hmmm........ here I am grinding out the 9 mans.... maybe I will give it a whirl in a bit.... but what is the bankroll management then for multi table tournament sit n gos.... especially if your multi tabling them? Since your cash rate will be lower than the 9 mans, what would be a proper bankroll management multiplier for multi tables?
lots of guys on here like grinding the multi table sitters. Do you find them to be more profitable and consistant than 9 man?
I use too, when everybody started to learn 9 man's I moved to 18 man's to make more and still play games where no one had a clue.
Nowadays everybody has caught on to 18 man's, I am still in love with em but lately have not been doing good at them, so I have been trying to play more 27 man's where I have been doing better lately but also have been trying to go back to 9 man's.
But like DJ said, if you can pull some 1sts or obv get a bit of a streak going with top 3 in 18 man or 27 man you will see a difference.
Hmmm..... I think I will have to give them a shot, but what do you do now for your bankroll management. For me when I play 9 man sit n gos, I play so that I have at least 20x the buy in per game. So for me because I am starting a new challenge for myself for 2012, I have started at $3.50 sit n gos at 4 games at a time, so my bankroll requirements are no less than $280. So $3.50 x 20 x 4. How do you bankroll yourself for the multi table games and how many do you play at a time?
but what is the bankroll management then for multi table tournament sit n gos.... especially if your multi tabling them? Since your cash rate will be lower than the 9 mans, what would be a proper bankroll management multiplier for multi tables?
I use 50 buy-ins but would prefer 100, to be safe. And never be afraid, or feel like you failed if you need to drop down. Down swings happen, you will need to ride them out, and maybe thats at a lower buy in.
I also see players switch between two buy in levels. Not a bad idea when your roll is in between.
Same as DJ, have about 50 but prefer to be at 100, as for how many at a time depends on what amount you do best with, I like 4 as well (or try to play that many) up to 6.
All I can say is if your running and doing good PLAY MORE.:)
i like to have around 100 buy-ins for the minimum level i'm playing at. i usually play between two levels concentrating on the main level and 'taking shots' at the next level up when i'm feeling confident or i'm running well.
Okay, so I am trying to follow, you both phil and trigs like to have 100 buy ins, but does that depend at all on whether you play 1 game at a time or 8? Because it sounds to me that you want 100 buy in regardless of how many games you play at a given time. Where for my bankroll management calculations work out to be similar. Like I said above, I want to have a minimum of 20 buy ins per game at any give level, for every game additional that I multi table, that bankroll gets multiplied by those amounts of games. So for me to play again those $3.50 games I require a minimum of $70 $3.50 x 20 to play one single game at a time, and being that I play 4 at a time, a minimum of $280 $70 x 4 games.
Does that make sense, is it too aggresive do you think or not enough?
I think at the lower stakes its hard t follow that because you wanna move up so fast and its not aggressive enough, but when you get to the $30, $60 and $100 games I was playing before I find it to be a very aggressive bankroll calculator.
btw this is a minimum for me, not a standard amount buy a bare minimum to play at a given level. You think this is too low?
It is a little low, 20 buyin swings are not uncommon. Having said that, if you are playing 4 or 5 at a time with 70 buy-ins, that should be fine, just bank your profits until you get to 100 buyins.
Well it is 20 buy ins per game, at 4 games its the equivalent of having 80 buy ins. Is that enough or if I am at 100 buy ins per game then that means at 4 games at a time would require me to have a bankroll of $1400. Does that not sound wayyyy high for a $3.50 sit n go? $3.50 x 100 = $350 x 4 games at a time = $1400 minimum to play $3.50 sit n gos 4 at a time?
The number of tables you play has little to do with bankroll needed.
Avg BI and ROI are most important
I 8 table the 45 man turbos with 30-50 BI.
With the ROI I have I can expect a 50BI downswing < 1% of the time.
Well it is 20 buy ins per game, at 4 games its the equivalent of having 80 buy ins. Is that enough or if I am at 100 buy ins per game then that means at 4 games at a time would require me to have a bankroll of $1400. Does that not sound wayyyy high for a $3.50 sit n go? $3.50 x 100 = $350 x 4 games at a time = $1400 minimum to play $3.50 sit n gos 4 at a time?
No, I guess I'm not explaining myself very well. I was more or less agreeing with your BRM, other than to say, that I would try to keep 100 buyins, regardless of how may tables you are playing. So for the $3.50 games, $350 is good, no matter how many tables you are playing at a time.
This, of course, assumes you are a winning player.
Okay I understand what your saying bout having a minimum of 100 buy ins regardless of the games. However if you play 12 or 16 games at a time, and dont cash in them, your dropping levels after each swing, where if you have 20 x buy ins per game, you will be able to keep playing those limits of 12 or 16 games at a time regardless if you lose every game you should still comfortably be at the same limit game.
Hobbes,
Though I don`t know you that well, I have to disagree that the amount of games you play at a given time don`t affect your bankroll. I think that the amount of games you play at a time directly should reflect your bankroll and the limits in which you should be playing.
It forces you to really play hard and win steady to be able to move up in stakes, opposed to just going on a heater of a day and moving up stakes to just lose and be right back down where you began. If you grind out your current level to make a 20x buy in per game played, you have earned your money and chance to move up and even if you lose you should still comofortable be able to continue to play at those levels until you hit a really big downswing in which case you can drop limits.
Though I don`t know you that well, I have to disagree that the amount of games you play at a given time don`t affect your bankroll. I think that the amount of games you play at a time directly should reflect your bankroll and the limits in which you should be playing.
A game is a game is a game.
You do lose some ROI but $/hr goes up with multitabling.
If you cannot play 4 games reasonably as efficient as 1, then you should not be playing them.
i.e. if your ROI single tabling is 20% and it drops to 10% with 4 tables at a time, then don't play 4 tables. But if it drops from 20 to 18, that is not significant enough to change your BR mgmt.
Comments
$2.50, regular speed, 90man SNG
ROI is definitely better, you just have to be able to take losing more than you win. But when you do win, it more than makes up for the non cashes.
I use too, when everybody started to learn 9 man's I moved to 18 man's to make more and still play games where no one had a clue.
Nowadays everybody has caught on to 18 man's, I am still in love with em but lately have not been doing good at them, so I have been trying to play more 27 man's where I have been doing better lately but also have been trying to go back to 9 man's.
But like DJ said, if you can pull some 1sts or obv get a bit of a streak going with top 3 in 18 man or 27 man you will see a difference.
This is just from my experience at em.:)
I use 50 buy-ins but would prefer 100, to be safe. And never be afraid, or feel like you failed if you need to drop down. Down swings happen, you will need to ride them out, and maybe thats at a lower buy in.
I also see players switch between two buy in levels. Not a bad idea when your roll is in between.
All I can say is if your running and doing good PLAY MORE.:)
Does that make sense, is it too aggresive do you think or not enough?
I think at the lower stakes its hard t follow that because you wanna move up so fast and its not aggressive enough, but when you get to the $30, $60 and $100 games I was playing before I find it to be a very aggressive bankroll calculator.
It is a little low, 20 buyin swings are not uncommon. Having said that, if you are playing 4 or 5 at a time with 70 buy-ins, that should be fine, just bank your profits until you get to 100 buyins.
Basic Bankroll Management
and check this site
Poker Bankroll Tools
The number of tables you play has little to do with bankroll needed.
Avg BI and ROI are most important
I 8 table the 45 man turbos with 30-50 BI.
With the ROI I have I can expect a 50BI downswing < 1% of the time.
No, I guess I'm not explaining myself very well. I was more or less agreeing with your BRM, other than to say, that I would try to keep 100 buyins, regardless of how may tables you are playing. So for the $3.50 games, $350 is good, no matter how many tables you are playing at a time.
This, of course, assumes you are a winning player.
Hobbes,
Though I don`t know you that well, I have to disagree that the amount of games you play at a given time don`t affect your bankroll. I think that the amount of games you play at a time directly should reflect your bankroll and the limits in which you should be playing.
It forces you to really play hard and win steady to be able to move up in stakes, opposed to just going on a heater of a day and moving up stakes to just lose and be right back down where you began. If you grind out your current level to make a 20x buy in per game played, you have earned your money and chance to move up and even if you lose you should still comofortable be able to continue to play at those levels until you hit a really big downswing in which case you can drop limits.
A game is a game is a game.
You do lose some ROI but $/hr goes up with multitabling.
If you cannot play 4 games reasonably as efficient as 1, then you should not be playing them.
i.e. if your ROI single tabling is 20% and it drops to 10% with 4 tables at a time, then don't play 4 tables. But if it drops from 20 to 18, that is not significant enough to change your BR mgmt.
I think this is what the kids are listening to these days:
RATT - Round and Round (HD music video) - YouTube