Something I’ve been considering in the last few month is on sticking with fixed limit versus switch across to no limit. Whilst I’m still enjoying (and winning) at fixed limit, it’s fairly likely that I will stick with it.
In saying that I also thought about things a bit further in terms of Bankroll management and win rates (possibly in an attempt to further justify staying with fixed limit).
Firstly some assumptions on required bankroll –
1,000 big bets being the required bankroll for fixed limit
100 buy ins of 100 big blinds being the required bankroll for no limit.
Therefore, if you have a bankroll of $1,000 then you’d be playing (assuming 6 max shorthanded):
$0.5/$1 fixed limit or
NL$10 ($0.1 big blind)
Putting that into perspective with win rates, a decent win rate for fixed limit is say 1BB/100, so at those stakes you’d be winning $1/100 hands.
At no limit, I’m not really sure what a decent win rate is, but I’ll take a guess and say 5bb/100. That would equate to $0.50/100 hands.
Overall, it looks like fixed limit is the winner (and rakeback would push it further ahead too), but, since there is a much higher win rate with NL, your overall variance should be lower, so downswings shouldn’t last as long. (although since pots are bigger this may be offset a little when compared with fixed limit).
Maybe my math is off, and I’m sure someone can point to the errors in my logic, or can show me where someone else has done the equivalent calculation better than I could.
But for now, for me, fixed limit is where I’ll stay.
Current bankroll: $26,000
May time played: 2.8h
May hands played: 627
May profit / (loss): $200