Bankroll/buyin questions

[4s7s 0]

Hi guys, I hope this is the right place to be posting this type of question, as I've never been to this portion of the FCP forums before, I mainly lurk the General Forum.My friend is really stressed out about his game lately and doesn't want to sign up for an account here in order to make this post, so I'm doing it for him. For this reason, please forgive me if I leave out certain necessary details that some of you may need in order to assess the situation properly.Anyway, he wanted me to ask about the number of buyins one should have to play NL cash games full time. He says that everything he reads on the subject suggests that you need about 15 buyins. But according to him, this is ridiculous and he feels like you should have more than 100 buyins, and if it were up to him, more like 200 buyins. He says you'd quickly go broke with 15 buyins because it's possible to lose 1 buyin in one hand at times. And he's lost 15 buyins in a week before.So what do you guys out there say to this? What is the reasoning behind the whole 15 buyin rule? And what do most of you consider the standard number of buyins?Again, any sort of help is appreciated, and I don't know all the details, but I can ask him whatever you guys need to know to help you better answer and reply.Thank you.

[Scott3705 0]

15 buy ins a week is a lot.if you're losing that much, you drop down in limits.100 buy ins is absurd.

[iggymcfly 0]

If you lose 50 buy-ins, then you're definitely a losing player. Thinking otherwise is just deluding yourself. Honestly, I think 10 buy-ins is usually enough if you don't go on tilt or hit a really bad run of cards.

[jayistheman 0]

i've found that a winning player will do just fine with 15 buyins in ring games. more for 6max.

[GeneralKong 0]

Tell your friend that if he's losing 15 buyins/week he needs to find another recreation, possibly kite flying or maybe even knitting mukluks-GeneralKong

[Merby 3]

15 buy-ins may seem small (the first time I heard the figure, I know I thought it was ridiculously small). Once you do the math, however, it makes a lot more sense:The figure of 15 buy-ins doesn't refer to minimum buy-ins but to regular (or in some places, maximum) buyins. A typical buy-in is 100 times the big blind. Therefore:--> at 1/2 NLHE, each buy-in is $200, therefore 15 buy-ins is $3,000--> 2/4 NLHE, the buyin jumps to $400 and the target bankroll is $6,000.--> if you want to jump up to $3/6 NLHE, then we're talking about a bankroll of close to ten thousand dollars.Now consider for a moment, that you're a break-even player. You win half your sessions and lose the other half. In this situation you have a probability of 1 in 2 of losing your buy-in. The question arises, what is the probability of going broke? -->You must lose fifteen buy-ins in a row to manage this. Each occurs at a probability of 1 in 2.-->Therefore, the probability of losing fifteen buy-ins in a row is one in "two to the power fifteen." Working this out, we get 1 in 32,768 --> if you average 5 sessions a week, then you should only expect to go broke once in every 6554 weeks. That's 1 in every 126 years.Obviously winning players go broke more often than this figure suggests. Where is the gap in logic? Well, a lot of players often risk more than 1/15 of their bankrolls in one session. Also if you lose a buy-in and buy right back in to the game, I suggest that you have a higher probability of losing your second buy-in (your table image probably looks vulnerable, the fact that you lost your buy-in may suggest that you're at a tougher-than-normal table, and most importantly: the tilt factor).Nevertheless, if you stick to 15 buy-ins, and drop down in limits every time you go on a bad run (say, every time you drop below 10 buy-ins at a given limit), the risk of you going broke remains minimal. --That is, unless you are prone to tilting, and suffer from the "never book a loss" mentality.Now go crush those no limit tables, and don't worry about going broke (unless you plan to live past 100...)Cheers,Merby> Edited because I didn't proofread, and apparently cannot form coherent sentences.

[DrawingDeadInDM 0]

15-20.You should not be losing 15 buy ins a week, unless you're winning 30 buy ins.

[petersun 0]

Also depends on style a little bit. A more loose aggressive player may need something like 20 to 25. A tight player can easily manage with 15. Your friend should set some limits on the number of reloads per session and also per week. If he's losing 15 buy ins a week, he's probably got a major hole in his game. Whenever I lose more than 2 buyins (in a single session or two consequtive sessions), I always spend some time reflecting on my play.

[bmcarter 0]

Honestly, I started with a total of 3 possible buy-ins. Now, I am at 20 buy-ins in a 4 month period by playing only about 2 hours per week in only cash games. If your friend is LOSING 15 buy-ins, he should take some serious looks at the leaks in his game. I would recommend he read Harrington On Hold 'Em. I know that book is geared for N0-Limit Tournaments, but I have found some of the principals to be useful in cash games, especially at the lower limits ($25 or $50).

[kcb 0]

I say anywhere between 10 and 20 buy-ins depending on the risk you're willing to take. I play .05/.1 NL right now, and I started with only 6 buy-ins, because I knew I could probably beat that game easily.When I start going up in limits, I'll make sure to have between 18 to 20 buy-ins, because the competition will be stiffer.Oh and your friend sucks at life.

[STYLINHAWYN 0]

for anybody playing out of their bankroll thinking that a bad card run will never hit them... think again. I used to think the same thing till I lost 9/10ths of my bankroll, 2,000 down to 200 in a week, playing 1/2 nl (10x buy-ins)Better to be safe than sorry, I'm sticking with a minimum of 20x BI's from here on out.

[iggymcfly 0]

Oh, I've had bad runs, but they usually coincide with me going on tilt.Honestly, if I never reloaded, I'm pretty sure I could go my whole life without a streak where I get down more than 15 buy-ins.