Cash Games: Bankrolls and Buy Ins

See also

When we speak of cash games, we’re speaking of everything from micro-limit all the way up to massive attacks with $50 and $100 blinds, and buy ins in the multiple thousands. The first question for most players, then, is: How big should I play? The answer lies in another question: How big is my bankroll? Whether it’s $50 or $5,000, protecting it should be among your primary concerns when you play online. After all, apart from the blessed few who draw down a working wage from online poker, the goal for most players is, realistically, to win enough to just stay in action. There’s nothing wrong with this modest goal; I always say that online poker works best as a recreation, and a low-impact one at that. You never want to go broke if you can avoid it, so just never put all or most of your bankroll at risk at once. While this is rarely a problem for fixed-risk players of tournaments or sitngos, it’s the cash player’s biggest vex.

The real consideration in no limit cash games, then, is not the size of the blinds, but the amount of money you need to put into a game to play it effectively. This number, in turn, must be measured against your bankroll, to ensure that you’re not imperiling your stash of online cash. Let’s say you have a bankroll of $500 and you’re contemplating putting $400 of it into play in an NLHE game with $2 and $4 blinds. To do so would be to put 80 percent of your bankroll at risk. If you’re new to poker, especially online poker, you might not think that’s so great a hazard. You can always quit if you start to lose, right? Well, technically, yes, but as everyone with any experience of online cash games knows, leaving when you’re losing is a lot easier said than done. So much so, in fact, that it’s codified as physical law, the First Law of Chair Glue:

An object in a cash game tends to stay in a cash game until acted upon by an outside force.

Like being broke.
Plus, as this is no limit hold’em, losses can be sudden, explosive, and significant - the result of being on the wrong side of an all in confrontation. A sadly-too-likely scenario is that you’ll start running bad, become desperate to get even, go all in on a reckless adventure, lose your $400, put your other $100 into the game, tilt that off, too, and find yourself out of action until you can drum up enthusiasm (and possibly spousal support) for moving more money from your credit card or Neteller account into your favorite online poker site. Feh, right? Who needs it?

I know what you’re thinking - I’ve thought it myself on many occasions - But I might win, though! I might double up! Yeah, you might, if you’re skilled, smart, lucky, and fearless. Skilled, smart, and lucky you may even be, but I guarantee that you won’t be fearless, not with your case money on the line. As a consequence, you won’t optimize your opportunities, or even, necessarily, play correctly. Plus, even if you’re skilled, smart, and fearless, you might not be lucky. You might be profoundly unlucky, or even just garden-variety unlucky and wipe yourself out. It’s just not worth the risk.

Nurse your bankroll! Grow it. Find a level you can afford and a game you can beat, and keep beating it until you’re sufficiently well heeled to step up. As with all aspects of your poker game, be patient. The good games aren’t going away. You have all the time in the world.

Some players think they need to play at a certain minimum level to enjoy the game. They claim they can’t get excited about playing in $25 or $50 buy in games: The buzz they’re looking for just isn’t there. They’re better off risking their bankroll, they argue, at higher limits where the money is sufficiently meaningful to make them play well. I find this argument specious. If they can’t meet the challenge of playing perfect poker at $.50 and $1 blinds, how will upping the stakes really help? Could the hidden issue be pride? Or if not pride, what?

On the subject of specious arguments for playing above one’s bankroll, here’s one I love: I can’t beat the low buy in games. They play too badly. I need to play higher where people respect my moves. Folks, bad players are where your profit comes from. Bad players play small. They can’t afford to play big. Why? Because they’re bad! So drop down, and keep dropping down, until you find a game where the buy in fits your bankroll.

And where, exactly, will you find that fit? How much of your bankroll should you be prepared to risk in any given game? Other people have other ideas, but here’s mine: 10 percent, max. That may seem overly cautious to you, but I figure if only 10 percent of my bankroll goes into play then I’ll have to really suck or get really unlucky ten times in a row before I’m busted. I’ve had hellacious losing streaks. We all have. I’ve seen buy ins melt like May snow. If I happen to be running bad, I’d rather not run so bad that I run out altogether. But that’s just me.

Here’s something else that may be “just me.” I can play poker at any level - even nickel-dime, even for play money - still be mentally engaged, still catch a buzz, and still take great satisfaction in beating the game. Perhaps this is because I look at poker first as an intellectual exercise, second as a test of my capability, third as a recreation, and fourth, a distant fourth, as a way to make money. Can you take this idea on board? If you can, you’ll find it much easier to play within your bankroll and not feel the need to scratch a prohibitively expensive itch.

If you’ve been playing poker for a long time, and whether you’ve been playing profitably or not, you may have forgotten what brought you into the game in the first place. As an exercise in discipline and a test of your pure poker prowess, why not jump over to the free play side for a session and challenge yourself to play as perfectly as you can? See if you can impose rigor on yourself and your decisions even when there’s nothing at stake. You’ll find it harder than you think, I think. And you’ll find it worthwhile to report on your findings, too.