Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="-Phil Ivey27, post: 1643794, member: 19294"] Earlier today I was pondering poker and the possibilities that my future holds. With this pondering I began to calculate on average how long it would take to get from one stake level to another, based on general statistics of my own. Then I began to analyze the concept of bankroll management and came to a thought.. A thought I am sure many poker players have had, maybe even players that abide by this certain philosophy, but I sure hadn't heard anything about it before. So I will share the thought and then ask away for readers to answer so I can get their insight and see if this is not a good approach, or if it is. By Chris Ferguson's law of bankroll management a poker player should 1. Never buy into a cash game or SnG with more than 5% of your bankroll, and 2. Never buy into a MTT with more than 2% of your bankroll. The thought: So I understand to play comfortably at the stakes that you are playing at the typical at least 20 buy-in rule is necessary due to a little thing called "variance." I am not arguing this at all as that is a fact, not a thought. But, lets say I have an $100 bankroll and have been playing $.02/.05 to get all the way up to this level what's wrong with taking a stab at $.05/.10? You have 10 buy-ins here, and the rule is that if you lose a buy-in then you go back down to $.02/05 to rebuild, until you can do it again. Maybe you will succeed at these stakes and begin to build up, or you will not succeed and rebuild from your 2 buy-in blow (considering $10 is 1 buy-in at $.05/.10 but 2 buy-ins at $.02/.05. And so on and so forth as you move up stakes. If not this then how about 12-15 buy-ins? Is there anything wrong with this philosophy? [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us