Bankroll? - Just Gotta' Know

Okay, I've been reading this board for awhile now, and many, many times have seen posters saying you need to have $15,000, $20,000 or even $30,000 in your bankroll to be betting a $25 to $200 spread.

Now honestly, how many people have that kind of money to begin with?!?
If a person REALLY has that kind of cash in an account, then perhaps you should play in the " world's largest casino" - the stock market!

My question is, must you really have that kind of $$$? Is there wrong with a $5000 - $6000 bankroll and bet $25-$100?

Thanks!

I can only speak from my own experiences.

I`m currently in Japan (teaching English) for the sole purpose of building a bankroll of about $20,0000.

So I can play nickels.

Cheers!
Syph

(Fortunately Syph does not require a large sum of money to be happy, and can quite comfortably live off the $7/hr that he will be making in the casino.)

(Unless, of course, I loose it all...then it`s on to Taiwan!)

will not get a better return in the market. You will get a better return, by far, from your first couple of hundred thousand in a bj bankroll. You reach a ceiling somewhere around there where you will essentially get a zero return at blackjack. A solo blackjack player with a 10 million dollar bankroll will not really make much more than a guy with a 1 million dollar bankroll. The market argument is for bankrolls that are too big to effectively use at blackjack.

About "needing" any amount, that is non-sense. This is just a matter of personal preference in regards to risk tolerance. Someone who wishes to bet at a certain level and only wants a certain risk of ruin needs a certain amount. A guy who is not particularly concerned with losing his bankroll does not need any certain amount. He can just go to the casino and play when he wants with what ever amount of money he has available. He'll be a favorite to come out ahead in the long run. Managing a bankroll is a better idea because you'll probably get in more play hours if you don't run out of gambling funds frequently.

As for myself, two years ago I had more money in the stock market than I had in my blackjack bankroll. That's not the case any longer. Not even close. In fact, if I had won at only 20% of expectation (or just broke even!) for the last two years my blackjack funds would still have significantly outperformed the market.

year with reasonably low risk. Where you gonna get that in the stock market ?

Besides, the stock market is a gamble. And i don't like to gamble, which is why i play BJ.

The reality is that you can gamble with any amount you want. The concept of bankroll for blackjack exists for the purpose of covering the spread of standard deviation and for making money. But you can take any amount of money to the casino you like, and sometimes win with it, and sometimes lose. If your bankroll isn't large enough, however, you can lose the whole thing and have to start over from scratch. We all like to win, and it's annoying as hell to lose. When you lose it all, then it's really a bummer! Make your choice.

Let's do it this way. Tell us what game you intend to play (decks, rules, etc.), and whether play-all or back-count. Then, tell us the stakes you wish to play for (we'll assume $25 to $200, unless you say otherwise) and the bankroll you propose.

We'll tell you the chance that you'll lose it all. Or, alternatively, you tell us the chance you're willing to take of losing it all, and we'll tell you how much bank you need. Fair enough?

Don

Thanks for all the responses. Very interesting reading. So, here's how I have been playing for the last year:

* I play Tunica 8-10 times a month
* Mostly SD, sometimes DD
* SD = no double after split, dealer hits S17
* I NEVER play with more than 2 others at table
* Many times can get a good heads-up game
* I buy-in for $600 per session
* I spread $25 to $100 (1-4 units) - 1 unit at plus 1, 2 units at
plus 2, 3 units at plus 3....etc. Never go over 4 units.
* I play until I win 10 units minimum = $250 profit minimum (always).
* Can take anywhere from 15 minutes to 2 hours max play time to reach

Unfortunately, I don't have the funds to have at least multiple sessions in a bankroll. I am applying my winnings to bills as soon as I get home each trip. However, my goal is to have a $3000 bankroll.

I have been very,lucky/fortunate to win 8 times out of 10. I believe the Canfield system I use is the reason.I kinda look at this as my "second job"!

Thanks for your thoughts here.

Thanks for your insights.

larger spread than 25-100 on a DD game. That spread is fine for SD, but a 3K bank is kinda on the small side.

I see you are applying a stop/loss. I use to do this, it doesn't help, trust me. The only thing stop/loss does is preventing you from getting into the long run.

What's the difference if you lose the money now, or later? A good time to stop is when conditons change, there is heat, you go broke, or you're fatigued.

Best of luck.

Regards,

Forensic

You would think the casinos would be filled with them. Reading a book is not that hard. But advantage play seems too boring to the typical gambler. And non-gamblers don't generally like the idea of investing in ventures that involve casino games. So it is a very non-typical personality type that ends up as an advantage player.

"Unfortunately, I don't have the funds to have at least multiple sessions in a bankroll."

So, are you saying that your buy-in of $600 is your whole bankroll?? you haven't defined your total bank yet. Or, did I miss something?

"I am applying my winnings to bills as soon as I get home each trip. However, my goal is to have a $3000 bankroll."

It's not going to work.

"I have been very lucky/fortunate to win 8 times out of 10."

You can say that again!

"I believe the Canfield system I use is the reason."

No, it isn't. You had it right the first time -- it's luck!!

"I kinda look at this as my "second job"!"

You need to rethink your approach, but it would help if you tried to answer my specific questions above, regarding bank and risk of ruin.

Don

if that's the work you choose to do, and I get awfully tired with the investment analogy that people apply to Blackjack vs other kinds of capital investment. Not to say that these other investitures, such as the stock market, the future's market, or real estate also don't involve wurrrrrrrk!--but folks, Easy Street is no where to be found in Vegas, or any other gaming venue for that matter, and let us never forget it.

Furthermore, risk is only one part to be considered in any investment strategy; the other part being how much pleasure and ease you take in seeing your capital grow. E-A-S-E...that's what its all about Alfalfa--did you squirm too much while you earned it, or did you learn from prior struggles where and how to find an easier way. ( And BTW, would'nt you know that Alfalfa never did learn this lesson, as he died over a nickle and dime argument concerning who was the rightful owner of a hunting rifle! Hmmm?--Reminds me of the fate of a certain number of failed cardcounters. )

Donald Frump, Warren Buck-it, J Paul Giddy et al.,--not a genuis among'em but great INVESTORS all--who found a way to make money work for them instead of the other way around--which, in a nut shell, is what good investment should always be, that is, it ain't no longer sweaty, uneasy, in the pits, hardscrabbl'n, money grubb'n WUUURRRRRRRRRK!!!

I'd say, for what you seem to be after Who-Asked-It, 5000 bucks is quite enough therefore.--Just go to Vegas on your annual sojourn, and ramp those bets like a 10 year-old kid doin wheeley's off a ski jump, say a little prayer, and, as they say, hope for the best--but NEVER be surprised if the worst happens, for if you are surprised you'd being acting as though your ease and pleasure had come too much at the expense of....WURRRRRRRRRRRRRRK! ( Hmmm? Reminds of the fate of a certain number of....)

...and hipper in Taiwan. G

How did you come up with the 500% return. That seems a little high to me. Does this mean you can turn your 20,000 dollar bank roll into 100,000 dollar bankroll in a the course of a year?

Just wondering how you came up with 500% return.

Thanks

He who runs away from the black & white norm into the tumultuous clutches of the blackjack storm.

A lesser fear exchanged for a greater one,

Where the real challenge is, to escape with one's life.

Thank You Don for take time answer Questions.
I also have been play for some time with no bankroll, just play when I got some money(usually about $500 each session).
Would you tell me about how much I need for my bankroll or risk of ruin.
Here is the game I alway play.
SD....s17,d10,no double after split,nm and play all(no wong)at $10-$50.
DD....s17,ds,nm,sc,rsa,play all at $10-$70.
How much BR I,ll need to cover both game?(I've to switch between SD & DD up to with ever avaliable at the moment)
Is $3000 enough?

Anybody please give advice.
THANK YOU.

I don't have BJRM on this computer. Maybe another poster will post the specific ROR.

Regards,

Forensic

Is $3000 big enough for what? Nobody else can tell you what the correct risk of ruin is. You tell them what you want and perhaps they can calculate how much money you need to achieve it. The only real absolute is that if you plan to reinvest winnings and increase bet levels as your bank grows, or cut back after you've lost a bit, you should have a ROR of 13.5% or less. Anything bigger than this will slow your long term growth rate because you will lose half your bank before doubling more than one time in three, which is optimal growth.

There is actually something to be said for different styles. Some people are prone to overbetting and will increase proportionally when they reinvest their winnings. They eventually go broke. These players may be better off spending their winnings immediately. I knew such a player and he was usually nearly broke. But at the end of the year he knew that he had spent more money than he cleared at his job. Obviously he was winning. By the time he went bust he had usually spent more winnings than the size of his original investment. When he spent the winnings he called it "locking in the profit". Nothing wrong with that. I think that the original poster in this thread is doing something like that. The only thing wrong in his case is that it is inconsistent with his stated goals. You do have to figure out what you are trying to do with blackjack.

Blackjack is not work, it's fun. This definition may only apply if your definition of work is making some kind of contribution to society, and not just to making money for yourself. "Ease" and "struggle kinda fall out of the equation.

The "day job" can seem relatively divorced from money, if you're lucky.

BTW, I consider kicking the casinos' butt a nice contribution to society. :-)

Pete, I hope you're writing a book. Now there would be a heckuva contribution.

:: ::