You do NOT need 100 Buy-ins to play a tournament. That's crazy.

bankroll management only applies to winning players who are playing for a living.So sure, if you want to grind on tournaments only as a way to make a living, yes you need 100 buy-ins to deal with variance.


If, however, you just want to play in a tournament one time, or even like once a week, all you need is 1 buy-in.


I play a live tournament at the local casino once a month. The buy-in is $175, there is no way that I need $17,500 is a seperate account (bankroll) to play this tournament, I just need $175 and I need to understand that in 2 weeks I get another paycheck if I would like to play it again!

I agree m8... BRM is for building a roll over time, trying to beat the game and move up in stakes...if you're just having fun it doesn't really matter..

tcummo said:

I agree m8... BRM is for building a roll over time, trying to beat the game and move up in stakes...if you're just having fun it doesn't really matter..

Click to expand...

That statement sounds like you are implying that I don't play that tournament to win or I somehow look at it like "just for fun".
No, I'm a serious player who tries to supplement my income with poker. I do follow BRM for cash games, but then again I play a lot of cash games live and online. I do have a bankroll for those games and I do stick to a strict minimum of 20 buy-ins per level.

I guess tournaments are like taking shots to me.....

No you don't need 100 buyin. However if you play one on a regular basis you need about minimum 20 unless if it a one off shot.

I take a shot once in a while at a big tourney only way you gain exp. I also tend to stay around 50 buyins on my regular schedule games.

joeisi said:

No you don't need 100 buyin. However if you play one on a regular basis you need about minimum 20 unless if it a one off shot.

I take a shot once in a while at a big tourney only way you gain exp. I also tend to stay around 50 buyins on my regular schedule games.

Click to expand...

That realy depends of what are you playing... 40-50 might be enough for bounty tournaments since there you make bigger profit with going in last 3-5% of field, but on regular tourneys where money is practicly only on FT you need more...

You are absolutely right you should not have 100 buy-in to know how to manage your bank and overcome the variance but if you play only tournaments and that's what you do if you should have a good budget to avoid those bad times if you only play a tournament in specific 1 time to the week or the month you simply have to have 1 buy-in to play it

I guess I made this thread because I hear it a lot.. "$175 tournament? You know you need $17,500 in your roll to play that one, right?"Um no, you just need $175

Smokewood said:

I guess I made this thread because I hear it a lot.. "$175 tournament? You know you need $17,500 in your roll to play that one, right?"Um no, you just need $175

Click to expand...

+1

For some reason you get a lot of "rule of thumb" info floating around.


I actually think it is good to have a larger bank for cash games, but this doesn't really apply to tournaments. Most players don't even come close to 20 buy-ins for tournaments, 100 would be crazy.


I just think it isn't necessary. If this was the case, no one would play tournaments. To play in the wsop main event you would need to have a bank of 1,000,000.00 (1 million dollars). In smaller tournaments like a 1000.00 tournament you would need 100,000.00. Most poker pros go broke many times, it happens. There are a ton of people in the WSOP that are being staked because they don't have the 10k to buy in. Even well known pros like Durrr play a LOT on staked money.

100 buy in rule applies to online Sngs and MTTs , you don't need that if just playing a live tourney once every 2 weeks

The truth is somewhere in the middle. You may don't need to have 17.000€ to play a 170€ tourney. But, if 170€ is your whole bankroll then playing that in a single tournament is foolish.

In your situation you say, "Hey since I can get a pay check next month if I have 170€ to enter a tournament, that means I have 170€ to enter a tourney! But.. Doing that thing every month for a year, means you have a yearly bankroll of 2.000€ for poker. If 170€ was all you had for that year, playing in a 170€ tournament buyin is not your best decision. That's the reason people talking about minimum buyins.


Now let me tell you an example, you play in that 170€ tourney and you win 1.000€. So now you can enter a 1.000€ tourney? You surely can, but if you do that, it is guaranteed that sooner or later you will end with zero profit or below.


Now, in your defence, Negreanu thought the same thing when started playing poker. He made the calculations and saw that to be able to have the minimum buyins for the games he wanted to play, it would take him decades. So he took the short path. But its Negreanu we are talking about.

This thread made me chuckle. Very true, the Sunday million doesn't ask you to show them your $21,500 bank statement before you register, if you've got the 215 bucks then you're in the tournament. There's a big focus these days on BRM all of which I'm in agreement with because I've seen how violent the swings are in pro careers. But yes if you are just playing once a week for fun and don't care about the outcome then I say go for it. Just remember not to whine when your big pair gets cracked by a set during the first hand of the tournament. It can and will happen.

Who knows players who play for a living? I don't play for a living.I know of many who do (or who have) & scoffing at a 100buyin bankroll for playing online MTT's is laughable. Ask the pros... ask the regs., most will suggest it is actually 200 buyins needed.... so I guess in fact you guys are correct, you do not need 100 buyins.

karl coakley said:

+1

Most players don't even come close to 20 buy-ins for tournaments, 100 would be crazy.

Click to expand...

Most players online are spending at least 20 buyins a day. 100 would be cutting it close. 200 would be far better.

As I play poker for a hobby, not professionally. This is pretty accurate for my situation. I normally throw 50$ a week in for a juicy tournament on Bovada or ACR. If I win, great. If I lose, no big deal.

Brm is important if u don't want to lose your bankroll. However I use different bankroll rules depending on what site I'm on and what type of game I'm playing. I certainly don't need 100 buy ins to make sure I don't lose my roll though it's important to stick to rules that work for you. If your happy to reload of course it matters less.

BRM is vital if you plan on playing a lot. You are not going to cash every buy in. So if your playing a lot you will deplete your roll quickly if you don’t have much. 100 buy ins is not gonna last long if you go on downswing. Variance is a bitch.

You're right. It's your money and you can spend it wherever you want. 100 buy-ins is not the ultimate truth. The main thing that it was not the last money for life.

Poker Orifice said:

Who knows players who play for a living? I don't play for a living.I know of many who do (or who have) & scoffing at a 100buyin bankroll for playing online MTT's is laughable. Ask the pros... ask the regs., most will suggest it is actually 200 buyins needed.... so I guess in fact you guys are correct, you do not need 100 buyins.

Click to expand...

+1

My big field tournament is 200/300 BI (I am a bank roll nit )

Small field 100

The recommendations is a guide for players who gamble way too much, I believe having a good BRM is a good thing especially in tournaments as there is a lot more variance in tournaments than in cash, so for that reason alone I am all for having a good BRM.

Pros need a Bankroll, Amateurs need a budget.

Ragequit said:

Pros need a Bankroll, Amateurs need a budget.

Click to expand...

I agree 100%.
You set aside a portion of your paycheck. If you lose that amount it is just like a stop lose. Your bankroll is actually much bigger than you think because you have a paycheck coming in every 2 weeks (or whatever).

So you take say $200 to the casino of money you would have just put in your savings account and play some $1/$2 at the casino.

I play freeroll and hope, what i win something and next time win in other tournament.

For beginner it's fair, but for who have some notion can be half of it

Smokewood said:

Bankroll management only applies to winning players who are playing for a living.So sure, if you want to grind on tournaments only as a way to make a living, yes you need 100 buy-ins to deal with variance.


If, however, you just want to play in a tournament one time, or even like once a week, all you need is 1 buy-in.


I play a live tournament at the local casino once a month. The buy-in is $175, there is no way that I need $17,500 is a seperate account (bankroll) to play this tournament, I just need $175 and I need to understand that in 2 weeks I get another paycheck if I would like to play it again!

Click to expand...

I would agree to some extent. I am just starting out and want to get better and I enjoy playing every night. I deposit once a month and try to make it last. It never does. I want to learn about BRM so I can make my money last longer and I can keep playing and improving.

Every Bankroll management advice I've seen says you need the XXX buy in's "unless you are planning to reload" which you and every other recreational player is doing.

Smokewood said:

I guess I made this thread because I hear it a lot.. "$175 tournament? You know you need $17,500 in your roll to play that one, right?"Um no, you just need $175

Click to expand...

for recreational players who play once a week or twice a month this is ok. but if someone, playing online, open 3-5 tables and have 175$ limit for a week/month, which bi do you think he choose? thats irrational having 100$ play 100$ tournament, and after badbeat on the 4 - 5 min after mtt starts go sleep with no money for re-buy!