If bankroll is not an issue, when do you move up at ring?

For most people, BRM in and of itself is a good way to manage yourself, but say a person has lots of disposable cash, or, they come to NLHE ring having established a bankroll at tournaments or PLO or something else.

But, being wise, they decide to start at $10 or $25 NLHE. What should they target before they look at moving up in levels?



I would think the first hurdle would be a certain number of hands; 10,000?

And then be winning within the last 10,000. If they started with a negative BB/100 over the first 2,000 hands but now have 12,000 and over the last 10,000 they have a BB/100 of 3, then they're ready to take a stab at higher levels?


Or would you say something like, regardless of how much bankroll you have behind you, try to earn enough playing at your current level for say 20 buyins at the new level before moving up?

Firstly, I don't think 10,000 hands is enough to even approach the long run. A lot of it for me is just how confident I feel in my game. I always ask myself these questions:

1) Am I getting my money in good on a consistent basis at this limit?
2) Have I plugged the leaks in my game that I came to this limit with?
3) Have I been winning at a consistently high rate.

To me, its not enough just to be grinding out the stake at 3bb/100 or something like that. Kill the limits you're at. Plug up all the holes in your game while its cheap, and ensure that you're avoiding getting your money in passively & as an underdog.

There's nothing concrete I used to move up. I was rolled for 50$ NL before I moved up from 10$ NL. There just comes a point when you're confident that your game is ready to take the next step up.

Sounds good but nebulous.


What if someone you didn't see regularly asked you, what would be a minimum I should do/achieve before I look at moving up? Again, assuming no bankroll consideration.

I don't think you need to start at the lowest levels but I would recommend starting a level or 2 below where your bankroll allows until you are comfortable with ring games.

Also if you're going to play at Full Tilt Poker I wouldn't start at less than 25NL because the rake is higher below that level.

This is such a difficult question even with bankroll aside. The problem with using some sort of quantitative measure as far as win rate and such is that you have to consider tables being played. If you use something like 3BB/100 over X hands, someone 20 tabling is basically never going to achieve that.

Even beyond that, you have the mental aspect of moving up. Some people just may not be able to deal with the increased stakes and increased risk involved.

And then beyond that, you have whether or not it's worth it to move up in stakes. My hourly rate at 25NL is higher than it is at 50NL. I'm just not able to comfortably play 9 tables at 50NL so my hourly suffers hugely even though my WR isnt even halved.

So from a serious side, there's way to many variables involved to give any sort of concrete answer.

From a less serious side, 25k hands with a good WR. 10k hands at next level to test the waters. If it's good, stay, if its bad, move back down for another 25k hands.

This is just what I would do if I were in the situation.

Start at a reasonably low stake game, and play 10K hands. If in profit, move up. If losing, move down. After I hit 30K+ at each limit, then I think I'd be getting a closer representation to my actual win-rate, and would be able to make a decision as to what level is actually going to generate the most profit.

I usually 4-5 table ring games. I imagine someone 15-20 tabling would want a lot more hands at each stake to make a decision.

Thanks guys.

It's partly just a theoretical question.

On the other hand I wonder how someone like Guy Laliberte starts out when bankroll is not an issue.


But on the other hand I move from game to game or variation to variation and I do need to set some targets for myself or else I get bored, and moving up targets are one option.

I have bit of input on this. At least one of them has been said already.

Bankroll ALWAYS matters. On some level. Saying you don't need to worry about it because you have disposable cash is like saying you will just set fire to that cash... who cares. Even if you don't need the money bankroll management is an extremely useful way to set easy goals for your play.

But the real deal is what Epinephrine said: When you can beat the crap out of x/y then give y/z a shot. But there's no reason to play above your skill (and your bankroll) just because you can afford to.

Well maybe *I* have a reason, but it's not gonna help you much. :*

love,
cAPS

how much can you afford to lose per hand.. just take that into account and see what tables or sngs you should be at.

in limit you should always have 300 or more big bets in NL you should always have 2-3000 times the BB.