Quote:Mission146If the story has a moral, then I think the moral is that the best risk of ruin is 0.0000000000001% Risk of Ruin, then you functionally don't even have to worry about any of this.

link to original post

That's probably true, but not necessarily realistic. The big players often raise their expectations such that even their huge session bankrolls don't always equate to no risk of ruin when considered against the max bet allowed.

Quote:Mission146

If the story has a moral, then I think the moral is that the best risk of ruin is 0.0000000000001% Risk of Ruin, then you functionally don't even have to worry about any of this.

link to original post

Thank for working up the examples. I never do anything where my RoR is much above zero, so I seldom mess with these RoR calculations.

I often have to worry about having enough cash on hand for a particular play. Whether its earning hurdle bonuses, playing leaderboards, of taking down must hit progressives, the loss in EV for running out of cash can be very large. Most of the time, I do not have accurate information about the probability distribution for the game at hand, so I have to make a guess based on the likely variance.

Quote:MentalQuote:Mission146

If the story has a moral, then I think the moral is that the best risk of ruin is 0.0000000000001% Risk of Ruin, then you functionally don't even have to worry about any of this.

link to original post

Thank for working up the examples. I never do anything where my RoR is much above zero, so I seldom mess with these RoR calculations.

I often have to worry about having enough cash on hand for a particular play. Whether its earning hurdle bonuses, playing leaderboards, of taking down must hit progressives, the loss in EV for running out of cash can be very large. Most of the time, I do not have accurate information about the probability distribution for the game at hand, so I have to make a guess based on the likely variance.

link to original post

Slot progressives, I take it?

There are ways that you can customize the Beating Bonuses simulator to give you something fairly reasonable if you want to make worst-case scenario assumptions, imo. I like to play around with it sometimes; the main thing is that you have to sort of standardize Free Games, which isn't ideal, because Free Games can have a wide variety of ($$$) results all on their own within the probability of just hitting Free Games to begin with.

When I sometimes play around, I start with the assumption that the machine pays whatever the minimum is for that jurisdiction, or 80%, whichever higher. Without knowing anything else, I figure Free Games (in total) makes up about 20%-30% of the base RTP on the game and then I just goof around with probabilities for, "High tier," standardized Free Games results, "Middle Tier," and, "Garbage Tier," standardized.

What you end up with is obviously still not going to be a very accurate reflection, but it probably ends up being basically within reason and it's kind of fun to play around with anyway.

Another thing you can do is use any known paytable/probability distributions for similar (known) games as a baseline for other games and then tweak it from there.

I can't emphasize enough that it's far from perfect, but it's better than nothing.

As fas as the point Mental made about a higher ror not meaning a higher bet - the way I always understood it and played it is that if you accept a 2% ror then that means that your max bet should be 2% of your BR

.

Quote:lilredroosterGreat answers and discussion guys - thx a lot

As fas as the point Mental made about a higher ror not meaning a higher bet - the way I always understood it and played it is that if you accept a 2% ror then that means that your max bet should be 2% of your BR

.

link to original post

I think there are many more factors involved, although that may be close for some games.

Quote:lilredroosterGreat answers and discussion guys - thx a lot

As fas as the point Mental made about a higher ror not meaning a higher bet - the way I always understood it and played it is that if you accept a 2% ror then that means that your max bet should be 2% of your BR

link to original post

There are several rules of thumb about RoR that gloss over the very difficult problem of calculating a RoR for an arbitrary PDF. The 2% rule might apply for low-variance games like BJ or coin flipping. I rarely play low-variance games. If I need to know a session RoR, I do Monte Carlo sims. The RoR formula is really only good for low-risk games that tend towards a normal distribution very quickly. I have never used it.

If you play DK Rocket at max payoff, you have a 1 in 1030 chance of hitting a 999:1 payoff. If you bet 2% of your bankroll on DK Rocket with enough cashback to make it slightly +EV, you have a 95% chance of going broke, not 2%.

I have heard of edge over odd as a rule of thumb for Kelly betting. Your rule of thumb doesn't even have edge built into it, so it cannot be generally applicable. If you edge is negative, your RoR is 100% no matter how small your bet is.

Quote:Ace2For low-edge games, your RoR will be very close to double the probability of finishing the session with a busted bankroll. This is true for any variance level according to the Ace2 Conjecture

link to original post

Risk of ruin is defined for an infinite series of bets, What do you mean by 'finishing the session'? If a session is short enough, you can never bust.

I know a lot of folks mean something different when they talk about RoR. Risk of ruin as defined by Wikipedia, is the probability of busting a single finite bankroll before making infinite money from a +EV game.

I believe the link from Don Schlesinger's book "Blackjack Attack" gives an excellent explanation or ror for blackjack - the guy is truly great on bj imho

obviously, ror will be very different - and can get - I would presume - extremely complicated - for other games such as machine games with high variance

https://www.blackjackincolor.com/blackjackrisk1.htm

.