Mathematical difference in bankrolls? (read)

[Automatic Monkey]

So some teammates and I are getting ready to try our hand, but we're concerned with bankroll requirements. We were wondering if there is any mathematical advantage to having a full bankroll at the beginning of an attempt or to have a fraction, say half, of that bankroll with replenishable income to replace it if it bottoms out.

To put this into a more understandable format:

We start now with $5,000 at a $25 unit, and an incoming $5,000 to add to the bankroll in the coming months.

We start in the coming months with $10,000 at a $25 unit.

Using the logic that any time not spent playing blackjack is a reduction in profits, as the advantage is with the counter, it would seem that the earliest one can get 50-ish units the better - start playing and if you run out of money in your bankroll try again when you get another 50-ish units. This seems mathematically identical to starting with 100-ish units later on, except that you have the profits earned through Blackjack if you start earlier.

Yes that logic is correct. Even if you don't start with a full-Kelly bankroll, you will probably not tap out, as long as you don't get greedy and keep increasing your bet as your small bankroll increases. You also have to consider what will happen if and when you do tap out.

One other question: Are simulators that calculate RoR applying all profits to the bankroll? It would seem not judging by their output, but I'm not positive. Our current plan is to start in 3 weeks with about 3/4 of the bankroll we should have for our unit, and to apply all profits to the bankroll until our RoR drops significantly, then to take profits.

Yes, they are applying all profits to the bankroll, sorry. Kind of incredible how you can still easily go bankrupt with all that money, isn't it? And when you start spending money from your bankroll your RoR increases dramatically from there. Recommend you have another source of income. It helps your blackjack career by reducing RoR.

 

[scotthimself]

Thanks for that info Automatic. Very useful.

Would increasing our spread from 1-6 to 1-10 decrease our RoR? We're using a somewhat under-funded BR of $10,000 for $25, so I'm wondering if it's still superior to use 1-10. Any advice?

 

[rukus]

will you be wonging in/out? if so at what points?

 

[charlieflip]

Can't increasing you spread lead to higher RoR than lower?

 

[rukus]

Can't increasing you spread lead to higher RoR than lower?

Yes and No.

if you do not have a sufficient bankroll, then yes.

but also no - if done with a sufficient bankroll, it leads to higher variance, but lower overall RoR since spreading increases your overall advantage. think about it this way in the most basic manner: if you use a 1-1 spread (ie flat bet), you have negative EV and an RoR of 100%, right? Now, if you spread say 1-10, depending on your game, rules, spread, etc, do you agree you can get some positive EV and can achieve an RoR of something like 3-5% with a sufficient bankroll? if you agree, then you must see that this was a very simple example of how increasing spread caused a decrease in RoR. however, your variance will increase with increased spread.

 

[charlieflip]

Yes and No.

if you do not have a sufficient bankroll, then yes.

but also no - if done with a sufficient bankroll, it leads to higher variance, but lower overall RoR since spreading increases your overall advantage. think about it this way in the most basic manner: if you use a 1-1 spread (ie flat bet), you have negative EV and an RoR of 100%, right? Now, if you spread say 1-10, depending on your game, rules, spread, etc, do you agree you can get some positive EV and can achieve an RoR of something like 3-5% with a sufficient bankroll? if you agree, then you must see that this was a very simple example of how increasing spread caused a decrease in RoR. however, your variance will increase with increased spread.

That answer was very helpful, thank you.

By variance you mean a sort of standard devation, am I correct?

 

[rukus]

That answer was very helpful, thank you.

By variance you mean a sort of standard devation, am I correct?

exactly -> Variance = (standard deviation)^2

 

[scotthimself]

Wonging in at 2+ TC, out at M1

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Thanks for that info Automatic. Very useful.

Would increasing our spread from 1-6 to 1-10 decrease our RoR? We're using a somewhat under-funded BR of $10,000 for $25, so I'm wondering if it's still superior to use 1-10. Any advice?

It depends. Are you increasing the spread by increasing the max or decreasing the min? RoR is more closely related to your max bet relative to your bankroll, rather than the spread, and I would certainly not recommend a $250 max bet to someone with $10K.

What games are you planning on playing?

 

[blackjack avenger]

What's in an Advantage

It depends. Are you increasing the spread by increasing the max or decreasing the min? RoR is more closely related to your max bet relative to your bankroll, rather than the spread, and I would certainly not recommend a $250 max bet to someone with $10K.

What games are you planning on playing?

I can think of situations where a $250 bet can be justified. It depends on the advantage and the Kelly fraction you are betting, fixed or resizing. Am I missing something?

 

[scotthimself]

70~% pen, S17, DAS, 6D, SA, DA

Wong out at -1, wong in preferably at or above 2.

 

[Kasi]

Am I missing something?

You're not alone if that helps at all

At one point it almost sounded like all 4 guys were all going to go off and play for 10 hours each with $1250 and bet some $25-250 spread or something.

But good luck Scott and fellow team members - keeping my fingers crossed.

 

[zengrifter]

You're not alone if that helps at all

At one point it almost sounded like all 4 guys were all going to go off and play for 10 hours each with $1250 and bet some $25-250 spread or something.

But good luck Scott and fellow team members - keeping my fingers crossed.

They are clear about the RoR and possibility that they can tap in the first 10-hrs and then wait a month to redeploy.

Top bet should be 2x$125. They will need to be able to transfer money between them quickly as some of them tap early.

May the force be with them! zg

 

[blackjack avenger]

Danger, Will Robinson, Danger

Many good points and potential problems.

One or two of the players probably will at some point tap out. Passing money back and forth will then become necessary. The players are not suppose to know each other and are inexperienced. They just may get caught. Often casino employees use the same bathrooms as players so the bathroom is not necessary a safe zone where money can be passed. Time will be lost passing money and perhaps waiting for seats. The bathroom stalls can also present some interesting situations also:joker:

As soon as one of them has to leave a positive shoe because of short funds then their advantage is probably not as high as they thought. So their ROR is higher then they think.

Others have pointed out the possibility of someone pulling out if the first roll is lost or perhaps even takes a large hit.

It seems some posters are adjusting the potential bets downwards because it's a partial bank spread over multiple players. It seems to slightly negate the idea of starting early. However, there is nothing wrong with limiting risk, especially with new players who may not be able to handle large cash swings.

You guys seem so eager to put money on the table that there may be a tendency to overbet. That would be a magnified problem since you are already starting with a short and spread thin bank.

Perhaps you guys should wait until you get perhaps 75% or 80% of the bank or if 4 players you guys can leapfrog (sagefrog is everywhere!) your play so that only 2 play at any given time.

During this short and thin bank period you need 100% reinvestment and no expenses taken out.

Think of the worse case scenarios before you decide to take the plunge.

 

[Kasi]

They are clear about the RoR and possibility that they can tap in the first 10-hrs and then wait a month to redeploy.
They will need to be able to transfer money between them quickly as some of them tap early.

Basically I just meant they should also consider how long each will play with their 50 units before hooking up again like you say. I mean if each were to play 10 hours straight before reporting back, each would likely be playing with a higher ROR than original lifetime ROR.

Just something for them to think about since he maybe seemed to think the overall risk would be the same no matter how they played as a team.

Not that it matters much - they spent months worried about this bankroll question and it seems they don't even have one betting plan yet?

I wish them all the luck but I'll just bite the bullet, and maybe I'm the only one, but they just don't seem ready asking what they ask.

Maybe they could even consider each throwing in 1 minimum bet and buy something that will answer alot of their questions.