when to move up?

i think 30-40 BI is good.

you can move up with 1k, but if you want to feel really secure move up at 1.5k. waiting to move up beyond 1.5k is just being a pussy because honestly you don't need fat rolls for 25nl or 50nl. maybe if you play 200nl or higher you'd want at least 40bi of your new stake before you move up, but not at lower stakes.

If you're playing that many tables I'd probably build up a pretty big roll before moving up unless you plan to substantially cut back tables when you move up.

anyway your question is one that only you can answer since you're asking where you won't care about losing the money. some players would care about losing an NL50 buy-in even if they had a $5000 BR, others wouldn't care about going a BI down if they had only $50 in their BR.

i like the idea of moving up aggressively until NL50 - moving up with around 20 BI for NL50 or $1k. BUT I also would NEVER recommend playing 16-20 tables because that's almost ALWAYS wrong. There's almost definitely no one who can perform all the necessary thought processes for learning poker while playing 16-20 tables. Chances are, if you think you can play 16-20 tables optimally, your optimal play could improve drastically. Undoubtedly some fast-thinking NL600 mass tablers could move down and play 16-20 tables of NL50 and rape it with a huge profit margin but that's because they've already memorized all the learning you still need to do etc etc. Of course maybe you're a FR-nit and who knows what that requires aside from the ability to trade coolers and scrounge rakeback haha

move up when you're comfortable no one can make the decision for you

16 tables? lol u need a bigger br due to higher varience so i say 40-50 bi? move up like at 2.2k

On April 12 2009 14:46 RoyCe 4otZ wrote: 16 tables? lol u need a bigger br due to higher varience so i say 40-50 bi? move up like at 2.2k

# of tables doesnt matter. 35-40bi is solid imo

Yeah what is with the people saying that more tables= need for bigger BR? I have seen this so many times and the only reason seems to me a threat of a massive tilt that would make you loose on all your tables simultaneously.

14+Tablers are usually total nits anyway and I can't see how variance affects them more.


And I also wouldn't play 20tables and think of moving up, why not cut down to around 9, open up your range and learn more when it costs you very little? (Unless your goal is to grind NL25-50 forever for profit that is)

Well if you play 20 tables and only have 20 buyins, your entire bankroll would be in play. If you raise on table #14 and miss your hand, you are now sitting with less than 100BB's. If you get coolered on 2 tables at once, you are now sitting out. So I would want to have a good 5+ buyins in the tank just to keep my tables fully loaded no matter how properly rolled I am for a limit.

On a side thought; I wonder if a better question these days is "when NOT to move up".... gets you thinking...

follow ur roll and move on on 50+ bi

On April 12 2009 15:49 NeillyJQ wrote: follow ur roll and move on on 50+ bi

thats how i see it.

but i guess everyone has there own form i mean what ever works for you

you guys are unreal nits

wtf? you're spending way too much time at microstakes playing on 50 buyins anymore than 20 below nl100 is retarded

On April 12 2009 16:04 CrownRoyal wrote: you guys are unreal nits wtf? you're spending way too much time at microstakes playing on 50 buyins anymore than 20 below nl100 is retarded

i follow a 75 bi rule, but im a nit so

40+ i guess, but ive usually taken some shots at 25BI for that level. Also, why play so many tables? Seems hard to catch all those little details that make you evolve as a player.

theres no reason to take shots, do things correctly from nl2+ and you form good br management, and won't have to worry about shots at higher stakes

NL2 til 180 (18 bi for NL5)
NL5 til 270 (27 bi for NL10)
NL10 til 625 (25 bi for nl25)
NL25 til 2250 (45 bi for nl50)
NL50 til 5500 (55 bi for nl100)
NL100 til 12,000 (60 bi for nl200)
NL200 til 40,000 (100 bi for NL400)
NL400 til 65,000 (109 bi for NL600)
NL600 til 105,000 (105 bi for NL1k)
NL1k til 225,000 (112.5 bi for NL2k)
NL2k til 550,000 (110 bi for NL5k)
NL5k til 2M (can play all games under 200/400)

On April 12 2009 17:13 NeillyJQ wrote: NL2 til 180 (18 bi for NL5) NL5 til 270 (27 bi for NL10) NL10 til 625 (25 bi for nl25) NL25 til 2250 (45 bi for nl50) NL50 til 5500 (55 bi for nl100) NL100 til 12,000 (60 bi for nl200) NL200 til 40,000 (100 bi for NL400) NL400 til 65,000 (109 bi for NL600) NL600 til 105,000 (105 bi for NL1k) NL1k til 225,000 (112.5 bi for NL2k) NL2k til 550,000 (110 bi for NL5k) NL5k til 2M (can play all games under 200/400)

If that would be a script of a movie, Im sure it would be titled as 'The way of the N.I.T. - how to waste your youth'.

This is so nitty its unbelivable ;p

On April 12 2009 17:16 DeFraG wrote: Show nested quote + On April 12 2009 17:13 NeillyJQ wrote: NL2 til 180 (18 bi for NL5) NL5 til 270 (27 bi for NL10) NL10 til 625 (25 bi for nl25) NL25 til 2250 (45 bi for nl50) NL50 til 5500 (55 bi for nl100) NL100 til 12,000 (60 bi for nl200) NL200 til 40,000 (100 bi for NL400) NL400 til 65,000 (109 bi for NL600) NL600 til 105,000 (105 bi for NL1k) NL1k til 225,000 (112.5 bi for NL2k) NL2k til 550,000 (110 bi for NL5k) NL5k til 2M (can play all games under 200/400) If that would be a script of a movie, Im sure it would be titled as 'The way of the N.I.T. - how to waste your youth'. This is so nitty its unbelivable ;p

Its the supernit Neilly, he aint like us crazy gamblers

Well i agree with Neilly that this whole shot taking thing is bullshit.

like moving up at 20BI and move down at 18BI again ---> u only will play scared cause u want to suceed at new limit so badly and dont want to lose the 2 bi to move down ...
grind a comfortable BR that u feel good with
-> play the new limit

On April 12 2009 18:19 PplusAD wrote: Well i agree with Neilly that this whole shot taking thing is bullshit. like moving up at 20BI and move down at 18BI again ---> u only will play scared cause u want to suceed at new limit so badly and dont want to lose the 2 bi to move down ... grind a comfortable BR that u feel good with -> play the new limit

On April 12 2009 16:04 CrownRoyal wrote: you guys are unreal nits wtf? you're spending way too much time at microstakes playing on 50 buyins anymore than 20 below nl100 is retarded

Fail

in my experience anything close to 2k is perfect for megatabling (e.g. 1750 - 1999). never fails for me

you could do the 20bi rule if you're like a winning 200nl player who's had to cash out and wants to get back asap, otherwise i just don't see the benefit of moving up quickly to limits you are totally unfamiliar with, esp in these games now

yeah i dont want to take any shots at ALL i just want to know about how much is proper i mean at least i would go with the 40-50 buy depends on what i feel comfortable with and when i have a cousion where i dont feel stressed to win just plain ol ABC FTW!!!

everyone who says the number of tables doesn't matter should consider that you're significantly reducing your edge by playing so many tables which means that variance will be higher

On April 12 2009 20:04 failsafe wrote: everyone who says the number of tables doesn't matter should consider that you're significantly reducing your edge by playing so many tables which means that variance will be higher

wouldnt there be less variance when playing more tables and more swings when u play less tables and get fancy play syndrome?

am i right on this or what?