MTT Satellite Bankroll

[shobolanul]

Hello guys,

Lets say your bankroll is sitting around ~120 $, in this case you should be good for playing 1$ tournaments or lower, is it worth playing satellite tours to qualify for bigger buyings (0.40$ -> 2$ or 1$->5$) or is it more profitable in the long run to stick to regular buying tournaments that offer cash prizes and sometimes maybe take some shots outside your bankroll management range ?
Should you keep 2 separate bankrolls 1 for regular and 1 for sats ?

 

[fundiver199]

When playing satellites you should be bankrolled for the target tournament. If you are a winning player, you can allow yourself some "discount", because you expect a positive ROI in the satellite, but it wont change the equation much. Lets take your example with a 1$ satellite to a 5$ tournament and say, you use a 100 BI bankroll system. Then if you buy in directly, you need a 500$ bankroll. Lets say the satellite is really soft, or maybe it offer an overlay, so you expect to have an ROI of 30% in the satellite. Then the bankroll requirement for playing the satellite is 500/1,3 = 384$.

If your bankroll is only 120$, and you play the satellite, then you are shot taking. And of course it does less harm to the bankroll to take a shot for 1$ rather than 5$. But its still shot taking, and if you do this to often, it will be very difficult to get the bankroll growing on a consistent basis. If you are getting bored playing 1$ tournaments, and I would not blame you for that, then the better solution is to add to the bankroll from paychecks, until it has reached an amount, which allow you to play 5$ tournaments.

 

[Gallarado777]

better add some money and start playing higher limits like $5 or higher low limits it's just awful I think you'll get lost there and it'll be very difficult for you to get out of there

 

[fundiver199]

Just want to add that shot taking can be ok, and especially with a small bankroll like 120$. But its much better to take some shots at the next level rather than at a significantly higher level via satellites. For example in this situation we could take 10 shots a 2$ tournaments, which will give us a significantly better chance of winning at least something, compared to spending the same 20$ on 1$ satellites for 5$ tournaments. So in bankroll building satellites sadly dont have much of a role to play.

But if you are playing recreationally and just want to have some fun and a chance of hitting the big homerun, its a different story. After all it was a satellite entry, which propelled Cris Moneymaker to his entire poker career and started the poker boom. And on a smaller scale we regularly see satellite qualifiers on the final table of Sunday Million

 

[kitchy65]

Hello guys,

Lets say your bankroll is sitting around ~120 $, in this case you should be good for playing 1$ tournaments or lower, is it worth playing satellite tours to qualify for bigger buyings (0.40$ -> 2$ or 1$->5$) or is it more profitable in the long run to stick to regular buying tournaments that offer cash prizes and sometimes maybe take some shots outside your bankroll management range ?
Should you keep 2 separate bankrolls 1 for regular and 1 for sats ?

If you are looking at $1 tourneys where the vast majority are 10c players ....you going to have to do better than min cash.

Only a suggestion, but why don't you play PKO $2 until you build that stack up?
If you get a good run, you could treat yourself to one $3.30 tourney on a weekend.

 

[vitormh]

keep playing to beat the field, and eventuallt get some shots on higher buy-ins or satellites

 

[najisami]

Hello guys,

Lets say your bankroll is sitting around ~120 $, in this case you should be good for playing 1$ tournaments or lower, is it worth playing satellite tours to qualify for bigger buyings (0.40$ -> 2$ or 1$->5$) or is it more profitable in the long run to stick to regular buying tournaments that offer cash prizes and sometimes maybe take some shots outside your bankroll management range ?
Should you keep 2 separate bankrolls 1 for regular and 1 for sats ?

The only thing I wanted to say concerns the last line of your post. Personally, I have never heard of such thing. You have a certain bankroll, you need to use it according to whatever bankroll management you know or prefer. But splitting it doesn't sound right to me. After all, you could decide to only play satellites if you want or go the other way instead of forcing yourself to play in even lower stakes.