vpFREE2 Forums

Bankroll

#1

Jean Scott, please read and answer my question at the end of
this post. I also would appreciate all other responses to this
bankroll question.
   I have a problem grasping the bankroll concept. First, I do
understand that bankroll is important for a visitor to Las Vegas who
does not want to run out of money before the trip is over. While
there is probably an ATM available, the player has not reached the
limit of losses where playing would no longer be enjoyable. Thus,
the player needs to bring the proper amount (bankroll), hopefully
play the best pay schedule possible, play the best strategy for the
game and to limit mistakes. Proper planning, selection and playing
should provide an opportunity to keep playing during the visit. With
some wonderful luck, bankroll will not be an issue. With the worst
luck, maybe no bankroll preparation will be sufficient.
   Okay, this is where all this talk about bankroll seems so serious
and important! I can grasp the concept just mentioned.
   However, my second thought about bankroll is where I have
problems. I assume each past hand is totally independent of any
future hand or result. Whether you had either two royals in a row,
or a royal drought of 20 royal cycles, are not the results for the
next and future hands totally unrelated to either of these two
unlikely positions?
    If this is true, then WHY is bankroll important unless the
previously played hands are the last you will ever play in your
life? Obviously, if you want to play video poker again you will
need some more money. To play the next hand, money needs to be taken
out of you pocket or where you keep it (bank, mattress, etc.) How
is bankroll really important other than for the convenience of having
it immediately available. Is not it irrelevant as to whether you
play the next hand within a minute, or 6 months from now? It is
irrelevant because you still need a bankroll to play again in the
future (short or long). Current bankroll is only for convenience.
    I understand and accept the importance of bankroll if you are in
a situation demanding a certain amount of play that day or session.
Examples might be multiplier days, or trying to get to a certain card
level or some other significant short term reason. Ignore all of
these types of situations. Without any such situation, is not
bankroll unimportant other than for the ability to play another hand
of video poker sometime in the future.
   I know we make all types of gambling accountings. The IRS makes
sure we do it once a year. However, if our current video poker play
is really part of one big lifetime session, than bankroll is simply
how much we can afford to loose until that final video poker hand.
   I am really asking, not explaining! I cannot get away from two
basic ideas that dominate video poker play. Each hand is independent
of each other and thus our video poker play is part of one big life
session. So why do we talk about bankroll other than as a tool of
convenience, or to obtain some goal other than just continuing to
play video poker? Why would Bill Gates even think of bankroll? Why,
other than being able to make a session accounting of video poker
play, be concerned about bankroll? How does it help? I simply need
another coin if I want to gamble again - sometime in the future!
   Jean Scott, please respond at this time! You had a significant
post to this question when posting about your multiple line play
experience. Simply tell me why bankroll was so important to you.
Assume there was an ATM in the casino. Were you concerned as to
whether or not you would have money to play another hand of video
poker at some point in the future? Were you worried that your play
was going to result in your never being able or wanting to play video
poker again? Seriously, why are you concerned about bankroll?
Was it just for your convenience? I doubt it was for determining the
possible end of your video poker play for the rest of your life!

Respectfully,
Bob

#2

why do we talk about bankroll other than as a tool of
convenience, or to obtain some goal other than just continuing to
play video poker?

That's basically it for me. I've never thought of "bankroll" as
having anything to do with short-term cash needs to play video poker.
My concept of bankroll assumes that I have no outside source of money
and no expenses and that I want to be able to play forever. In that
how each hand affects the availability of cash that's necessary to
keep playing, under these assumptions, hands of video poker are
dependent on each other, which is why volatility, and not just
expected value, affects the value of choices of which machine is
played and what strategy is used in playing it. But assuming one does
have another source of income, this concept may be mostly, if not
entirely, irrelevant.

Why would Bill Gates even think of bankroll?

Until he plays a $5 billion coin machine, he wouldn't because no
machine is going to give him a significant chance of going broke and
he has a significant outside source of income.

···

Why,
other than being able to make a session accounting of video poker
play, be concerned about bankroll? How does it help? I simply need
another coin if I want to gamble again - sometime in the future!
  Jean Scott, please respond at this time! You had a significant
post to this question when posting about your multiple line play
experience. Simply tell me why bankroll was so important to you.
Assume there was an ATM in the casino. Were you concerned as to
whether or not you would have money to play another hand of video
poker at some point in the future? Were you worried that your play
was going to result in your never being able or wanting to play video
poker again? Seriously, why are you concerned about bankroll?
Was it just for your convenience? I doubt it was for determining the
possible end of your video poker play for the rest of your life!

Respectfully,
Bob

#3

You raise some interesting questions. I am not going to try to
answer all of them, but I will make a couple of observations.

First, as you are no doubt aware, there is a difference between the
concepts of "Trip bankroll" and "Longterm bankroll". "Trip bankroll"
can be thought of as the amount of money you feel you will need for a
given stretch of play. "Trip bankroll" is of interest to both pros
and recreational players. For a recreational player, Trip Bankroll
is the amount of money they are willing to lose on a single trip.
For a pro (or otherwise serious VP player), Trip Bankroll is the
amount of money that gives them an acceptably small chance of running
out of money during a Trip. (The difference is that a Pro would be
willing to lose more than his/her Trip Bankroll on a single trip, but
doesn't want to carry excess funds needlessly.)

"Longterm Bankroll" generally refers to the amount of money necessary
to achieve a certain RoR when a game is played indefinitely. As
such, Longterm Bankroll is not of interest to recreational players
willing to play VP at a disadvantage.

But Longterm Bankroll is important to Advantage Players like Jean
Scott because it tells them the level of play (choice of game,
denomination, lines) that their bankrolls will support.

To summarize:
Pros and other Advantage Players care about Longterm Bankroll
considerations because they want to be able to play VP indefinitely.
They care about Trip Bankroll considerations because they need to
know how much money to bring on a specific outing.

Recreational players care about Trip Bankroll because it determines
the size of game they can play to assure a reasonable amount of play
on a trip. Rec players willing to play at a disadvantage shouldn't
care much about Longterm Bankroll considerations.

As an Advantage Player myself, I found myself repeatedly in a
position of needing to know how much Trip Bankroll to bring with me
on various trips. It was the difficulty in estimating Trip Bankroll
that led me to develop Dunbar's Risk Analyzer for Video Poker.

--Dunbar

  Jean Scott, please read and answer my question at the end of
this post. I also would appreciate all other responses to this
bankroll question.
   I have a problem grasping the bankroll concept. First, I do
understand that bankroll is important for a visitor to Las Vegas

who

does not want to run out of money before the trip is over. While
there is probably an ATM available, the player has not reached the
limit of losses where playing would no longer be enjoyable. Thus,
the player needs to bring the proper amount (bankroll), hopefully
play the best pay schedule possible, play the best strategy for the
game and to limit mistakes. Proper planning, selection and playing
should provide an opportunity to keep playing during the visit.

With

some wonderful luck, bankroll will not be an issue. With the worst
luck, maybe no bankroll preparation will be sufficient.
   Okay, this is where all this talk about bankroll seems so

serious

and important! I can grasp the concept just mentioned.
   However, my second thought about bankroll is where I have
problems. I assume each past hand is totally independent of any
future hand or result. Whether you had either two royals in a row,
or a royal drought of 20 royal cycles, are not the results for the
next and future hands totally unrelated to either of these two
unlikely positions?
    If this is true, then WHY is bankroll important unless the
previously played hands are the last you will ever play in your
life? Obviously, if you want to play video poker again you will
need some more money. To play the next hand, money needs to be

taken

out of you pocket or where you keep it (bank, mattress, etc.) How
is bankroll really important other than for the convenience of

having

it immediately available. Is not it irrelevant as to whether you
play the next hand within a minute, or 6 months from now? It is
irrelevant because you still need a bankroll to play again in the
future (short or long). Current bankroll is only for convenience.
    I understand and accept the importance of bankroll if you are

in

a situation demanding a certain amount of play that day or

session.

Examples might be multiplier days, or trying to get to a certain

card

level or some other significant short term reason. Ignore all of
these types of situations. Without any such situation, is not
bankroll unimportant other than for the ability to play another

hand

of video poker sometime in the future.
   I know we make all types of gambling accountings. The IRS makes
sure we do it once a year. However, if our current video poker

play

is really part of one big lifetime session, than bankroll is simply
how much we can afford to loose until that final video poker hand.
   I am really asking, not explaining! I cannot get away from two
basic ideas that dominate video poker play. Each hand is

independent

of each other and thus our video poker play is part of one big life
session. So why do we talk about bankroll other than as a tool of
convenience, or to obtain some goal other than just continuing to
play video poker? Why would Bill Gates even think of bankroll?

Why,

other than being able to make a session accounting of video poker
play, be concerned about bankroll? How does it help? I simply

need

another coin if I want to gamble again - sometime in the future!
   Jean Scott, please respond at this time! You had a significant
post to this question when posting about your multiple line play
experience. Simply tell me why bankroll was so important to you.
Assume there was an ATM in the casino. Were you concerned as to
whether or not you would have money to play another hand of video
poker at some point in the future? Were you worried that your play
was going to result in your never being able or wanting to play

video

poker again? Seriously, why are you concerned about bankroll?
Was it just for your convenience? I doubt it was for determining

the

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "futrend" <futrend@y...> wrote:

possible end of your video poker play for the rest of your life!

Respectfully,
Bob

#4

You don't have a stop loss limit? As long as you can get "another
coin" you will gamble it?

http://www.gamblersanonymous.org/20questions.html

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "futrend" <futrend@y...> wrote:

Why,
other than being able to make a session accounting of video poker
play, be concerned about bankroll? How does it help? I simply need
another coin if I want to gamble again - sometime in the future!

#5

<<Jean Scott, please read and answer my question at the end of
this post. I also would appreciate all other responses to this
bankroll question.>>

I think others have responded with great explanations. I can't add too much here. But to summarize and give some personal input.

There are short-term and long-term bankroll considerations. Someone who plays negative games is more interested in a session or trip bankroll because there is no long-term bankroll figure that will allow someone to play forever on negative games and be sure of not going broke (Unless perhaps you are in the Bill Gates category).

The player who only plays when he has an advantage over the casino is often more interested in long-term bankroll considerations. However, the smaller the advantage he has the larger the bankroll requirement. The biggest problem I see for advantage players is that they are often under-bankrolled for the small edge at which they are playing, especially now that plays with hefty edges are becoming more scarce. If you are under-bankrolled for the long-term, then short-term bankroll considerations become more important, even for the advantage player.

In a nutshell, if you are under-bankrolled, you need to look for better plays or you will usually go broke more frequently.

Of course, there is another kind of bankroll - your psychological one. Many people have an adequate bankroll for their session plays and for the long-term, but they could not stand those large losses along the way.

Personally, we aren't concerned about short-term bankroll issues. We can always get a marker - so we don't have to carry a lot of money with us. And although losing isn't as much fun as winning, we take a huge session loss or a long series of losses pretty much in stride, with only a minimal amount of griping! :slight_smile: We usually quit when we get tired, not because we are winning or losing. Sunday's long session was a real rarity for us. (By the way, Brad just called me from the Palms and said that we each won $1000 in last night's drawing - so all our "work" Sunday is starting to pay off!)

We also do not worry about long-term bankroll issues because we never play at levels that are too high for our bankroll. And to keep losing feeling more comfortable, we usually play well beneath our bankroll. I recommend that for anyone who has a small psychological bankroll.

···

________________________________________
Jean $�ott - http://www.FrugalGambler.biz
  Tax time is coming up - groan! "Tax Help
   for the Frugal Gambler" can answer many
   of your questions!

#6

Bob,

Bravo! I was begining to think I was the only one who actually beleived in logic and math!

Fo VP, I can summarize the issue like this: You play for a while and lose a bunch of
money, say even a few Royals worth. Knowing that each VP hand is statistically
independant, we can compute the likihood of winning that money (or more) back.
Ignoring the effects of finite bankroll for the moment, the answer we seek in the precisely
the cumulatve distribution function or CDF. But knowing how to compute the answer is
only part of the problem. The other part is understanding what it means and being brave
enough not to discard what we learn when we don't like the results.

So, let's take a step back for a moment from VP and consider a very simple random walk
process, the flipping an idealized (true) two-sided coin, where you take a step to the left if
the coin comes up heads, and a step to the right if the coin comes up tails. The long term
expected location of such a random walker is exactly where he/she started. That is, in the
long term, the expected number of heads is equal to the expected number of tails.

But what happens when the first few flips come up heads: What is the likilihood of the
walker ever getting back to the original starting point? What is the longterm expected
(average) result?

Let's takle the last question first: Suppose you start with Num_head = 10 heads in a row.
So you take ten steps to the left. Standing there 10-steps to the left of orginal starting
point, you ask, in the long term, where can I expect (on average) to end up now? Well,
since the coin is "true", you expect (on average) to end up just where you are when you
asked that question: 10 steps to the left. Why? All future coin tosses (actually all coin
tosses) are independant of each other. There is no restoring force. If you were so unlucky
(or lucky) to get ten heads in a row to start with, and if you managed to play forever, you
would NOT expect to end up at the original starting point. [Now imagine you are playng a
VP game with 100% return. You quickly drop a lot of cash. In the long run-- if you play
forever-- you expect to end up down precislely that amount of cash.]

Back to the first question: Given that the walker has gotten say 10 heads in a row to start
with, what is the likilood of the walker EVER getting back to the original starting point?
Note that I am not asking about the long-term expected avearge result, just the liklihood
of ever
getting back to the starting point. Well, the answer to this question depends on the
variance of the coin-flipping process, not the EV. Actually, to be precise, the answer
depends on all the higher-order moments of the coin-flipping processes PDF. The EV, is
the first moment. The variance is the second CENTRAL moment (that is, the moment with
the EV removed from the data)-- but whether or not we are dealing with the moments
themselves or the central moments doesn't matter. What is important is that the answer
to this question depends upon the SHAPE (the details) of the PDF while the answer to the
other question (regarding long term EV) depends on the central tendancy or central limit
of the PDF (if any). While the exact answer to the coin toss problem is beyond the scope
of this email, let me motivate how it is solved. Suppose you actually get 10 heads in a row
and are 10 steps to the left. Now if you are to ever get back to the start, you will have to
get 10 more tails then heads. But there are lots of ways to do this. You could 10 tails in a
row. You could get 1 head then 11 tails. You could get 2 heads then 12 tails, you could
even get 5 tails, 1 head, and 6 tails. As you see, there are lots of possibilities.
Nonetheless, these things have been well worked out and you can find the answers on the
web (One generlized solution that I like involves Catalan numbers, see http://www-
math.mit.edu/phase2/UJM/vol1/RMONTE-F.PDF and ; it turns out to be useful for analytic
RoR computations also)

The end result of all this math stuff is that if you can play forever (flip a coin forever), that
you can expect a finite non-zero likihood of sooner or later returing to your starting point.
It may take a long, long time, but there is always a non-zero likelihood of gettin gback to
the starting point so long as the PDF is well behaved and meets certain conditions (that is,
it is time-stable, it has some non-zero higher order moments so that it has finite, non-
zero width "shape", etc). The reason why you can expect this has nonething really to do
with EV, but eveything to do with variance. So when people talk about coming back from a
bad loss, they are actually banking on the variance, not the EV of the game, though most
don't know this at all.

This "result" has a lot of implications for VP. First, if you have a big loss, (1) your long
term EV is this loss + EV of the game (in the correct units of coarse) and (2) you always
have a non-zero finite probability of making up for that loss so long as you can continue
to play-- but certainly you may never ever actually do so.

Let us not forget that the reason for (2) above is not the EV of the VPP, but rather its
variance. As you might guess, this "fact" has not escaped investors who follow certain
growth-optimized strategies (such as kelly-like ones). The seemingly unexpected finding
here is that an investment portfolio that includes appropriately weighted investments with
negative EV can be expected to perform "better" (given a particular investors risk/reward
utility functions) than one without the negative EV investments-- so long as the
appropriate variances (disributions) exist. In other words, if for whatever reason someone
really values (needs) a big win, they might be better off playing a game with higher
variance even if that means a lower EV.

#7

Am I right in thinking this way about your "steps to the right and left" example. What if steps to the right stands for profits and steps to the left stands for losses. I can see that if you are playing at exactly 100% that it might take more time than you will live, to get back to the original starting place ("even") if you had to take 10 steps to the left on the first 10 coin tosses. But what if you were given a "bonus" step to the right periodically, like every so many coin tosses. You would be more apt to get back to the starting place faster, right? I consider EV "bonus" steps - and the higher the EV the more bonus steps you would get, and the faster your trip toward the original EV.

<<First, if you have a big loss, (1) your long
term EV is this loss + EV of the game (in the correct units of course)>>

Despite the limitation of my math skills and understanding, I do understand this - I think!. So this does not negate the concept I drum on all the time. In fact it reinforces it. The higher the EV of the game the faster you get to the long-term. If you have a long severe losing streak at the first part of your play, it will just take longer than if you start with a big winning streak.

···

________________________________________
Jean $�ott - http://www.FrugalGambler.biz
  Tax time is coming up - groan! "Tax Help
   for the Frugal Gambler" can answer many
   of your questions!

#8

One measure of the "longterm" is N0.

N0=variance/(er-1+cashback)^2 hands

For example, for FPDW + 0.25% cashback:

N0=26/(1.0075-1+.0025)^2= 260,000 hands

At N0, your chances of winning are 84%

At 4 x N0, your chances of winning are 98%

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Jean Scott" <QueenofComps@f...> wrote:

The higher the EV of the game the faster you get to the long-term.

#9

Some people think if you can gamble, that's a good thing. If you
expect to win, there's more to it than that.

Some people think if you can gamble with a positive expectation,
that's a good thing. If you expect to win, there's more to it than that.

Having a stop loss is an important gambling concept.

http://basisonline.org/changetools.htm

If you don't have a stop loss, you probably have an addiction.

The stop loss is your bankroll.

The risk of not being able to play FPDW forever is:

0.999347^(stop-loss/bet-per-hand)

For a stop loss of 5 royal flushes, the risk is 0.999347^4000= 7%

The risk of not being able to play FPDW until you hit a royal flush is:

0.998713^(stop-loss/bet-per-hand)

For a stop loss of one royal flush (800 bets), the risk is
0.998713^800= 36%

The risk of not being able to play FPDW until you hit a royal flush or
deuces is:

0.996091^(stop-loss/bet-per-hand)

For a stop loss of one set of deuces (200 bets), the risk is
0.996091^200= 46%

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "futrend" <futrend@y...> wrote:

   I have a problem grasping the bankroll concept.

#10

No, that is not what I meant. I was thinking of bankroll being
simply the total amount of dollars one is willing to lose on gambling
during a lifetime. This amount may be exceded on the first trip, or
after various trips.
  Maybe even Bill Gates could have a limit he is WILLING to lose
gambling. This would be his bankroll. So the next coin is
significant only in that I still have not reach my predetermined
limit, whether on a single trip, or months, or years later. Past
hands have nothing to do with this next coin that I am willing to
play. This coin is just part of my only meaningful banroll. It is
this bankroll that is the stop limit. One's bankroll can grow if
fortunate enough to have net winnings after all previous play. Now
the bankroll is the original gambling budget plus any winnings. One
might increase his bankroll because heen enjoys the gambling activitiy
and other benefits received.

  "I understand the significance of bankroll for a single trip. I
desires to keep playing (for enjoyment) during the trip and needs to
estimate how much to bring with him. This also assumes he has no way
to electronically tap into his lifetime gambling bankroll.

- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000"
<nightoftheiguana2000@y...> wrote:

> Why,
> other than being able to make a session accounting of video poker
> play, be concerned about bankroll? How does it help? I simply

need

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "futrend" <futrend@y...> wrote:
> another coin if I want to gamble again - sometime in the future!

You don't have a stop loss limit? As long as you can get "another
coin" you will gamble it?

http://www.gamblersanonymous.org/20questions.html

#11

Sounds reasonable to me. We need the figures from mathematicians like you, but you
summarize our needs nicely...Thanks...

I share the original poster's concerns about how people constantly harp on "bankroll". It
appears to me, after the mathematics is done, this is all we have to know.

.....bl

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@h...> wrote:

To summarize:
Pros and other Advantage Players care about Longterm Bankroll
considerations because they want to be able to play VP indefinitely.
They care about Trip Bankroll considerations because they need to
know how much money to bring on a specific outing.

Recreational players care about Trip Bankroll because it determines
the size of game they can play to assure a reasonable amount of play
on a trip. Rec players willing to play at a disadvantage shouldn't
care much about Longterm Bankroll considerations.

As an Advantage Player myself, I found myself repeatedly in a
position of needing to know how much Trip Bankroll to bring with me
on various trips. It was the difficulty in estimating Trip Bankroll
that led me to develop Dunbar's Risk Analyzer for Video Poker.

--Dunbar

#12

In my own case, my stop loss is when it stops being "fun". It is not a dollar figure...well, I
guess it really is a dollar fugure, but it varies with the way I am feeeling. If I have another
coin and it is fun...yes...it goes into the machine.

.....bl

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000" <nightoftheiguana2000@y...>
wrote:

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "futrend" <futrend@y...> wrote:
> Why,
> other than being able to make a session accounting of video poker
> play, be concerned about bankroll? How does it help? I simply need
> another coin if I want to gamble again - sometime in the future!

You don't have a stop loss limit? As long as you can get "another
coin" you will gamble it?

http://www.gamblersanonymous.org/20questions.html

#13

Just want to congratulate you on one of best explanations I have read
on this subject that the ordinary non math person can relate to. You
either are or would have been a great teacher.

Trish--

Bob,

Bravo! I was begining to think I was the only one who actually

beleived in logic and math!

Fo VP, I can summarize the issue like this: You play for a while

and lose a bunch of

money, say even a few Royals worth. Knowing that each VP hand is

statistically

···

- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "cdfsrule" <groups.yahoo@v...> wrote:

#14

Thank you for taking some time to address my questions. I have
been very impressed with your contributions to this group and know
this is a subject in which you have considerable knowledge.
  I do recognize the difference between trip vs longterm bankroll as
you define them. Also, trip bankroll is also part of your long term
bankroll. In fact, trip bankroll could also equal your longterm
bankroll. That said, I always employ a type of trip bankroll each
day I play. There is a certain point at which I do not want to lose
anymore money on any particular day - so I stop!
  Frank Scoblete talked about "manageable thrills" in a Casino City
Times" article. He describe it as a zone between a "thrill zone" and
a "sweat zone". I personally do not want to play in the "sweat
zone" I also do not want to feel too bad for the near future. So I
try to temporarily stop playing at a point before losses are a size
that I will make me "feel bad" for some time in the near future.
This would be my session "sweat zone", or "feel bad zone" It is
easier to return at another time. This is what I call a session
bankroll. If I am on a trip, the trip bankroll might be a number of
these session bankrolls.
  But, in reality, it just seems like I am rationalizing session
bankroll and trip bankroll. As I said in the previous paragraph, I
only "temporarily" stopped playing. When I play that next hand it
will be part of my longterm bankroll and I assume that mathematically
does not matter if that next hand is within seconds or months later.
I am assuming the same game, pay schedule and comp situation at this
later point in time.
  You said the "pro" might play more than a trip bankroll if playing
in an advantageous situation. It is easy to electronically tap into
ones longterm bank roll and thus why does a pro even consider "trip
bankroll". But, if that is not a reality, then I see your point. I
assume that Jean Scott, or any other "pro", has a significant
longterm bankroll. She is a local player an can get resouces until
her longterm bankroll is depleted. Does she have a "feel bad xone"
that will just stop here from continuing in the advantage situation?
She can answer for herself, and that is why I was interested in her
responding to my original post.
  Again, as in my original post, why is it economically meaningful to
stop as long as there is longterm backroll remaining? It seems a few
members interpreted my question as to my not caring or worrying about
bankroll. This is not what I meant! I was just trying to
rationalize the mathematics of various bankrolls. I am only speaking
in terms of mathemaical or financial significance. The next hand
result is as financially significant to the bankroll even if played
more than two months from the current point in time. Thus I was
wondering why her trip bankroll is significant as a "pro". Obviously
a trip bankroll, even if equal to longterm bankroll, can be depleted.

Thanks,
Bob

You raise some interesting questions. I am not going to try to
answer all of them, but I will make a couple of observations.

First, as you are no doubt aware, there is a difference between the
concepts of "Trip bankroll" and "Longterm bankroll". "Trip

bankroll"

can be thought of as the amount of money you feel you will need for

a

given stretch of play. "Trip bankroll" is of interest to both pros
and recreational players. For a recreational player, Trip Bankroll
is the amount of money they are willing to lose on a single trip.
For a pro (or otherwise serious VP player), Trip Bankroll is the
amount of money that gives them an acceptably small chance of

running

out of money during a Trip. (The difference is that a Pro would be
willing to lose more than his/her Trip Bankroll on a single trip,

but

doesn't want to carry excess funds needlessly.)

"Longterm Bankroll" generally refers to the amount of money

necessary

to achieve a certain RoR when a game is played indefinitely. As
such, Longterm Bankroll is not of interest to recreational players
willing to play VP at a disadvantage.

But Longterm Bankroll is important to Advantage Players like Jean
Scott because it tells them the level of play (choice of game,
denomination, lines) that their bankrolls will support.

To summarize:
Pros and other Advantage Players care about Longterm Bankroll
considerations because they want to be able to play VP

indefinitely.

They care about Trip Bankroll considerations because they need to
know how much money to bring on a specific outing.

Recreational players care about Trip Bankroll because it determines
the size of game they can play to assure a reasonable amount of

play

on a trip. Rec players willing to play at a disadvantage shouldn't
care much about Longterm Bankroll considerations.

As an Advantage Player myself, I found myself repeatedly in a
position of needing to know how much Trip Bankroll to bring with me
on various trips. It was the difficulty in estimating Trip

Bankroll

that led me to develop Dunbar's Risk Analyzer for Video Poker.

--Dunbar

>
> "Jean Scott, please read and answer my question at the end of
> this post. I also would appreciate all other responses to this
> bankroll question.
> I have a problem grasping the bankroll concept. First, I do
> understand that bankroll is important for a visitor to Las Vegas
who
> does not want to run out of money before the trip is over. While
> there is probably an ATM available, the player has not reached

the

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@h...> wrote:

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "futrend" <futrend@y...> wrote:
> Bob
>

#15

Thanks Tom for responding.
  Assume you were playing a very positive progressive bank. Would
you keep playing until your longterm backroll is depleted? I know
this is a silly question, but if it is a very advantageous
progressive play, why, if you do, stop? A progressive play is
different in that it gets even more advantageous. If you stop, is it
no different than playing again later at another progressive that
might be less of an advantageous situation. Have you simply given up
and thus employed a sort of trip bankroll?
  Bill Gates could have a longterm bankroll. It just might be the
amount he is willing to lose gambling. Of course it has nothing to
do with going broke. I hope all of us have a finite amount of loses
that we are willing to accept from gambling and that it is long
before going broke.
  I do not know if he Bill Gates gambles, but I have seen film of
Paul Allen (also a foundr of Microsoft) in a casino. Wonder if he is
a considered a whale!

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <thomasrrobertson@e...>
wrote:

>why do we talk about bankroll other than as a tool of
>convenience, or to obtain some goal other than just continuing to
>play video poker?

That's basically it for me. I've never thought of "bankroll" as
having anything to do with short-term cash needs to play video

poker.

My concept of bankroll assumes that I have no outside source of

money

and no expenses and that I want to be able to play forever. In that
how each hand affects the availability of cash that's necessary to
keep playing, under these assumptions, hands of video poker are
dependent on each other, which is why volatility, and not just
expected value, affects the value of choices of which machine is
played and what strategy is used in playing it. But assuming one

does

have another source of income, this concept may be mostly, if not
entirely, irrelevant.

>Why would Bill Gates even think of bankroll?

Until he plays a $5 billion coin machine, he wouldn't because no
machine is going to give him a significant chance of going broke and
he has a significant outside source of income.

>Why,
>other than being able to make a session accounting of video poker
>play, be concerned about bankroll? How does it help? I simply

need

>another coin if I want to gamble again - sometime in the future!
> Jean Scott, please respond at this time! You had a significant
>post to this question when posting about your multiple line play
>experience. Simply tell me why bankroll was so important to you.
>Assume there was an ATM in the casino. Were you concerned as to
>whether or not you would have money to play another hand of video
>poker at some point in the future? Were you worried that your

play

>was going to result in your never being able or wanting to play

video

>poker again? Seriously, why are you concerned about bankroll?
>Was it just for your convenience? I doubt it was for determining

the

···

>possible end of your video poker play for the rest of your life!
>
>Respectfully,
>Bob

#16

<<This would be my session "sweat zone", or "feel bad zone" >>

That is not rationalizing - that is "knowing thyself." You are talking about your psychological bankroll - which is a very important consideration for most human beings, particularly for a session or trip. And depending on the player's personality and tolerance for losses, this can be a valid consideration for the unskilled or the advantage player.

You ask why session bankroll is even significant to an advantage player who, rightly, believes that life is one long VP session. It is significant for the psychological reasons I mentioned above. It is also significant because many advantage players do not have the required bankroll for the long term. Therefore, they may have to"gather it up" over time and in the meantime, they want to limit their losses or conserve their wins to stretch out their play while they are working to increase their gambling bankroll.

You ask about our personal session bankroll. Brad and I do not have a "session bankroll." We quit when we reach a particular goal or when we get tired. When the money we have in our pocket is gone and we wish to play longer, we just go get a marker.

We keep our long-term bankroll in "tiers": The first one is a very liquid money market account where our winnings are deposited and all our markers go to be paid off. Then comes semi-liquid accounts that we could tap if things really went south - i.e., bond funds. Fortunately, our losing streaks have never been so severe that we have had to go to these accounts, but it is a comfort to know that it is there. The last tier contains assets that aren't so liquid, i.e., annuities. Although we consider this a last-resort section of our bankroll, we really don't see this ever being used for gambling. We would probably go down in denomination before we would access these funds, thinking that we would probably prefer to leave it to our grandchildren. In any case, we wouldn't ever touch our retirement funds for gambling purposes. (I just wish I would retire and then I might start spending some of that money I "saved for a rainy day" for so many years!!!!!)

···

________________________________________
Jean $�ott - http://www.FrugalGambler.biz
  Tax time is coming up - groan! "Tax Help
   for the Frugal Gambler" can answer many
   of your questions!

#17

Thanks Tom for responding.
Assume you were playing a very positive progressive bank. Would
you keep playing until your longterm backroll is depleted?

Theoretically, while playing a progressive, I reevaluate my long-term
bankroll after every hand and decide if I should keep playing. I
don't believe in starting a progressive without a long-term bankroll
that is sufficient for the reasonable worst that can happen, but any
progressive could put me in a situation in which my long-term bankroll
is being depleted faster than the value of the progressive is
increasing, reaching some point at which I'd value holding on to what
money I had left more than I'd value trying to hit the progressive.

I know
this is a silly question, but if it is a very advantageous
progressive play, why, if you do, stop? A progressive play is
different in that it gets even more advantageous.

It's an addiction that has a legitimate basis, but they can be risky
for both financial and physical health.

If you stop, is it
no different than playing again later at another progressive that
might be less of an advantageous situation. Have you simply given up
and thus employed a sort of trip bankroll?

This is the argument I use against people who think the way to win
money gambling is to "quit when you're ahead." Unless your top
priority is to be able to say on your deathbed that you were a net
winner at gambling for your whole life, what value is there in waiting
to play again just because you just won? Was Jean the inventor of the
saying "life is just one video poker session?" That's how I look at
it.

#18

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "futrend" <futrend@y...> wrote:

  Assume you were playing a very positive progressive bank. Would
you keep playing until your longterm backroll is depleted? I know
this is a silly question, but if it is a very advantageous
progressive play, why, if you do, stop? A progressive play is
different in that it gets even more advantageous. If you stop, is it
no different than playing again later at another progressive that
might be less of an advantageous situation. Have you simply given up
and thus employed a sort of trip bankroll?

The situation you describe sounds like you are seriously overplaying
your current bankroll. One progressive session should not have a
significant risk of busting your bankroll.

As an example, let's say you're going to play double-double bonus
progressives with a double royal (1600 bets) or greater and a 10% risk
of busting is acceptable to you.

Using:
http://wizardofodds.com/videopoker/analyzer/CindyProg.html
The 10% ror bankroll is 8503 bets. ($10,628.75 on 5 coin quarters)

The risk of busting out before hitting a royal is:
0.999354^(stop-loss)

So the risk of losing your bankroll on one progressive play is:
0.999354^(8503)= 0.4%
(It is less if you are competing with other players)

If over the course of several sessions, your bankroll is depleted, you
should probably switch down in denomination, in any case you should
stop to revaluate your current risk.

#19

Jean $¢ott wrote:

life is one long VP session.

I just quoted this in a message I just sent. I knew the "long" was in
there, but I was just reading in "Urantia" what was happening 900
billion years ago, so it would have felt funny to leave it in.

#20

I've been playing about three years and consider myself a pretty good player. I've been reading bankroll questions/answers since I joined this message board. I've been a computer programmer for 25 years with an extremely high aptitude for math so I'm no idiot.
   
  Something about ROR calculation doesn't seem right. What am I missing? Does 10% ROR mean you have a 10% chance of losing yor bankroll? I play between 900-1000 hands per hour. Do the numbers try to support that if I play 8503 hands in one day, I have a 1 chance in ten of losing 10 grand playing full pay quarters? That seems rather unlikely.
   
  I must have played more than 8500 hands in one day 40-50 times in the past year playing quarters and I think the worat day I ever had was maybe a $1200 loss. Not even close to $10,000.

  --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "futrend" <futrend@y...> wrote:

  Assume you were playing a very positive progressive bank. Would
you keep playing until your longterm backroll is depleted? I know
this is a silly question, but if it is a very advantageous
progressive play, why, if you do, stop? A progressive play is
different in that it gets even more advantageous. If you stop, is it
no different than playing again later at another progressive that
might be less of an advantageous situation. Have you simply given up
and thus employed a sort of trip bankroll?

The situation you describe sounds like you are seriously overplaying
your current bankroll. One progressive session should not have a
significant risk of busting your bankroll.

As an example, let's say you're going to play double-double bonus
progressives with a double royal (1600 bets) or greater and a 10% risk
of busting is acceptable to you.

Using:
http://wizardofodds.com/videopoker/analyzer/CindyProg.html
The 10% ror bankroll is 8503 bets. ($10,628.75 on 5 coin quarters)

The risk of busting out before hitting a royal is:
0.999354^(stop-loss)

So the risk of losing your bankroll on one progressive play is:
0.999354^(8503)= 0.4%
(It is less if you are competing with other players)

If over the course of several sessions, your bankroll is depleted, you
should probably switch down in denomination, in any case you should
stop to revaluate your current risk.

vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm

  SPONSORED LINKS
        Online gambling Outdoor recreation Recreation software Gambling

···

nightoftheiguana2000 <nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com> wrote:
    
---------------------------------
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

    Visit your group "vpFREE" on the web.
    
    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
vpFREE-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    
    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

---------------------------------
  
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos
Got holiday prints? See all the ways to get quality prints in your hands ASAP.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]