Ferguson experiment question

I did a search, but couldn't find anything on this. When Ferguson did his whole $1 to $20K, he would only buy into a game with 5% of his bankroll. If he is buying into a cash game, how many BB did he start with?

For example, let's say his bankroll is at $40. That means he would be buying into a game with $2. I only play on Pokerstars, so will just use them as a reference:
-If he bought into a .01/.02 game, he would start the game with 100BB.
-If he bought into a .02/.05 game, he would start the game with 40BB.
-If he bought into a .05/.10 game, he would start the game with 20BB.

100BB seems a bit high to me as that would mean you would need a bankroll of $1000 to play in the .25/.50 games.

Originally Posted by mikeneron

I did a search, but couldn't find anything on this. When Ferguson did his whole $1 to $20K, he would only buy into a game with 5% of his bankroll. If he is buying into a cash game, how many BB did he start with?

For example, let's say his bankroll is at $40. That means he would be buying into a game with $2. I only play on Pokerstars, so will just use them as a reference:
-If he bought into a .01/.02 game, he would start the game with 100BB.
-If he bought into a .02/.05 game, he would start the game with 40BB.
-If he bought into a .05/.10 game, he would start the game with 20BB.

100BB seems a bit high to me as that would mean you would need a bankroll of $1000 to play in the .25/.50 games.

He played SNG's to start out IIRC

it was on the full tilt tips from the pros stuff i think.

the start is going to be iffy no matter what, but it's doable. the bankroll management is a little light at the beginning (i.e. the entire br on the table at .02 NL), so you have to be a little lucky to get started. after that its just a bankroll management exercise.

He started with freerolls right? I heard he had to win a few cause the first couple he won, he lost the cash playing under rolled...inevitable.

I did a similar thing at stars with my FPP after I cashed out last summer, playing the 70FPP sunday 100k qualifiers, then getting 11 T$. I don't even think he got that much from his freerolls, so he had to have been playing underrolled for a little while.

Didn't it take him 9 months to go from 0 - $100, then another 9 months to go from $100 - $10k?

Gotta play a lot of freerolls to get even a bit of cash to start building a BR.

And yes, $1k is the min recommended BR for .25/.50 games, though I believe most of the BR nits here would say $1250 or $1500...

Maybe I should rephrase my question. Me and a buddy are having a little competition where we start with $40 and see what we can turn it into playing cash games only (full table). I don't think he has the ability to manage his money very well and will sit down at a cash table and either do well or go bust. I am going to incorporate Ferguson's strategy with the 5%/10% rule and see how it goes.

He only plays one table at a time and I multi-table, so to make it fair we will be using highest BB/100 as the winner over minimum 1000 hands. I know that isn't all that many hands, but at the rate he plays it could take awhile before he reaches that many hands

5% of my starting roll is $2, so which game on PokerStars should I be sitting down at?
.01/.02 game, starting the game with 100BB.
.02/.05 game, starting the game with 40BB.
.05/.10 game, starting the game with 20BB.

If you want to win the friendly competition with yer buddy, play .01/.02 games. They'll be the easiest to get the highest BB/100.

Of course if he puts his whole roll on a 50NL table, doubles up then plays like a rock he'll probably have a higher total winnings than you, but more likely he'll go broke in a hurry.

But to make it fair, you should both be playing the same limits.

He will be playing low limits as well, likely .05/.10. Maybe we should use something other than BB/100 to determine a winner?

I still haven't really found an answer for the following:
Buyin for $2...which is the best choice?
.01/.02 game, starting the game with 100BB.
.02/.05 game, starting the game with 40BB.
.05/.10 game, starting the game with 20BB.

Is 20BB even enough to work with and is 100BB too much?

Originally Posted by mikeneron

He will be playing low limits as well, likely .05/.10. Maybe we should use something other than BB/100 to determine a winner?

I still haven't really found an answer for the following:
Buyin for $2...which is the best choice?
.01/.02 game, starting the game with 100BB.
.02/.05 game, starting the game with 40BB.
.05/.10 game, starting the game with 20BB.

Is 20BB even enough to work with and is 100BB too much?

There are some who say that playing short-stacked can be fairly profitable, but I have no experience with it outside of playing tourneys.

Playing 20BB deep means when you flop TPGK you're basically forced to go in...which I imagine could be fairly high variance. You don't get as much chance to exploit post-flop errors in your opponents. If you suck postflop, then play short. If you wanna take advantage of the micro-donks post flop errors, then play full.

I dunno really, but 100BB deep is definitely not "too much".

Originally Posted by d0zer

Playing 20BB deep means when you flop TPGK you're basically forced to go in...which I imagine could be fairly high variance.

LoLz, as opposed to dumping 100+BB to a cooler?

Originally Posted by Fnord

Originally Posted by d0zer

Playing 20BB deep means when you flop TPGK you're basically forced to go in...which I imagine could be fairly high variance.

LoLz, as opposed to dumping 100+BB to a cooler?

MmmMm....touche (generally)

But in mike's plan, 20BBs deep has the same bankroll implications as 100BBs deep since he's planning on buying in for $2 regardless of what limit he's playing at.

So where he could get away from a strong pair 100BBs deep, only losing maybe 20-40BBs (less than a buck at 2NL), he's now pushing the entire $2 in when short at 10NL.

I imagine playing 20BBs deep at 2NL would be less variance than 100BB deep at 2NL for a player with mediocre postflop skills (like me), but I don't really know.

You the half-stack expert aintcha?