Why 20 buy-ins is not enough

[Evan Jarvis]

I haven't posted in a long time, and I won't post again for a long time.

I'll post this to make a point: if you're averagely good, 20 buy-ins cannot be considered safe bankroll management. If you do the math, you'll see that over this stretch of 419,000 hands I ran at 1.46ptBB/100. And I still pulled off two swings that would make the devil cry.

Please go ahead and attribute all (or most of this) to tilt, if it makes you feel better. I used to do that, too, when someone posted a sick swing.
However, having looked over these swings in a lot of detail, I'd give the following numbers:
Swing 1 (-36 buy-ins): about 30%-40% attributable to tilt
Swing 2 (-50 buy-ins): about 10% attributable to tilt

Take it or ignore it.

P.S.: Stakes are all 6-max and some HU, buy-ins $0.25/$0.50, $0.50/$1, $1/$2, $2/$4, $3/$6, $5/$10, $10/$20

Great great post, thank you very much for sharing this and using a picture to say a thousand words. It's really good for people to have a visual idea of just how big the swings can be!

 

[Marginal]

I don't see how except under the most perfect situations with the best runs as a great player that 20 buy ins is enough ...it's not surprising to me that the math and stories from pros support this ...IMO 20 buy ins is a shot and not much more ....

Its important to understand the timings of the post. Back in the day there were people saying that 20bi was an adequate number. I think people realised pretty quickly that wasnt the case.

 

[Marcelobp]

Interesting post ! Thanks for this ! Its really god for peopel understand that not necessary play 20 buy-ins and have a safe bankrool.

 

[Andrey FRIFIN]

If you play poker in order to win money, then of course you need to play well at a distance, and count your bankroll in many tournaments