| Posted by: chiefer77 at November 13, 2007, 4:32 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
i'm gonna start wearing a thick rubberband around my wrist, and everytime i am tempted to play over my bankroll i'm gonna give it a good snap. that'll teach me.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Cheetah at November 13, 2007, 7:19 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by Chris_TC
Never in a million years will I understand this reasoning. If one follows these rules AND MOVES DOWN once the losing begins, then the likelihood of going broke is significantly smaller than 3%.
Quick example: You have $1400 and play $1/$2 Limit, so you start out with 350 big bets in your bankroll. Now he makes the completely unrealistic assumption that you will keep playing this limit, no matter what happens, e.g. even if your bankroll falls below $400 (100 big bets).
If you move down to $0.50/$1 as soon as your bankroll drops to below $1200 (below 300 big bets), you'll suddenly have 600 big bets left which reduces the odds of going broke a whole lot.
In the unlikely case of you dropping even further (to below 300 big bets once again), you'd have to reduce the buy-in again. I'm not sure what's so hard to understand about this and why everybody gets it wrong.
Chris, you are correct to be confused. There is a lot of ... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Chris_TC at November 13, 2007, 6:32 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by aliengenius
For limit poker players he recommends 300 big bets as a standard to ensure that a 1 big bet/hr earning poker player will have a less than 3% chance of going broke with a standard expectation or likelihood of going broke due to 'bad luck'.
Never in a million years will I understand this reasoning. If one follows these rules AND MOVES DOWN once the losing begins, then the likelihood of going broke is significantly smaller than 3%.
Quick example: You have $1400 and play $1/$2 Limit, so you start out with 350 big bets in your bankroll. Now he makes the completely unrealistic assumption that you will keep playing this limit, no matter what happens, e.g. even if your bankroll falls below $400 (100 big bets).
If you move down to $0.50/$1 as soon as your bankroll drops to below $1200 (below 300 big bets), you'll suddenly have 600 big bets left which reduces the odds of going broke a whole lot.
In the unlikely case of yo... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: aliengenius at November 12, 2007, 8:59 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Another one here:
Bankroll Requirements - WillisNYC
Early on in my poker career I lost my initial bankroll by not realizing the proper bankroll requirements for playing limit poker.
A normal string of losses at 5/10 limit poker quickly depleted my $3600 bankroll that I had built over the months preceding that one month run.
I started reading about bankroll requirements and started following the advice I found on them fanatically. Conservatively would be the way most people would term how I follow those bankroll requirements.
Mark Blade wrote an excellent book called Professional Poker in which he devotes two chapters to money and bankroll management for professional poker players. The gist of those chapters that I summarize below is for someone playing out of a given bankroll size for a living. Thus they do not apply to someone who is not playing for a living and can thus 'reload' his bankroll from other sources of income.
Additionally, this figure ass... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Chris_TC at November 10, 2007, 9:14 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Someone on the PokerOffice forums helped me and I've figured out how to read out the MySQL database.
I'll send you the text file in a PM!
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Cheetah at November 9, 2007, 12:15 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by Chris_TC
Oh wow, I think this is beyond me.
My PokerOffice database is MySQL, so I'm sure there's a way to read out the data and format it the way you need it but I don't think I can pull this off.
I'll ask on the PokerOffice forums, maybe someone can help me.
Don't worry about the format. I can reformat if needed.
Also, the reason I need this table is to determnine the percentage of time you are finishing in 1st, 2nd, and so on places. If PokerOffice can display these percentages, then you would not have to extract the table.
However, it is CRITICAL that you use data from the same type of game (buy-in, turbo or not, # players).
If you can display this statistic with PokerOffice, you could then send me something like that:
Game type: $5 buy-in, turbo, 9 players
Number of tournaments played: 45 (needed for statistical significance calculation)
result percentage
1 10
2 15
3 20 | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Leebold05 at November 8, 2007, 4:15 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
I only like to use a small portion of my bankroll. I ery seldom go higher than 5 percent of my total bankroll. If i do, Its because i feel ery focused and feel like gambling.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Chris_TC at November 8, 2007, 2:16 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Oh wow, I think this is beyond me.
My PokerOffice database is MySQL, so I'm sure there's a way to read out the data and format it the way you need it but I don't think I can pull this off.
I'll ask on the PokerOffice forums, maybe someone can help me.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Cheetah at November 8, 2007, 5:24 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by Chris_TC
This sounds ery interesting, can you please tell me what data you need? I'll PM it to you.
Chris, I need a space separated table with the following columns:
Turbo: (either 'y' for yes or 'n' for no)
Buy-In:
# of players:
result:
For example:
Turbo Buy-In #players result
y 1 10 2
y 1 10 1
y 1 10 10
y 1 10 3
y 1 10 6
y 1 10 9
n 1 9 3
n 1 9 3
n 1 9 5
n 1 9 2
n 2 10 1
n 2 10 4
n 2 10 3
n 2 10 6
y 1 6 4
y 1 6 6
y 1 6 1
y 1 6 2
y 1 6 5
The turbo and buy-in are needed to group together games of the same type. If all your data is the same type (say $5 regular), you can omit the first 2 columns.
# of players is need for grouping and to calculate the prizes.
I will assume standard payout structures. If the payout structure is non-standard for some of the entries, indicate what it is.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Chris_TC at November 7, 2007, 12:22 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by Cheetah
If anyone is interested to obtain their optimal STT bankroll, then let me know and I will tell you what data I would need.
This sounds ery interesting, can you please tell me what data you need? I'll PM it to you.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Cheetah at November 7, 2007, 6:42 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by zachvac
Right, but even if you're playing with 0.00001% of your BR, you're still gonna lose if you consistently call 3 all-ins with hands like KJ (and boy are there plenty of those, just tripled up at a cash table with AA s. KK and KJ, bet, raise, raise, raise, raise all-in, call [this was KJ], call [me, happily rejoicing]).
BRM is only relevant for winning players.
If a player is losing, the required BR is infinity. In that case, it is not a BR management issue, but a budgeting issue.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Cheetah at November 7, 2007, 6:29 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by chiefer77
agreed that at this level it can be dangerous to your BR. but is the 1.65 it takes to move up a level really that much?
Yes, it is that much!
The relationship between risk of ruin and % of BR is extremely non-linear. For example, let's assume that the 5% rule is "safe", i.e. that it is ery unlikely to lose your BR due to a bad run. If you started playing using 25% of BR, you are almost certain to go broke, not just 5 times more likely.
The flip side of this is what AG is saying. If you play "too safe", you are not getting enough profit. Say that you use 1/10% rule. The reduction of risk is not worth it. Say that, just for the sake of an example, the 5% rule leads to 1% chance to go broke per year. If going down to 1/10% decreases your risk to 0.001%, it may not be worth it.
Basically, the expected win is rougly proportional to the buy-in, but risk raises VERY QUICKLY above the "safe&q... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: aliengenius at November 7, 2007, 5:45 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by T-MaQ
my br only allows me to play $1+.20 sng at pokerstars. Once in a while i'll play the $5+.50 sngs. I do well in those, winning a couple and placing in the money in others. its tempting to want and try to double and triple up your br, but i'll learned my lesson and tried to jump up to $10+1. that was dumb. Now i just stick to my $1+.20. I know it will take a while to build my br, but i am determined to stay disciplined.
Please move your br to a site like Ultimatebet instead (where they have $0.50 + $0.05 sngs). You must realize that a 20% rake at the one dollar level is probably unbeatable long term. You can move back when you can afford the $5 games if you like FT better (rake is 0.50 = 10%), but please, please, please get out of the 20% rake games if at all possible as soon as you can.
Also, consider e-mailing FT and telling them that you don't appreciate them raping their low limit players, and point out that you have options (like U... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: T-MaQ at November 7, 2007, 5:40 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
my br only allows me to play $1+.20 sng at pokerstars. Once in a while i'll play the $5+.50 sngs. I do well in those, winning a couple and placing in the money in others. its tempting to want and try to double and triple up your br, but i'll learned my lesson and tried to jump up to $10+1. that was dumb. Now i just stick to my $1+.20. I know it will take a while to build my br, but i am determined to stay disciplined.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: KingNothing4 at November 6, 2007, 11:26 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
i try hard to conform to my BRM but sometimes i do find myself over it because i am coformfortable at some higher levels, it is a risk i guess and could hurt u quick, but i think keeping control of yourself can back it up, like u have ur $70 and u play in the $5 and lose...u took that stab at it and lost so now back to doing it right, instead of trying to play again and again to get it back...thats how i do it. another thing i do if i want to play in a higher limit game is i will go play a cash game to win enough for a buy-in and i treat it like a satellite, basically go sit in a cash game until i have a profit that covers the buy-in.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: jonfelkin at November 6, 2007, 11:19 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
I ocassinally play a game that is just out of my bankroll ($5+50) but i think this helps me even if i loose it is a wake up call for me to play better and i seem to do a lot better at the games i normally play for at least a week later. Not a tactic i would recommend to everyone but works for me.
Also i played a Knockout the other day and that also seemed to get me out of my rut of lossing, I guess if your lossing your normal game try a different to get your mind of it before going back it works for me.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: TheDoc at November 5, 2007, 9:47 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by anquish
In fact, I would go as far as saying that after joining CC, the thing that improved my online poker experience the most was learning proper BR management.
Couldnt agree more. It wasnt until I started reading cardschat that I realised what BR management was, and just how important it was. In my humble opinion it is the single biggest factor that has helped me win more, avoid tilt and stay sane in the process.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Genso Hikki at November 5, 2007, 9:13 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by ChuckTs
Well realistically, all BRM comes down to is how much the money means to you.
Looking at both ends of the spectrum, if the $70 and change is just fun money to you, then you don't need any BRM rules.
I understand what you're saying here, but I disagree just a bit. My entire online bank roll (indeed, my bank roll period) is what most people would call "fun money." When I decided to start playing poker, I used the money I would usually spend on other entertainment (movies, eating out, new clothes) to fund my original bank roll. I have managed to build it up quite a ways, but I still adhere to strict brm rules. I want to be a profitable poker player, not just a poker player who can afford to donk off a pile of money. The only way I can continue to show a profit (the only measure of success that matters to me) is to abide by those rules.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: vanquish at November 5, 2007, 8:20 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
In fact, I would go as far as saying that after joining CC, the thing that improved my online poker experience the most was learning proper BR management.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: zachvac at November 5, 2007, 8:17 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by ChuckTs
Completely agree. It's at least a huge, hugggee factor.
Right, but even if you're playing with 0.00001% of your BR, you're still gonna lose if you consistently call 3 all-ins with hands like KJ (and boy are there plenty of those, just tripled up at a cash table with AA s. KK and KJ, bet, raise, raise, raise, raise all-in, call [this was KJ], call [me, happily rejoicing]).
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: ChuckTs at November 5, 2007, 6:48 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by H020585
IMO bankroll management is what makes long term winning players. Stick to it, and you cant go wrong.
Completely agree. It's at least a huge, hugggee factor.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: ChuckTs at November 5, 2007, 4:41 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by Chris_TC
Why would you say this? If you always move down a level once you'd be past 5% there's irtually no chance of going broke.
At 5% you only have 20 buy-ins, but that doesn't mean you can play 20 times at this level. Once you have only 19 buy-ins left you must move down.
Factoring in multitabling and ariance and the %5 isn't safe enough for me. I was on a downswing with a ~$900 bankroll at the $16s while four-tabling and the swings would tear my bankroll a new asshole every day.
I think %5 is enough, but the smaller the % the better. If you don't change your game by being overrolled (ie don't undervalue every buyin), then playing with <%1 is just plain safer.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Chris_TC at November 5, 2007, 12:16 pm | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
I stick to the 5% SNG / 2% MTT rule down to the last dollar. I used to "take shots" but not anymore.
This can be a lesson in discipline, and it keeps your bankroll safe.
Quote: Originally Posted by ChuckTs
Since my 400nl blowup, I've stuck to the %5 percent rule, but I'm not sure that's even safe.
Why would you say this? If you always move down a level once you'd be past 5% there's irtually no chance of going broke.
At 5% you only have 20 buy-ins, but that doesn't mean you can play 20 times at this level. Once you have only 19 buy-ins left you must move down.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: chiefer77 at November 5, 2007, 3:20 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by aliengenius
I have the opposite problem: I am uncomfortable unless I am what most people would consider "over rolled" (I like to have 100+ buy ins personally).
i would love to have that luxury. i am working on it. it's take an extrordinary amount of patience to get there from irtually nothing. which is obviously why people stray away from proper BRM.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: chiefer77 at November 5, 2007, 3:14 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by ChuckTs
Well realistically, all BRM comes down to is how much the money means to you.
Looking at both ends of the spectrum, if the $70 and change is just fun money to you, then you don't need any BRM rules. On the other hand, if it's all you can afford to have online for a long time, then yes, the $1.65 over the %5 really does matter. Especially if other players (who are more experienced than us) say that 50-100 buyins is the norm. In that case your $3.85 is already too big anyways.
well said! another factor i think that needs to be taken into consideration is the level of play at these low limits. i've played all of the levels up to 5.50 (which i've quite sure you have as well) and i've found that the only difference is the level of seriousness at which the game is taken, but not skill level so much.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: aliengenius at November 5, 2007, 3:00 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
I have the opposite problem: I am uncomfortable unless I am what most people would consider "over rolled" (I like to have 100+ buy ins personally).
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: ChuckTs at November 5, 2007, 2:16 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Well realistically, all BRM comes down to is how much the money means to you.
Looking at both ends of the spectrum, if the $70 and change is just fun money to you, then you don't need any BRM rules. On the other hand, if it's all you can afford to have online for a long time, then yes, the $1.65 over the %5 really does matter. Especially if other players (who are more experienced than us) say that 50-100 buyins is the norm. In that case your $3.85 is already too big anyways.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: chiefer77 at November 5, 2007, 1:10 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
agreed that at this level it can be dangerous to your BR. but is the 1.65 it takes to move up a level really that much?
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: ChuckTs at November 5, 2007, 1:00 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
Occasionally. Not to say it's 'right', though.
BRM is meant to discourage this type of thing. Regardless how comfortable or good you are at a certain level, if you play over your limits on a regular basis, you will get massive swings (or possibly lose your BR).
Since my 400nl blowup, I've stuck to the %5 percent rule, but I'm not sure that's even safe. I've read that for multitabling STTs, 50-100 buyins (ie %2-%1) is standard; I've also read that for MTTs, 100-200 is standard (ie %1-%.5).
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: chiefer77 at November 5, 2007, 12:55 am | | Topic: comfortability vs. BRM Forum: Card Chat |
do you ever let you comfort level override proper BRM?
example:
your bankroll is $70. 5% is 3.85 which on pokerstars allows you to play 1.20 stt or mtt. or 3.30 turbo's. you play 5.50 instead because you feel comfortable playing at that level.
| | Static Link |
|