# Thread: What is the ideal Risk of Ruin (ROR) %?

1. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

## What is the ideal Risk of Ruin (ROR) %?

스크린샷 2018-06-28 오.jpg

Is ~10% ROR considered to be safe to avoid going bankrupt? What is the generally accepted ROR?

2. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by Planisphere
스크린샷 2018-06-28 오.jpg

Is ~10% ROR considered to be safe to avoid going bankrupt? What is the generally accepted ROR?
"Full Kelly" is 13.5%, and by definition is the RoR that maximizes bankroll growth.

However, many pros use a fraction of Kelly. If your bank roll is non-replenishable, I personally feel your 10% is high. I'm not a pro, but I play at 3 to 4% RoR.

3. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by SteinMeister
"Full Kelly" is 13.5%, and by definition is the RoR that maximizes bankroll growth.

However, many pros use a fraction of Kelly. If your bank roll is non-replenishable, I personally feel your 10% is high. I'm not a pro, but I play at 3 to 4% RoR.
There is a misconception of full Kelly and the 13.5%. 13.5% ROR is what you get if you begin with full Kelly and NEVER resize your bets, no matter how your bank fluctuates. But that is NOT what betting full Kelly means! Betting full Kelly is betting the full Kelly wager for whatever your CURRENT bankroll level is. And, in theory, you never go broke betting that way.

So, it simply isn't true that players need to accept 13.5% ROR in order to grow their bankroll optimally.

Don

4. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Hmm..so what Don means is that if I resize my bet according to my current bankroll (ex. narrow my bet spread if I'm going down the hill on bankroll), I wouldn't have to worry about going broke regardless of ROR?

5. 1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by Planisphere
Hmm..so what Don means is that if I resize my bet according to my current bankroll (ex. narrow my bet spread if I'm going down the hill on bankroll), I wouldn't have to worry about going broke regardless of ROR?
Yes, resize your bet for whatever the bankroll is at that moment.

The ideal ROR is different for different people. One problem is oftentimes your max bets will be dependent on the casino and not your bankroll. A casino might be okay with \$1k max bets, but nothing higher. If bankroll X is sufficient for that bet size, it doesn’t matter if your bankroll is 2X or 10X, because you’re still limited to max bets of \$1k. But that’s obviously for when your bankroll is a larger number and not something like \$5k or \$50k, where your bet size is more dependent on the size of your bankroll and sometimes based on casino tolerance (for the most part).

What’s your goal in APing? If you’re playing full time and as a main source of income, your desired ROR is going to be much lower than someone who may just be getting into it or just goes a few times a year and does it as a hobby or side income/investment. Someone with a replenishable bankroll is going to have different ideas on what a preferred ROR is compared to someone who has no other way to make income.

6. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
There are practical limitations to resizing: You play your first hand at say \$25. Win or lose you are now re-calculating your next bet based on a new bankroll. e.g. starting BR = \$10,000 = \$25 wager lost. Next hand, BR=\$9,975= \$24.94 wager...uh oh...where did I put those pennies...The reason you never go broke is because when your BR is down to \$1,000, you wager is now \$2.50 and there is no place to play...When your BR is \$100, you're betting \$0.25. When you BR is a dollar, you pull out a file and grind a bit of copper dust onto the betting square. You never go broke, but, you call that playing?

I play for kicks with a replenishable BR. I'm mindful of ROR, but also balance the fact that my theoretical hourly has to be enough to make it interesting for me, so I'm ok pressing my luck at 10% RoR for now. My long term goal is raise the hourly and reduce the RoR, but since I don't do this for a living, I can be a bit more aggressive looking to catch some positive V.

7. 1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
0%, who wants to go broke?

8. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Originally Posted by Red Green
There are practical limitations to resizing: .
I doubt there are many (or more likely any) who try to resize exactly according to what is called for. Or even very close to exactly. Making a strong approximation will get you so close to the same results that you would get if you resized with great exactitude that it's really not worth the effort.

9. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Agreed. I was merely illustrating.

I’ve not resized yet - up or down - but with a relatively small BR, would do so with a 50% gain or loss of BR.

I suspect as BR grows, resizing occurs less frequently as a function of gross dollars and more as a function of RoR? That is, once you reach a critical BR size relative to the table limits and RoR approaches zero, resizing becomes irrelevant. As an extreme example (I’m riffing without calculating!), if you have a \$1M BR and are playing a \$25 game, it will take a very long time to move the RoR needle from near zero to, say 5% (a theoretical resizing trigger point).

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

10. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
Between 0.5-2% is my preferred risk.
With higher risk of ruin I wouldn't play confidently...

Sent from my SM-J730F using Tapatalk

Page 1 of 2 12 Last

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•