Online Poker: Easy Bankrolling System for Heads Up SNGs (HUSNGs)
on 9:55 AM
I've seen so many poor systems for bankroll management. Like any other poker decision, you want to make the right one. Being too tight will slow your opportunity for growth and advancement. Being too loose will have you moving up and down between limits super fast. I have a confession to make. I am a loose bankroller.
Everybody else I know plays with 40, 50, or even 100 buy-ins in their account for the game they're playing. Not me. I played as high as the $200s and $500s with no more than 30 buy-ins. And you know what really matters? My decision was correct.
What is the purpose of a bankroll? It's because you don't win every game. Of course, it's possible to lose 100 games in a row, and at the end of a run like that, the only person still solvent is the guy who had the 100 buy-in bankroll. This is unrealistic. Of the more than 10,000 heads-up SNGs that I played, the worst downswing I ever went on was 20 buy-ins.
Even bankrolling as loose as I did, I was never at any real risk of going broke. So, how many buy-ins do you really need?
The proper bankrolling requirements are simple to calculate. There's an equation called the Kelly Criterion which was invented by economists to answer this exact question. We know our ROI, and we know our bankroll. The Kelly Criterion says we can rationally risk any amount of money up to our ROI. This means if our ROI is 5%, we can play with a 20-buy in bankroll.
Now, there's nothing wrong with being a little more conservative than this. If you calculate your Kelly Criterion bankroll requirements by estimating your ROI at half what it actually is, you should be very safe.
Remember, the more aggressively that you bankroll yourself, the more comfortable you must be with moving up and down in limits. You will shoot through the limits when you're hot, but when you're cold, you will likely have to drop down a limit or two. This serves an extra purpose, though. You will play in bigger games when your confidence is at its peak, and you will play in lower games when you are more likely to tilt.
Using the Kelly Criterion to rationally decide how much of your bankroll to risk is a much better solution than just picking a number out of thin air, don't you think?
Everybody else I know plays with 40, 50, or even 100 buy-ins in their account for the game they're playing. Not me. I played as high as the $200s and $500s with no more than 30 buy-ins. And you know what really matters? My decision was correct.
What is the purpose of a bankroll? It's because you don't win every game. Of course, it's possible to lose 100 games in a row, and at the end of a run like that, the only person still solvent is the guy who had the 100 buy-in bankroll. This is unrealistic. Of the more than 10,000 heads-up SNGs that I played, the worst downswing I ever went on was 20 buy-ins.
Even bankrolling as loose as I did, I was never at any real risk of going broke. So, how many buy-ins do you really need?
The proper bankrolling requirements are simple to calculate. There's an equation called the Kelly Criterion which was invented by economists to answer this exact question. We know our ROI, and we know our bankroll. The Kelly Criterion says we can rationally risk any amount of money up to our ROI. This means if our ROI is 5%, we can play with a 20-buy in bankroll.
Now, there's nothing wrong with being a little more conservative than this. If you calculate your Kelly Criterion bankroll requirements by estimating your ROI at half what it actually is, you should be very safe.
Remember, the more aggressively that you bankroll yourself, the more comfortable you must be with moving up and down in limits. You will shoot through the limits when you're hot, but when you're cold, you will likely have to drop down a limit or two. This serves an extra purpose, though. You will play in bigger games when your confidence is at its peak, and you will play in lower games when you are more likely to tilt.
Using the Kelly Criterion to rationally decide how much of your bankroll to risk is a much better solution than just picking a number out of thin air, don't you think?
