5% of bankroll rule

do you think this rule is too conservative? I do. Sometimes i can't play as serious when i am playing for so little amount. however i think it is effective in that it keeps you from going on tilt. I think i am going to try it out because it destroyed tilt destroyed my last bank role. On the other, i made 600$ without this bank role management, but it was on cake not full tilt. What do you think about this rule?

You need to re-examine your motivation. It sounds as though you may be playing for the rush of gambling rather than for the love of the game itself.

If so, that is unhealthy and may lead you into playing overly loose and making unnecessary errors.

^^^ this.

the monetary value at stake should be totally irrelevant for your motivation. Otherwise ... well, you have a gambling problem.

Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I'm not sure that's what he was getting at. I've read that post like five times now. Initially it sounds like he's saying that he thinks playing with only 5% of his BR is too conservative. Clearly this seems to imply he'd rather play with a larger portion of his BR at any one given time which leads directly to your point. But I have to wonder if what he's really saying is that his bankroll is fairly small (say $50). So when he tries to follow the 5% rule ($2.50), then he's stuck at $2NL which is the gave level that he can't take seriously because at that level the money means nothing to him and he'd play loose or badly. Maybe he's comfortable playing $10NL but then of course he's not rolled for that as $10NL would be 20% of that hypothetical BR I mentioned. Those two things are significantly different. The first is a gambling problem, the second is a bankroll mgmt problem.

Does it makes sense the way I explained my interpretation? Basically instead of seeing it as f(x)=y, I'm saying I see it as f(y)=x.

I agree to a point. However there comes a point (which varies per person) at which the stakes become so low that playing is pointless. If you seat me at a $2NL FR game I'd likely be an extremely loose spewtard chasing everything because heck, it's only $.08 more. I wouldn't be playing my best possible game because the monetary value at stake is insignificant to me. Now put me on $25NL or higher and, while the lower end of that spectrum is still pretty insignificant overall, I start to see the value in the money I'm using to play and I take it more seriously. Take a bunch of the guys from HSP that play for the sums that they do and put them all at a $2NL table. They would all be all in every hand with atc because the monetary value of that is directly relevant to how they are playing.

It's only a gambling problem if you're losing.

I think 1-2 % is a good rule. 5 % is too much. If you have a bad week that could eat up your bank roll.

I've seen this rule several places (5%). Is this just some sort of "rule of thumb," or is there some mathematics behind this? just wondering. . .

So you think that if you have $500 in your account, playing a 10c 25c $25 buy-in table is too much? lol

The whole point of the 5% rule is so if you have a bad week, it's not too big of a hit. If you blow through $500 in a week playing only $25 buy-in table, then it is not just a bad week, you are not a very good player. You're not going catch 20 coolers without winning some big pots somewhere in between them. If you play only 5% bankroll and play good poker and don't steam, that should you last you a very long time.

I recently started playing on Carbon with only $75. I played the 5c 10c tables, even though that is technically too high for even $75 because it is a $10 buy-in, but I refuse to play the 2c 4c tables. I have it over $200 now and still play the same tables and I honestly don't see a possible way that I could ever lose my whole bankroll. I will wait until I have it to $500 until I play the 10c 25c.

Of course, I play in a lot of tournaments also so the day I move up in stakes could come sooner than later. I don't expect to continue on the 5c 10c tables and get rich, but it's just a matter of time until I win a tournament for over $1000 and move up to the bigger cash games. But for now, I just have fun playing poker with absolutely no worries of losing.

5% is good management. 1%-2% is ridiculously low. That would mean you would need $500 to $1,000 just to play 5c 10c blinds. lol

for stock portfolios more than 2% in a position is considered risky, if you're playing professionally i think it would be good to stick to the 2-5% rule

not if they were all at the same table...

There is. Essentially the Kelly criterion. But it's hard to estimate the parameters correctly.

Basically, you are saying that, if your BR is so small that the 5% "rule" forces you to play baby stakes, it is justifiable to relax somewhat. BR management comes into play once you have a sufficient BR to be worth managing.

That makes perfect sense, JD.

Application of rules and management systems are more easily defined if the goals of the player are established - first. If poker is stricly recreational for the player, neither one probably makes much difference.

Playing at the 5% guidelines, what does 'reload' mean to the player? If a max bet is a statistically favored hand and loses, a player with 25% of his $50 roll on the table only has 4 reloads. Or maybe he'll just make another deposit, and then percents really don't matter.

Online poker players run the full spectrum from dead broke bad players to dead broke excellent players (maybe due to family or work related financial situations, etc) and from financially secure bad players to excellent, profitable players.

I understand what you and JD are saying, but here's my thought from a different perspective - my own situation.

I'm retired, but have avail funds that I like to use on live table play. When I started playing online 2 years ago, I decided I would not make any cash deposits, and have not to date. I maintain a +ROI live, so why mess with it. Online is mostly recreational for me, but with an objective, not unlike the Ferguson Challenge. No deposits at stake, I cannot really 'lose' anything. Taking micro stakes seriously (with winnings from FR's) I can actually turn nothing into something.

I take my .04/.08 online stakes just as seriously as I do my live 2/4 and 3/6 play. Maybe some cannot. But to me, managing my BR online at any level is just as important as managing my live game BR. I just won't use one to fund the other.

Can I 'relax' at 04/08? Not really. It's the level my BR will permit me to play and survive variance. If I loosen up because it's 'only 8 cents more', and lose my roll, I'm back to the FR's and off the cash tables.

From my view, bankroll management is a good thing for ANY bankroll, big or small. I can recall the days when I could not join chat or rail in a game because my roll wasn't big enough for a buy-in. BRM of my small online rolls keeps even that from ever happening again ...

personally, I play razz, the highest variance poker game you'll find online. I play up to $50/$100, and am a consistent winner. And I dont feel comfortable without a bankroll of at least 400 BB.

Quote:

5% of bankroll rule,

For me, the 2% for MTT games and 5% for sits is great rule, because every time i get out of this rule i almost get broke.

It's generally better to be conservative. You may not make a profit immediately but patience is the name of the game.

Following brm is a good Idea but you have to have a bankroll to follow it.IF you only have a small amout off money in your account than play
a limit accourding to what you have.Maby play some sit n gos to try and
build your bankroll than use bank roll managment once you have enough cash to use it.

This don't work you work out very good if your playing $1-$2 sngs. At best you hope to make 20% roi and that is about 25-50 sngs just to make $10 to play .5/.10 nl. That is a lot of work just to make enough for one buy-in.

To the 5% bankroll rule... In my honest opinion, the 5% rule is ok, but say your BR is $100... 5% is $5. That is a no brainer, lol! But say you sit down at a .10/.25 NL table, you only have 20 blinds, so you have to play really tight. Well, no problem!!! Sit down at 4-6 tables of that limit with $5 on each table and only play premium hands. Most of the time the action will be so fast that you will be running on INSTINCT! 85% of the time first instict is correct. There is an old saying... "think long, think wrong!"

But back to what i was saying. The 5% rule is ok, but way too conservative!!! 20% is a good safe margin. Especially that 20% being split between 4-6 tables playing tight/agressive. I have been doing this for 2 years and it has been succesful a good 80% of the time. And i dont usually go on tilt because getting all of my $5 from one table, in the middle, with good odds.... well, you cant win em all.

BUT, all advice does not work for everyone. I hope that it does, and if anyone feels different about this, i would love to hear your thoughts.

GOOD LUCK!!!

You haven't been playing very long (or very seriously volume wise) if you haven't gone through some days where you lose 10x your buy-in.

100x the buy-in isn't so outrageous.

brm.jpg (http://www.cardschat.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=15763&d=1229378745)

This. Also note that edge is a significant factor. If you're crushing the games you won't have a ton of big swings. If you have a slight edge you're going to have frequent swings. If you're a losing player you obviously need an infinite bankroll so it's not relevant. But if you're winning at 10 PTBB/100 your downswing will be when you only win at 3 for a few thousand hands or when *gasp* you break even. If you're winning at 1 PTBB/100 you'll have more frequent worse downswings. I took my 200nl "shot" when I had 30 buy-ins because otherwise I'm exactly the opposite. Instead of thinking it's not much money and not protecting it I just played way too nitty and was afraid to get my money in the middle. Both are mistakes.

If 18 years is not a long time aliengenius, then I haven't been playing poker long.

I think is a good idea to used 5% in Bankroll per days, I think that okay and 10% on the weekend or what are you think about it? About the rule I think good thought to let 5% in your bankroll if you withdrawn :P

I am myself a very strong believer in the 5% BR rule it I find accounts for the deviations from the norm where you can't win a pot even if ya bought it. That way you always have something for a rainy day. Gl on and off the felts

I think it's a matter of perspective and personal preference. I follow BRM even tighter than 5% on a single table, but multi-tabling brings that way up. I have no problem, for example, buying in max at eight NL25 tables, but I wouldn't do the same on four NL50 tables until my BR is higher. So, it's not uncommon for me to have almost 20% of my BR in play at any given time, but only 2-3% on a single table.

When it comes to SNG/MTTs, I generally use a 1% rule, but that's mostly because I suck at them, and don't play enough to get a serious estimate of my ROI.

Personally, I find BRM almost as much fun as poker itself. (lame, I know)

i honestly love this rule, i managed to make a large sum of money just simply playing within my means and remaining disicpline throughout using the 5% rule. only time i lose is when i go on tilt and play beyond my means

chris "jesus" ferguson used 2% rule on full tilt, from $0 to over 10,000 in about a year. he had a few exceptions though, he could play any $1 tourny no matter what percent. All told, he probably is just a little better at this game than us though.

Also Chris Ferguson also started from a freeroll!