Do you have a proper BRM for Home games? (1 Viewer)

[Pinball]

Do you have a proper BRM for Home games?

What is the max you would play? (cash game / tourney)

 

[Luk_nuts]

I play cashgames up until NL200 in casinos, but usually NL50 at homegames.
Tournaments I play everything up to $200 buyin without getting stacked. Above that I sell percentages to friends to avoid playing on scared money.

I always play at a level Im comfortable losing the buyin without getting hurt

 

[Poker Zombie]

Home games: $100, Tourney or cash

Casino: Tourney $1000, cash $300

I may have to bump the home game limit for meetups though. Joining the circus with less than a grand to back me up give me the feeling I need to win. I much prefer poker if I feel the money is already lost and I'm just trying to win it back - thus my preference for tournaments.

 

[detroitdad]

Do you have a proper BRM for Home games?

What is the max you would play? (cash game / tourney)

BRM?

 

[Luk_nuts]

BRM?

Bankrollmanagement

 

[detroitdad]

Bankrollmanagement

gotcha. Yes, bankroll has 6k and change. I take three buy ins (plus 1 to loan out) for the home cash games. Single buy ins range from 60-80 pending where I play. It's almost always .25/.50 blinds.

 

[Mr. Cheese]

I typically play up to 100 cash games at home and up to 100 dollar tournaments. At casino's I've always only just bought in for 60 in 2/4 limit and typically 30 or 60 for tourneys.

 

[bergs]

CASINO CASH - I normally play $500 max 2/5 NLHE and $300 max 1/2 NLHE, PLO, or PLO8. At least once a month I play $800 max 2/5 NLHE and I take 2-3 shots annually at $2K max 5/10 NLHE. Lately (last 12 months) I've been playing more limit O8 than anything else - stakes from 4/8 to 8/16.

HOME GAME CASH - 25c/50c and $1/1, predominantly. Both stakes are mixed games (NLHE, Pineapple, PLO, PLO8, Big O, Tahoe, SOHE) and the buyins start at ~$100 and can go up to half the biggest stack on the table (a typical big home game buyin for me is $400). Once a year at the Bounty Battle, where the Saturday night $1/1 mixed game is uncapped, I rebuy for $2K.

CASINO TOURNAMENTS - my typical buyin is $0, because I typically don't play casino tourneys. I made one exception the last 3 years and played in a WPT O8 event for $300.

HOME GAME TOURNAMENTS - I usually only buy into 2 all year - the Bounty Battle and the Derby City Showdown, both are ~$125ish bounty tourneys.

FWIW, I usually bring between $4-6K to the meetups. Biggest loss was $4100 Wed-Fri at BBotB4 (made most of it back Saturday night) and biggest meetup win was a couple DCS's ago where I got winner for $2100.

 

[bergs]

Home games: $100, Tourney or cash

Casino: Tourney $1000, cash $300

I may have to bump the home game limit for meetups though. Joining the circus with less than a grand to back me up give me the feeling I need to win. I much prefer poker if I feel the money is already lost and I'm just trying to win it back - thus my preference for tournaments.

You can get by via playing tight and sticking to the 25c/50c circus table at a meetup. If you're playing the $1/1 games, you need a higher bankroll ($2500ish). These games are swingy as hell and the action gets pretty hot at the $1/1 table with the aggrotards that play there (I'm classifying myself as an aggrotard here, but Courage, don't go anywhere bro, you're to my right).

 

[Mental Nomad]

For recreational poker, I don't think you need a bankroll. However, that means you are limited to buy-ins you can afford to lose and that are easily replaced out of your income. This means micro games for most people. I think more people would play poker if there were more micro games around.

When you make playing poker a hobby, and play higher than that, then bankroll management becomes important, unless you enjoy being forced out of your hobby on a random basis.

When you try to make it a career, or even a side-job, bankroll management is crucial. Losing your roll is like getting fired and having no job.

 

[72o]

^^^^I agree

I belong at the kiddie table. My pokah bankroll is only a few hundred. I bring about 3 buy-ins for my cash games ($60+ total). I play with 8-10 co-workers...can you tell my job pays us shit?!? I would play for more, but it's what everyone feels comfortable with.

 

[detroitdad]

For recreational poker, I don't think you need a bankroll

I have a bankroll because I enjoy being married

before the bankroll started (5 or 6 years ago) she would always ask how much I was taking, ect.....She isn't a gambler. She runs the finances, and wasn't comfortable with it.

I won a 20.00 tourney that paid me about 200. That was the start of my bankroll. Its peak was 6300 (until I bought some chips, which come out of my BR). It stayed around 3K. Then I went on a horrible streak for about 1.5 years. It went from 3k to 800 (cash games were the only thing that was keeping it even slightly afloat). Then I reset my play. Started over, and took the 800 up to 6k+.

We play .25/.50 cash games. I usually take 250-300 with me. 1-2 buy ins is to loan to John or Marc, lol.

 

[Mr. Cheese]

FWIW, I usually bring between $4-6K to the meetups. Biggest loss was $4100 Wed-Fri at BBotB4 (made most of it back Saturday night) and biggest meetup win was a couple DCS's ago where I got winner for $2100.

I hope that isn't the norm for everyone going to the MTTD2 that I'm going to in a few weeks. I'm planning to bring 300ish lol. No way I could afford to bring 4-6k to any meetup.

 

[detroitdad]

I hope that isn't the norm for everyone going to the MTTD2 that I'm going to in a few weeks. I'm planning to bring 300ish lol. No way I could afford to bring 4-6k to any meetup.

I'm going to the Chicago meet up. No way will I have 6k with me..........prolly not even 1k, lol.

 

[Sal Bandini]

How can you know how much money you need to play a particular stake? Are you keeping track of your winrate and calculating your standard deviation? Without that you cannot know your bankroll requirements and also are not practicing bankroll management.

Having a "proper" bankroll is not BRM.

 

[bergs]

Sorry - I shouldn't have spoken for all meetups.

At DCS and BBOTB, you can play fine with ~$800 at 25c/50c. One you get into the $1/1 games, it's more like a 2/5 casino game where there are $400-500 rebuys as stacks get bigger late night. That's where the $4K came in. Plus, I've been known to try to push 51/49 edges for all I can, so my variance will...um....vary.

 

[Mental Nomad]

How can you know how much money you need to play a particular stake? Are you keeping track of your winrate and calculating your standard deviation? Without that you cannot know your bankroll requirements and also are not practicing bankroll management.

The truth is that nobody can know their winrate until they've played many tens of thousands of hands, and you won't even know your standard deviation without playing thousands of hands.

You need to make some assumptions in order to get there.

Also, while winrate is important so than you can know whether your bankroll will maintain itself, or shrink (unless you keep topping off), it is not the key factor for estimating the necessary bankroll to keep playing a particular game (for any winrate within reason); it's the standard deviation... and standard deviation can be estimated based on playing style and game.

 

[Sal Bandini]

Which is why BRM is irrelevant in home games.

 

[Chicken Rob]

You can never know your true BR requirements.

First of all, it is only possible to calculate your ROR (risk of ruin) if you are a winning player. Losing players need an infinite bankroll.

One of the problems is that if you are a thinking player, by the time you have enough hands to properly calculate your win rate and SD with any accuracy, your game has changed. Additionally, the games you are playing in have probably changed as well.

That said, there are some decent rules of thumb for cash games that I think cover most people who are at least small winners and not super high variance players, and these rules of thumb cover a general sound strategy for BR management, even if you don't know your true earn rate and SD (because you never can know these things, except on-line players can get much better estimates, but we're talking home games).

Buy-ins in big bet games should not exceed 5% of bankroll.
Limit bankrolls should be 500 big bets if you don't want to drop down limits, or 300 if you're willing to drop down at 200 big bets, or 250 if you have enough game selection to drop down at 200 big bets and move back up at 200 big bets.

I no longer have a bankroll. I make a lot of money, and poker is a hobby. When I played as a semi-pro I was a bankroll nit. Now I'm a regular nit.

I have disastrously lost my records 3 times in 4 years, but I am estimating my win rate at a mere $2k per year. I used to make mid 5 figures playing part time, but I play much less now, for lower stakes, and in tougher games. It's more fun as a hobby. As an income, it is either boring or terrifying, depending how variance is treating you.

 

[Chicken Rob]

I also think that people incorrectly look at winrates and SDs wrong in big bet games. Beople look at bb/100 hands or bb/hour, or bb/whatever-unit-of-time. And variance in the same units.

Really, the unit in big bet games is buy-ins, not big blinds. I assure you the .25/.50 games we play in new england look a lot difference than the ones described at the MTTD. And part of that picture is buy-in size.

I'm going to a $100 - $1000 buy-in game saturday. That is at least as important to know, if not more so, than the blind sizes (2/5 NL). But they play 1/2 there at the same buy-ins, and that is really the same game as the 2/5.

 

[Mental Nomad]

Losing players need an infinite bankroll.

I wouldn't say that...

A losing player who loves to play NL can also manage a 10 or 20 buy-in bankroll.

Since they're a losing player, they accept that they'll have to regularly add money to the bankroll... but the amount they'll need to add is just their loss rate. If they're really bad and losing 10 big blinds per hour, that's their cost to enjoy the game - and that's what they'll have to add to their bankroll for every hour they play, in order to be sure they can be able to keep enjoying the game, regardless of the swings.

The losing player's bankroll helps them keep playing despite the swings, just like a winning player's bankroll. The difference is that the losing player needs to keep topping up - while the winning player's bankroll should eventually grow and can be drawn down (if they don't move up in stakes until they're a loser again.)

My main point: losing and break-even players can take advantage of bankrolls to help them continue to enjoy the game we love.

 

[Pinball]

I have a bankroll because I enjoy being married

+1 this

 

[Sal Bandini]

If you keep topping up your bankroll then you don't really have a bankroll to begin with. You are just pulling money out of your pocket to keep playing.

 

[courage]

You can get by via playing tight and sticking to the 25c/50c circus table at a meetup. If you're playing the $1/1 games, you need a higher bankroll ($2500ish). These games are swingy as hell and the action gets pretty hot at the $1/1 table with the aggrotards that play there (I'm classifying myself as an aggrotard here, but Courage, don't go anywhere bro, you're to my right).

I'm intrigued by this idea of a bankroll y'all are suggesting. I can't seem to hang onto one, but my friends have bankrolls, and thankfully will loan me when the $1700 I take to a meat-up disappears.

imo, if a circus game, the stakes don't have much effect on BRM. The buy-in does, esp. if half the big stack or buy-in equal to big stack is allowed. If the game is .25/.50 and it's mixed game big bet, plenty of cash still gets on the table, particularly if the stradddddddllllee is on. To keep a mixed game smaller, limiting the buy-in to $100 or less and not allowing a straddle would work well although play differently. The aggro-tards (berg! guinness!) would play light-buy-in-on-fire early on trying to build a stack but the game wouldn't have as much on the table.

 

[Mental Nomad]

If you keep topping up your bankroll then you don't really have a bankroll to begin with. You are just pulling money out of your pocket to keep playing.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but it's not the same.

Anyone can have three bad 4-hour sessions in a row, losing three buy-ins each. Play long enough, and it's easy. That's down nine buy-ins. A 1/2 player might be out $1800. Twelve hours of play for someone losing 10 big blinds per hour at 1/2 means they expected to lose $240... not $1800. Maybe they can afford to lose $80 for a fun night with their friends and the thrill of some gambles, but $1800 in a row would take them out of the game, because their income can't handle that kind of variance.

But if they have a 20 buy-in bankroll of $4000, then although their bankroll may have taken a massive hit down to $2200, they're not out of the game. They add $80 to the bankroll three times, taking it up to $2440, and keep playing the game.

They have to add $80 per 4-hour session, while a very winning player might be ahead $80 per 4-hour session, but for either one of them, it's the bankroll that allows for surviving a violent swing.

 

[Poker Zombie]

or recreational poker, I don't think you need a bankroll. However, that means you are limited to buy-ins you can afford to lose and that are easily replaced out of your income. This means micro games for most people. I think more people would play poker if there were more micro games around.

When you make playing poker a hobby, and play higher than that, then bankroll management becomes important, unless you enjoy being forced out of your hobby on a random basis.

When you try to make it a career, or even a side-job, bankroll management is crucial. Losing your roll is like getting fired and having no job.

^^^ This

My "Bankroll" for home games is a part of our "Entertainment" budget. This covers chips and tables, gas when travelling to a meetup, buy-ins, and food for our events. It also covers non-poker entertainment like sporting events, dinner and a movie, and the like. Meanwhile, "Vacation" budget covers bigger poker expenses like a trip to Las Vegas. We budget our trips assuming we will lose every time we sit down (or stand when calculating the cost of a craps table). If we do win, we figure out a way to up our vacation.

After Mrs Zombie cashed at a WSOP side event, we upgraded our room at the Mirage to the penthouse, and last year a good poker run on the front side of our vacation resulted in a chef's table dinner at the Restaurant at Meadowood (near Napa) on the back end of the trip. Both were things we wouldn't dream of spending our money on, and both provided a memory more permanent than a bigger bankroll.

 

[Sal Bandini]

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but it's not the same.

Anyone can have three bad 4-hour sessions in a row, losing three buy-ins each. Play long enough, and it's easy. That's down nine buy-ins. A 1/2 player might be out $1800. Twelve hours of play for someone losing 10 big blinds per hour at 1/2 means they expected to lose $240... not $1800. Maybe they can afford to lose $80 for a fun night with their friends and the thrill of some gambles, but $1800 in a row would take them out of the game, because their income can't handle that kind of variance.

But if they have a 20 buy-in bankroll of $4000, then although their bankroll may have taken a massive hit down to $2200, they're not out of the game. They add $80 to the bankroll three times, taking it up to $2440, and keep playing the game.

They have to add $80 per 4-hour session, while a very winning player might be ahead $80 per 4-hour session, but for either one of them, it's the bankroll that allows for surviving a violent swing.

Ok so they have 20 buy-ins. What if they run bad and/or are losing player and end up down to last $20. Now what? They effectively have no "bankroll" anymore. So they reach into their pocket and pull out some more money. Either that or they must quit and not play the game again. So initially their bankroll was $4000. Now it's $20. After they reload it might be something like $400. So that is their new bankroll. I can go bank, withdraw a bunch of money and all of a sudden my bankroll is significantly bigger. So should I play a bigger game now? That's why it (and BRM) is meaningless in home game context.

I know a few players that no matter how may buy-in cushion they have they will eventually go broke.

 

[Sal Bandini]

And I don't think you are being argumentative. I enjoy a debate as long as there is no mudslinging.

 

[Mental Nomad]

So initially their bankroll was $4000. Now it's $20. After they reload it might be something like $400.

No, if our theoretical awful player loses to the tune of $20 per hour, they should put $20 more in their bankroll for every hour they play.

If they start at $4k and have a good four hours and win $400 it grows to $4400... and they put in $80 for their hourly rate, making it $4480.
If they start at $4k and have a bad four hour and lose $400 it drops to $3600... and they put in $80 for their hourly, making it $3680.

Their four-hour night of poker costs them $80, either way.

The bankroll cushions their variance.

This is exactly the same as for a winning poker player, except that a winning poker player doesn't put in... and they can still expect their bankroll to grow.

Neither player's bankroll will survive if they're a degen, and will dip in to try to double up after a loss, or if they play big because they have a big bank, or they try to play up stakes when they're not read, etc. Even a winning player who mismanages their roll will lose it. Period.

 

[Chicken Rob]

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but it's not the same.

Anyone can have three bad 4-hour sessions in a row, losing three buy-ins each. Play long enough, and it's easy. That's down nine buy-ins. A 1/2 player might be out $1800. Twelve hours of play for someone losing 10 big blinds per hour at 1/2 means they expected to lose $240... not $1800. Maybe they can afford to lose $80 for a fun night with their friends and the thrill of some gambles, but $1800 in a row would take them out of the game, because their income can't handle that kind of variance.

But if they have a 20 buy-in bankroll of $4000, then although their bankroll may have taken a massive hit down to $2200, they're not out of the game. They add $80 to the bankroll three times, taking it up to $2440, and keep playing the game.

They have to add $80 per 4-hour session, while a very winning player might be ahead $80 per 4-hour session, but for either one of them, it's the bankroll that allows for surviving a violent swing.

If you are a losing player, and you can afford to put your losses into your bankroll, you have an infinite bankroll. A bankroll is how much you have to play with.

What you are talking about is playing out of your checking account, not bankroll management.