What do you think? I have read that you need a bankroll of at least 100x your maximum bet. So, for instance, if my max bet is $200, I would need $20,000 in order to survive several cold shoes.
Don, I can really use your help here.
Thank you.
i was taught the game by the donald. so i don't dare answer for him but if you check his book i think you will find he reccomends 400 units of bank and a 1 to 2x6 spread. with correlation that is not 1 to 12 but 1 to around .75x12 or 9. so he thinks around 40 top bets playing his way.
i find this to be way too much variance for me. i currently have 400 max bets in my bank (calculated the same way). HOWEVER i play a much lower score game for cover.
anyway this game has a way of biting you in the butt and i like to keep my swings to a much smaller % of my bankroll.
ultimately it depends on how much of your net worth the bankroll represents and your risk tolerance
Nothing to argue with here. You have to be comfortable with risk of ruin. My 400 units was always based, more or less, on the fact that, if I lost the entire bank (I never did), I could always replace it fairly easily and quickly. So, in reality, maybe 400 units wasn't, truly, my "bankroll."
In any event, for any player, it behooves him to simply plug in the numbers and generate a risk of ruin. For some very good games, especially when back-counted, 400 units is MORE than adequate, in my opinion. For mediocre, and/or "play-all" games, you need considerably more bank.
Don
I play by never letting my "big" bet become more than 2% of my total bank. Thus, if my bank is $4000, I will not make a bet bigger than $80. This will give me an 8-1 spread on a $10 double-deck game, for an example. Opinions?????
All games have different parameters. For example, for a 62/104, das, s17 game, you need about $5,000 worth of bank to bet optimally in the manner you describe, if using hi-lo and the I18. For 70/104, $4,200 works fine.
Some prefer lower ROR than 13.5%. In that case, you'de need more bank.
Don
