When To Leave

Just curious when you guys leave a cash game. double up? lose your buy in? triple up? or you just see how it's going and go from there.

Also when you are ready to leave do you wait for the BB to get right to the right of you. (wait till your next hand is your bb but leave right before it)

Always wait until it's your turn to pay the big blind.
Never post early.
Doing any different is almost always -EV (an argument could be made for posting in late position, but in general it's bad).

Leaving should be determined by how you and your opponents are playing, of particular interest is the position of tight/loose players in relation to you, nits on your left and loose players on your right. Stack sizes on left and right are also important, in a perfect world you'd have the players on your right covered and the guys on your left would be short. Also, if you don't think you have the advantage playing deep stacked, you should leave when you're deep and at least one other player has you covered.


Sorry for not giving explanations, but yeah, I think those answers are about as reliable as it gets.

Make use of the sit out at next Big Blind feature.

This topic has been much debated, especially in this forum. There is no right answer, but there are different things you can do.

Here are what I've taken away from some discussions.
1. Play until you feel the table's potential profit isn't worth it's risk. Players are not paying off your monsters
2. Play until you can't play well anymore. Basically fatigue sets in.
3. Play until you hit a certain amount of time/number of hands. Set out saying "I want to play 1500 hands online today." Or "I want to play for six hours at the live table."
4. Play until you have a certain amount of money, or have lost a certain amount of money. Note: This is usually best when you have a high and low limit for yourself. For instance, I'm playing a $300 buy-in game, I'll play until I'm up two buy-ins or down two-buy-ins. When I play in tournaments, I'll allow myself a buy-in at the $300 buy-in game before, where I have a real time limit to contend with, and possibly a $300 buy-in after, but usually a break is in order after any long amount of poker.

These are just some examples. Personally if I go to the casino at night, I play where the action is, I'm a self proclaimed deep-stack hunter, so I play very tight until I'm up a buy-in and can knock a couple buy-ins off a deepstack. If there are multiple deep stacks, I keep waiting until they get a hand they can't fold and have'em pay me off.

I've had set over set (top two, no less), trips over Aces, a flopped flush vs a way behind overpair, etc. So it doesn't make sense for me to go with less than four buy-ins, or when the deep stacks start leaving.

When the wife is really pissed, or ready for some 'action', then it's time to go. Table position is completely irrelevant at this point.

I uncheck the auto-post blinds after I've doubled up unless there is a hyper-donkey (around calling 85%+, raising 30%+) at the table.

If I get stacked I double check and make sure there are some looser players at the table. I'm closer to nit and prefer not to be grinding it out against a table of nits.

isnt there another thread like this on the first page?

Leave when you stop being able to win at a rate close enough to the winrate you want/expect for playing to be worth your time/energy.

I always will sit down at a table with the max and double that up. When you do double it up, U MUST tell yourself to get UP. or bad things will start to happen. LOL

not true. I usually will leave when there is only 1 fish at the table and the rest are all decent players or if I double up and then take a hit from someone.

I played 1/2 yesterday, bought in for $200 got up to a little over 500 and told myself I should leave then (I was 4 hours in) but I just love playing so much that I stayed another 5 hours and left with the same $200 I came with. Kinda kickin myself but at least I didnt lose.

Set an amount before you start playing that you feel comfortable with and stick with that everytime you play. It can be whatever you want see what is most profitable in the long run.

Just so you know, it wont effect your longterm results. Not saying don't do it, just saying it might help to understand that it wont have any impact (unless you play differently depending on winnings).

Whether you play you next hand now or tomorrow doesn't change the average outcome.

Okay, here's a good question. Say you buy in for 50 BB. You proceed to make 650 BB. It's a No Limit game. You have 14 buy-ins in front of you and possibly a large percentage of your bankroll. Does the math say that you could be risking to much of your bankroll on one hand? Would a 4 to 1 OR "Aces against anything" matchup sound appealing to you?

Does anyone's bankroll management say they are allowed to risk 14 buy-ins on one hand?

First, don't buy in for 50bb it will hurt your winrate and wont help your variance.

Once you get to 700bb you've only got 7 buy ins (assuming you're working off a 20 buy in bankroll, this rule of thumb bankroll requirement is based off of the variance you can expect with 100bb buy ins).
If you've got 27BI in your roll, and you're following 20BI BRM, I don't see any problem with playing on even if someone's got you covered but I think leaving is fine if you're uncomfortable with it.

Oh and the maths says that you can do whatever the hell you want, you're dealing with a risk of ruin that's higher if you're cavalier about your BR and lower if you're nitty about it.

No short stacking is an actual method that can be used. What if you double up from 7 buy-ins? Surely you have a limit as to how many buy-ins you risk in one hand? Or does math says yoos can't do that?

Short stacking involves playing a 20bb stack and exploiting the fact that everyone else at the table now has 20bb when against you, but have to play like they have 100bb because they have a full stack against everyone else.

It however returns a miniscule winrate (only argument for it is that it may allow you to mass multi-table) and is very high variance.

Playing with anywhere from 21bb-99bb is a mistake, since more than 20bb makes your play less exploitive and reduces your stacking range (and you need to be able to stack a lot to pick up dead money). Less than 100bb, playing deep stack strategy, increases the effect of the rake since it's bigger relative to your stack (and rake is huge) and it also reduces your skill edge, since deeper play is more complicated and therefore offers more edge to the better player.



And regarding how much of your BR is worth risking, the only concerns I was able to come up with off the top of my head were:
1) Not increasing your risk of ruin beyond what you've already determined is acceptable to you (not risking going significantly bellow your BRM requirements).
2) Not playing badly. Most people will play more emotionally in that situation, which is bad, unless the other guy is more effected.
3) Just thought of this one: I'd pretty much always leave if the guy who has me covered is nearer to my left and stay if he's nearer my right.

However since the amount of times you're actually 700bb deep and someone has you covered is low (if no one else has 7000bb too, your effective stack is still around 100bb), and the fact that it's not going to be many opponents who have you covered, and the fact that both players stacking ranges will be very small (since you're so deep)... I don't see this having a major longterm effect on a bankroll, provided we stay above our chosen BRM.



Wow, I really can take a simple concept and ramble on about it endlessly can't I. To summarise: don't play with less than 100bb, and risk as much as you want as long as you're above your bankroll requirements.

I generally leave a table after two bad beats. Even if the players are bad, when you don't have luck, it's time to take a break and try another table.

I had this dude call a 6xbb preflop raise (there were 3 limpers) with J5 suited. Guess what, I hit a K. The problem? He makes trip Js.

A few hands later. I raise to 4xbb with JJ in position. The dude who had limped calls with 67os. Guess what. He hits trip 6s. He 3bets all in on the flop, so I folded. The frustrating thing was, he rabbits it and I would have hit a 2 outter J on the river. If I'd just call his small flop bet instead of raise I might have seen the river cheap and won.

Didn't lose my whole stack, but the two hands caused me 2/3 my stack.

Lol at TPK trying his damnest to help people in this thread, fair play sir.

To everyone else, every rule that is even slightly results orientated except for when where if you double up and someone has you covered and you feel you don't have an edge deep then you should leave.

If the table has money to be won, a fish, then you should stay. If it doesn't then leave. Regardless of how much you have won or lost. Ever notice a table break up soon after one player (the fish) leaves?

If you feel you are playing well and the above is true then keep playing. If you feel like you are not, or are starting to feel the beats then leave immediately. If you ever find yourself feeling a bit tired then leave immediately. If you ever say to yourself I think I should leave, then leave immediately. That last one is a good rule to follow. Again regardless of how much you have won or lost.

Setting goals like I want to play x number of hands or a certain time frame is also good. However don't be afraid to break it if a table is good and you are playing well. But never break the rule if you feel you are playing poorly. This is the worst thing you can do.


Results mean nothing. Absolutely nothing. It is how you are playing that should determine everything in poker.

Effective Short-Stacking involves about 30-40 BB. I don't think 50-BB is really short-stacking given the amount of play but it has a high-rate of becoming short-stacking. I know a good short stack game from experience.

Making your play less exploitive is a good thing. That means closer to no holes in your game.
Closer to unreversable.

Deeper play makes the game more complicated and short stacking makes the game simpler. Pretty easy to see what you did there.

As for your 3 points, I think you should just answer the question. Do you risk 4 buy-ins on one hand or not? 8 Buy-ins? You sit down double up, double up, and double up. Do you put it all in on two pair?

Say your BRM is 5%.

You brought one buy-in and have 20 buy-ins. Now there are six buy-ins on the table of your's. Wouldn't you be risking 6/26 of your roll? More then 5%.

Also your second sentence needs evidence. You need to give evidence it's miniscule and define high variance. High variance in relation to a deep-stackers win rate? The variance can't be that high. It's a strategy based on getting it in with the best hand more consistently then a deep-stacker.

If a short stacker makes an avg of 2 BB per 100. He would be earning 1/15th-1/20th of his original bankroll. Someone who buys-in for a 100 BB would need to avg. 5 BB per 100 to earn 1/20th of his original bankroll.

Your first sentence is right.

Your second sentence has no facts except for the thing in parentheses.

The third paragraph needs further explanation.

Those 3 points don't answer what your limit is to how many buy-ins you risk. If it's your house just say it's your house.

That paragraph telling me what the table was like when you had 7 buy-ins at the table and no one else had 70. It was OK for that scenario.
I thought we were discussing situations where your stack was at risk. Not one where people only have one buy-in and your effect stack is one buy-in.

What if they double up? Your effective stack is now 200bb. Might become more.

What are your bankroll requirements where you can always afford to be top stack at the table?

Answer the question!!! Forget short-stacking for a sec!

How many buy-in's do you risk on one hand?

I did.
I said there were 3 concerns that made sense to me. If it doesn't breach any of them, then yes I continue to play, if that's 1BI or 1000BI at stake, if it doesn't breach any of my concerns, I'll continue to play.

Miniscule and high variance were terms I used in relation to deep stack strategy.
Short stacking does NOT involve getting it in with the best hand, it involves getting your stack in with a very wide range (if you are getting it in with quality hands, you will be far better off with a full stack). I really don't want to explain short stack strategy because they (the guys who do it at 20bb and actually win) are parasites. Do some searching for short stack strategy (filter for cash games if you can) and you'll come across it if you're interested.

Play until you're busto or can afford a woman IMO

Elaborate on your first one. Is it 3 or 7 buy-ins or what? How many buy-ins increase your risk of ruin so that you get an uncomfortable feeling?

My short stack strategy involves getting it in with the best hand. It's not 20 BI. You read the wrong strategies.

Oh right! OP!

Things to avoid:
Avoid playing badly.

Times and reasons to leave:

You can leave at a set time.
You can leave if you feel you have a disadvantage.
It's not fun.
If you have or are at risk to lose more money then you want to.
Won the desired amount.
Anytime for any reason.



Usually? Set time, won enough money, lost to much money.

You really have to follow your gut. No matter what math you use, if you find yourself not calling or raising because you think your luck has run out or might be outmatched, it's time to pull the plug.

sounds like a comment for the rigged thread.......

Bad things will happen when you play bad or get sucked out, has nothing to do with your stack size.........

But to OP:

the time to leave is always going to depend on you and your table. Lots of good comments already made above. If you are on a cooler getting irritated by it, tilt is here or on its way, go. If you are on a heater, milk it. If you are ready to go, waiting till you are next in BB is always cool, ya never know whats coming. But when you decide its time to go, you need a GOOD reason to change your mind. Anytime you find yourself thinkng "its time to go" then it is time to go. Mindset is so crucial in poker, and if your mind is set on going, then do it.

Pokerkid, chippy and weregoat all make good points.

And maybe subverse, can you give me your strategy that make you always double up?? Ive never encountered anyone who always doubles up.

I give up.

When i do double up...i force my self to leave table..otherwise i know i will lose...

why?Why?WHY?

Why is everyone so certain you will lose after you double up?I had 3 sessions in the past days where I bought in for 4$ on the 20-50BB .10 tables and got it up to 16$ then left...Of course, you risk losing your double-up if you value TPTK too much or make a wrong read or lose to a bad beat against a bigger stack...The latter is known to happen and cost you your double-up sometimes, and of course there are many sessions that end up this way, but should you win that one then you're good to go!

I'm kind of superstitious and when I feel my bad luck isn't changing on a table after a while I will leave regardless of the players...But if I'm not getting sucked-out on and there's at least some ultimate nits for steals and some donks for big wins, then I guess I'm staying as much as possible or until I feel I'm not winning enough anymore...

There are a lot of sessions where I say to myself "I should've left earlier" but when you lose because of a good play, that doesn't make any difference because you made a +EV move and you lost to a beat that won't happen next time...What's not ok is when you make a wrong play instead of leaving earlier, then you're paying for experience you should already have or for the greed of staying on a table when you were not at the top of your game...

My opinion of course. Hope this helps !

I'd Personally say once you double up and right before the big blinds get too you again after said double up. The major rule of thumb is dont get greedy! even though thats the hardest thing to do its probably the best advice out there

I don't believe in luck. A certain % of the time your opponent is going to flop trips. A certain % of the time you're going to hit your set (effectively flopping a boat against a drawing all but dead three of a kind.

Just because your opponent holds a card on a paired board doesn't mean it's a bad beat. And it certainly doesn't mean you need to leave the table.

What's important is that you set rules for yourself, alter them until you find what works, and stick to them. For me, personally, my biggest losses happen when I deviate from my rules.

There was a point made that you should leave when you think to yourself "I should leave."

I agree with this entirely. If you're up a wicked amount of money, and are good with the time you spent, at the very least take a break, go get something to eat, catch a movie, go to the gym, whatever, get the money off the table, even if it means calling it quits for the day.

Poker is about discipline and rules, not just two hole cards and five community cards.

The amount of discipline and rules you bring into the game are important, and of course I mean in a deeper context than a flush beats a straight.

Consider the following:

Not everybody is good at deep stack poker.

While it's one of my better games (in cash, I don't like being the deep stack in a tournament, I get bored and end up spewing), not everybody understands all the concepts.

Suppose Villain A and myself have 400 BBs each. Villain B has 100 BBs.

Villain A raises to 3 BBs, I call, Villain B raises to 9 BBs, Villain A folds. My implied odds just took a massive dive. Against Villain A I play a lot of hands. Anything with remote straight or flush possibility, especially if I can get to a flop cheaply. Some of the biggest cash game pots I've won this year have been with garbage cards at high effective stacks against premium hands that make TpTk or an overpair.

I kid you not, I've had 24o win me $400 (total pot size $700) where I only put $45 into the pot where I was behind, I've had 86o crack aces w/ flopped trips for a $650 profit where I only put $12 into the pot bad, I've had 35o win a gigantic 3-way all-in pot when I called a preflop raise in position, got a free turn to connect to my gutshot straight draw, and stacks went in for upwards of $600 profit, and I called a raise from position with T5s (I fold this 19/20 times, but as stacks get higher the first number gets lower...) to flop a flush against a silly overpair without so much as a runner runner full house draw. All of these hands were within approximately six sessions in a fifteen day period at a $300 BI live table.

The risks associated with my playstyle are known to me, so are the rewards. If you can't deal with somebody at the table who is willing to open their calling range greatly as effective stack sizes go up, then you don't have any business playing deepstacked, and should leave when you're double your buy-in.

But I've made rent payments (if I paid rent, the Army does a good job of giving me a barracks room) in a single hand that would have been snap-folded preflop because people don't know how to deny me implied odds.

(I'll give you a hint, it's not calling my CRAI on the turn with TpTk or an overpair, regardless of board texture...)

Maybe I'll make a thread about that.