are you a pro or a recreational? Would love to hear from you guys.

Comments

  • jfarrow13jfarrow13 Red Chipper Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭✭
    Live : 10 buy-ins. Unless you run absolutely awful, that should at the very least take a while to burn through if you are a losing player.
  • Chris FChris F Red Chipper Posts: 155 ✭✭
    10 is ok if you have a job where you can replenish it. Otherwise you want 25 at least.
  • jfarrow13jfarrow13 Red Chipper Posts: 1,254 ✭✭✭✭
    Isn't that what he's saying? For Rec players who have a job, 10 is fine.
  • Jónas SJónas S Red Chipper Posts: 202 ✭✭✭
    10 sounds good for a recreational who can afford to add-on to his bankroll whenever, but not so good if he can't so yeah I'm on board with the 25 buy-ins so basically what we're saying is that there's not much of a difference between online and live buy-ins excluding that edge case?
  • MonadMonad Red Chipper Posts: 1,004 ✭✭✭✭
    What's a "mankroll"?
  • Jónas SJónas S Red Chipper Posts: 202 ✭✭✭
    Magnificent bankroll.
  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,426 ✭✭✭✭
    bankroll for who? in what game? what is your likely WR and SD?

    want to really get into the weeds for good answer check out MAP and/or pokerdope.com
  • kageykagey Red Chipper, KINGOFTAGS Posts: 2,241 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Chris F wrote: »
    10 is ok if you have a job where you can replenish it. Otherwise you want 25 at least.

    25 is okay if you play like a nit. Otherwise you want at least 50.
  • MonadMonad Red Chipper Posts: 1,004 ✭✭✭✭
    Jónas S wrote: »
    Magnificent bankroll.

    Makes sense.
  • Jónas SJónas S Red Chipper Posts: 202 ✭✭✭
    kenaces wrote: »
    bankroll for who? in what game? what is your likely WR and SD?

    want to really get into the weeds for good answer check out MAP and/or pokerdope.com

    Right now I'm looking for general guidelines that can be applied for recreational and professional players. However I very much like the idea of constructing the bankroll around your very specific game and win-rate. PokerDope looks cool, going to look into it, but what's MAP?

  • Jónas SJónas S Red Chipper Posts: 202 ✭✭✭
    kagey wrote: »
    Chris F wrote: »
    10 is ok if you have a job where you can replenish it. Otherwise you want 25 at least.

    25 is okay if you play like a nit. Otherwise you want at least 50.

    I agree with what you're implying. Ever since I started playing better poker, thanks to red chip and other coaching materials, I've experienced an insane amount of variance due to the nature of the plays. It's hard to go broke when you never triple barrel but we're leaving money at the table in the long run if we never do it, but in the moment it can go wrong so we need to be prepared and be able to reload or buy into another game.
  • Jónas SJónas S Red Chipper Posts: 202 ✭✭✭
    WardoYT wrote: »
    I have a question why do you want to break even or loose profit?? This game ain't all about making the final table every time my friend.. I am sure you know the up and downs of a poker tourney maybe you won't be asking this question. Why not try your luck with 2-3 buy in and profit in cash??

    I don't quite understand. I've not implied that I want to break even or loose profit.

    I've played plenty of live cash and online. If 3 buy-ins is all you have and you lose it, are you just going to wait until you get your next pay-check to play? Sounds horrible :)
  • Jónas SJónas S Red Chipper Posts: 202 ✭✭✭
    WardoYT wrote: »
    kagey wrote: »
    Chris F wrote: »
    10 is ok if you have a job where you can replenish it. Otherwise you want 25 at least.

    25 is okay if you play like a nit. Otherwise you want at least 50.

    What about LAG??

    LAGs have a bigger win-rate if executed properly but have to experience bigger swings, need to take that into account.
  • Chris FChris F Red Chipper Posts: 155 ✭✭
    kagey wrote: »
    Chris F wrote: »
    10 is ok if you have a job where you can replenish it. Otherwise you want 25 at least.

    25 is okay if you play like a nit. Otherwise you want at least 50.

    If a person plays bigger than 1/2 live then I agree. Live 1/2 (and some 2/5) is so soft that I find it hard to imagine that an actual winning player would need more than 25. I've had some deep discussions about this in a semiprivate poker group on slack and none of the winning players on there have went on more than a 10 BI downswing playing 1/2 live. At 5/10 some of them have been in pretty big downswings that would require a 50BI roll for sure.

    My long winded way of saying that it depends.
  • kenaceskenaces Red Chipper Posts: 1,426 ✭✭✭✭
    Jónas S wrote: »
    kenaces wrote: »
    bankroll for who? in what game? what is your likely WR and SD?

    want to really get into the weeds for good answer check out MAP and/or pokerdope.com

    Right now I'm looking for general guidelines that can be applied for recreational and professional players. However I very much like the idea of constructing the bankroll around your very specific game and win-rate. PokerDope looks cool, going to look into it, but what's MAP?

    https://www.amazon.com/Mathematics-Poker-Bill-Chen/dp/1886070253/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1509035805&sr=8-1&keywords=mathematics+of+poker+chen
  • AustinAustin Red Chipper Posts: 5,483 ✭✭✭✭✭
    1) style of play
    2) level of play
    3) risk to ruin

    At 1\2 and 1\3 the skill level and play is pretty face up. My largest swing over the course of a month was 15 buyins.

    Many professional players took crazy shots at the high levels and went broke many times. For recreational players who seldom play and have the extra money go gamble and learn the game the # of buyins don't really matter. You can even start with just 2-3 buyins and reload your BR if you go broke. If you go on a win streak let your bankroll increase from there. Chris furgeson did some type of challenge in the past where he took like $10 and turned it into like 20k.

    Professional tag player i think
    1\2 (30 buyins)
    1\3 (40 buyins)
    2\5 (50 buyins)

    Nit you can cut that in half. As a lag you would need to double that amount and if your a losing player you would need to just have an infinite BR and keep studying.
  • Ruxton_AtheistRuxton_Atheist Red Chipper Posts: 152 ✭✭✭
    With an infinite roll you would never need to quit; with a finite roll, you are presented with an endless parade of quitting decisions, including the toughest quit - to not play today. To sit in the game all you need is money and time; how much you need of one resource is inversely proportional to your skills with the other.
  • NYCRyNYCRy Red Chipper Posts: 336 ✭✭✭
    To sit in the game all you need is money and time; how much you need of one resource is inversely proportional to your skills with the other.

    I like this. Very well put

  • Justin MJustin M Red Chipper Posts: 105 ✭✭
    With an infinite roll you would never need to quit; with a finite roll, you are presented with an endless parade of quitting decisions, including the toughest quit - to not play today. To sit in the game all you need is money and time; how much you need of one resource is inversely proportional to your skills with the other.

    I'd say that's a very good way of putting it!
    I wouldn't imagine most recreational (or even semi-serious) 1/2, 1/3 players are starting out anywhere near 10 buyins when they sit down.
    As long as you're not playing professionally, a lot of people don't necessarily have to have dedicated bankrolls. Rather it can take on the form of spending cash/disposable income/whatever.

    Since I started playing live again (last year), I only started out with 2 full buyins. I also wasn't buying in full, or taking overly risky/high variance plays then either. Now I have about 10, and can certainly tell the difference in my own play. I agree with what was said earlier about having that cushion to be able to play well.

    In any case I think this is an old and never ending debate, and highly subjective.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 4,200 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2017

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file