|
|
| Author |
Message |
PizzaByNight
53o
Joined: 08 Feb 2005
Posts: 3778
Location: SW Ohio
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:24 am Post subject: Benchmarks from the eCOGRA survey |
 |
|
I wanted to quote something from the online gambling survey that janeg discussed on the General Board and put it in here for reference.
| Quote: | | A similar curvilinear relationship exists between bankroll management and profitability. Playing with a smaller percentage of your bankroll (i.e. money set aside for gambling at one time) tended to have a positive impact on financial outcome up to the point where players were playing with less than 2%. Players playing with less than 2% tended to be less financially successful than those playing with between 2% and 20% of their bankroll. The optimum range to maximise profitability was playing with between 2% to 10% of the bankroll at any one table. |
I often play with less than 2% so this has given me some food for thought. Hopefully it will do the same for anyone reading that plays with greater than 10%. |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
 |
toronexti
53o
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 4241
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 10:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| You have to remember that this is based on averages and may not necessarily apply to you. The line they draw is a best fit line and I don't believe they mention how strong the relationship is - so it's quite possible it's a weakish relationship with lots of outliers. |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
Zool1
1K Club
Joined: 07 Apr 2004
Posts: 1266
Location: Crushing Pre / Spewing Post
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 12:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So does this apply to SnG's/MTTs too? I mean I can understand playing one table of NL50 with say a $1000 BR = playing with 5% of your roll, but how does this correspond to trny buy-ins? If I'm playing $12 SnGs with a $1200 roll does that mean I'm playing with 1%, or given that I'm 8-tabling, that I'm playing with 8%?
I guess the latter makes more sense, since that's the amount I have invested at any one time; i.e. if my computer crashes mid-session and I can't get back online, I stand to lose 8% of my BR. |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
the_hawk
Chelsea FTW!
Joined: 13 Jul 2005
Posts: 4449
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 1:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well for limit poker which I play, assuming 25BB to be a decent buy-in, 10% implies playing on a 250BB bankroll. That is just way too thin for my liking - and 20%, a figure also mentioned in the article, is suicidal.
It's also worth pointing out that 2-10% is a pretty wide range which would cover most (but not all) limit players' strategies. It's not necessarily all that illuminating in that respect.
As regards Zool's question, I'd regard $12 SNGs on a $1.2k roll as much nearer 1% than 8% play, even if you're 8-tabling. All multitabling really does is bring the long-term to you more quickly. Presumably it erodes your edge a little, and the "session disaster" scenario you mention does matter a little, but nevertheless you're really playing a series of 1% games, rather quickly. |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
janeg
Regina Canada
Joined: 04 Oct 2004
Posts: 5234
Location: Somewhere down the crazy river
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:56 pm Post subject: Re: Benchmarks from the eCOGRA survey |
|
|
| PizzaByNight wrote: | I wanted to quote something from the online gambling survey that janeg discussed on the General Board and put it in here for reference.
| Quote: | | A similar curvilinear relationship exists between bankroll management and profitability. Playing with a smaller percentage of your bankroll (i.e. money set aside for gambling at one time) tended to have a positive impact on financial outcome up to the point where players were playing with less than 2%. Players playing with less than 2% tended to be less financially successful than those playing with between 2% and 20% of their bankroll. The optimum range to maximise profitability was playing with between 2% to 10% of the bankroll at any one table. |
I often play with less than 2% so this has given me some food for thought. Hopefully it will do the same for anyone reading that plays with greater than 10%. |
I guess it depends on what you're playing and what the standard bankroll is for the game.
My guess is that what their finding supports is not letting yourself get short stacked. Remember reading, somewhere, that you shouldn't sit down with less than you'd need if all rounds were capped so 4 x 4BB = 16BB minimum which is 5.3% of a 300BB bankroll. The idea being, that if you do hit a good hand you won't be able to maximize your profit.
Not sure how'd you'd work it out for an NL cash game |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
bpgui
2K Club
Joined: 17 Oct 2005
Posts: 2380
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:05 pm Post subject: Re: Benchmarks from the eCOGRA survey |
|
|
| janeg wrote: | | ....you shouldn't sit down with less than you'd need if all rounds were capped so 4 x 4BB = 16BB minimum which is 5.3% of a 300BB bankroll. |
Just being a bit nit-picky but the bet sizes on the first two rounds are 1/2 BB (i.e. in a 3/6 game a BB is $6 but the bets are $3 preflop and on the flop and $6 on the turn and river). Assuming it is capped at 4 bets on each street, the maximum you could put in on one hand would be $72 (4*3 + 4*3 + 4*6 + 4*6) or 12BBs
Therefore, you should always have at least 12BB in front of you, which is 4% of a 300BB bankroll |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
Bugsbunny
Wascally
Joined: 07 Apr 2004
Posts: 7723
Location: Drinking Carrot juice
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 5:13 am Post subject: Re: Benchmarks from the eCOGRA survey |
|
|
| bpgui wrote: | | janeg wrote: | | ....you shouldn't sit down with less than you'd need if all rounds were capped so 4 x 4BB = 16BB minimum which is 5.3% of a 300BB bankroll. |
Just being a bit nit-picky but the bet sizes on the first two rounds are 1/2 BB (i.e. in a 3/6 game a BB is $6 but the bets are $3 preflop and on the flop and $6 on the turn and river). Assuming it is capped at 4 bets on each street, the maximum you could put in on one hand would be $72 (4*3 + 4*3 + 4*6 + 4*6) or 12BBs
Therefore, you should always have at least 12BB in front of you, which is 4% of a 300BB bankroll |
And, of course, if the cap is 5 rather than 4 (as in some live games) the amount is 15 BB rather than 12. An interesting theoretical question - if there is no cap once it's HU how much do you want at the table as a minimum? (And I don't have an answer to this other than I'd want a bit more than the minimum, probably about 18-20 BB) |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
bpgui
2K Club
Joined: 17 Oct 2005
Posts: 2380
Location: Illinois
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:03 am Post subject: Re: Benchmarks from the eCOGRA survey |
|
|
| Bugsbunny wrote: | | if there is no cap once it's HU how much do you want at the table as a minimum? (And I don't have an answer to this other than I'd want a bit more than the minimum, probably about 18-20 BB) |
I'd want to have more than all my opponents |
|
| Back to top of Forum |
|
|
|
