Stop Win/Loss Limits and Bankroll

If someone has already posted about this topic, please send me link as I was not able to find it.

My question is:

What is the best recommended stop win/loss limit per session based on your bankroll and what should my bets be based on my bankroll?

I've read the benefits to establishing a session bankroll and then establishing a win/loss limit. I realize that the casino is happy to take less than 1% (I'm sure somebody can tell me the exact percent.) of the total bets and will still make millions over the course of a year.

But, I'm the average guy who has a designated bankroll and wants to gamble in Vegas for a few days. Hopefully break even or make a little money and have fun doing it.

If I want to minimize my losses and leave a table a winner when I have the opportunity, what would you say is the best bankroll strategy?

What bankroll strategy will help me to play the longest with my designated bankroll?

Anybody have some good ideas on this?

Quote: JimmyMac

If someone has already posted about this topic, please send me link as I was not able to find it.

My question is:

What is the best recommended stop win/loss limit per session based on your bankroll and what should my bets be based on my bankroll?

I've read the benefits to establishing a session bankroll and then establishing a win/loss limit. I realize that the casino is happy to take less than 1% (I'm sure somebody can tell me the exact percent.) of the total bets and will still make millions over the course of a year.

But, I'm the average guy who has a designated bankroll and wants to gamble in Vegas for a few days. Hopefully break even or make a little money and have fun doing it.

If I want to minimize my losses and leave a table a winner when I have the opportunity, what would you say is the best bankroll strategy?

What bankroll strategy will help me to play the longest with my designated bankroll?

Anybody have some good ideas on this?

Your bankroll will last longest by making flat bets at the table minimum. Find a $5 or $3 table. Remember the casino takes x% per BET, not of your overall bankroll.

Regardless of the size of your bankroll, this will make it last the longest at any particular game. If you choose what you want to play, play good blackjack, baccarat or passline (no odds) at craps. Avoid double-0 roulette or Sic-Bo or the Big-wheel.

Quote: JimmyMac

If someone has already posted about this topic, please send me link as I was not able to find it.
My question is:
What is the best recommended stop win/loss limit per session based on your bankroll and what should my bets be based on my bankroll?
I've read the benefits to establishing a session bankroll and then establishing a win/loss limit. I realize that the casino is happy to take less than 1% (I'm sure somebody can tell me the exact percent.) of the total bets and will still make millions over the course of a year.
But, I'm the average guy who has a designated bankroll and wants to gamble in Vegas for a few days. Hopefully break even or make a little money and have fun doing it.
If I want to minimize my losses and leave a table a winner when I have the opportunity, what would you say is the best bankroll strategy?
What bankroll strategy will help me to play the longest with my designated bankroll?
Anybody have some good ideas on this?

Here's a suggested methodology:

First, define what a "session" is, and stick to it. For instance, if you want to have three two-hour sessions per day, don't play any more than that in a given day, REGARDLESS OF RESULTS. When a session is over (time-wise), QUIT until the next session, and ensure that you have a meaningful break between sessions--walk around and smell the flowers (easy to do if you are in the Bellagio), people-watch, have something to eat, etc.

Overall: figure out how many sessions there will be in your entire visit. Take that number of sessions and divide your total bankroll by that number. You now have your per- session bankroll. Figure out how many decisions there will be in a session--for example, if you are playing blackjack, there will be about one decision (outcome) per minute. This is 120 decisions, and you can figure that you will win at least SOME of those decisions, so use some smaller number, say, 40, to figure out your bet size. Now divide your session bankroll by that number to give you your bet size.

Next step: physically divide your total bankroll into session bankrolls--put each session bankroll into a separate envelope, or something. After a session is over, cash out, put your money in that envelope, and TAKE THAT MONEY OUT OF PLAY FOR THE REST OF THE TRIP. Whether you've doubled it, or lost all but $5, whatever--just TAKE IT OUT OF PLAY. I actually used to mail the envelopes to myself when I did this.

The above method ensures that you will never be betting over your head. It also removes the temptation to bet bigger because you've been winning, or because you've been losing, both of which are slippery slopes that lead to disaster.

For example: total bankroll $1000, long weekend (three days). Two two-hour sessions per day. Session bankroll: $165. Maximum bet: $5 ($3 would be better). Shade the session bankroll number a bit low, because you have to figure in tips for the cocktail waitresses and the dealers.

This may seem like an unusually harsh and limiting method, but the way the casino kills you is that you make so many bets, over and over and over. This method limits your exposure, and pretty much guarantees that you'll come away with some money, no matter what. It also helps you lock up profits without exposing them to future risk.

I like that methodology. As a relatively novice gambler, I've been searching for something like that myself.

I haven't been able to able to do a per session bankroll. I do a daily limit. The next morning I take whatever I had left and put that away. I do generally take a little from that if I was up for the next day, but certainly not the entire amount I was up, and absolutely not into the initial bankroll for the previous day.


Win/Loss limits to me are more about myself getting pissed off vs actually preserving capital.

Loss Limits - I have set amounts I take to a BJ or craps table. BJ it is ~10-12 hands, craps it is 40 times the minimum bet(400 for a $10 table). I do pass/come/full odds bets. When I used to do pass/odds/place bets my buyin was probably half that.

Win Limits - BJ is double my money. Craps depends greatly on how long I've been there. If I hit a long shooter 5 minutes in and triple my money, I'm gone. If I've been there an hour+ and doubled my money, I'll leave.


But again, those limits are there solely to make sure I keep to my strategy and don't get pissed off. I may put 200 on a BJ table, go up to 400, leave and then 5 minutes later go to another BJ table with a new 200. The simply fact that I don't have all 400 out there means I'm not going to get stupid and try $50/hand bets and I have enforced another loss limit on myself. Leaving the table was always the hardest thing for me, and resetting the stop loss is one of the easiest things for me to follow now.




I love breaking up my play. I will sit at a table for 15-60+ minutes and unless I'm having just an amazing time I'll generally get up and walk around a little bit. Just walking to the casino next door just killed 10-15 minutes and then finding a new table killed another 5. Going to go get a little snack can kill another 20. If I sit down at 3 tables in 3 casinos vs 1 table in 1 casino in the same time frame, I probably just played 30-40% less hands/rolls.



Not sure if this is possible for you, but I will go to lower limit tables at times. Obviously if your bankroll says you can only play on $5 tables, not much you can do there, but if you are normally at $10+ tables, no reason at times you can't go to a lower table. Even heading to something like the $1 craps table at Casino Royal isn't a terrible idea if that is your game.

For me that is even more possible because I actually enjoy people watching and seeing the different reactions at the different tables. A casino like Belagio at a $25 craps table is drastically different than the $1 craps table at Casino Royal. I know people have different tastes and don't find it entertaining at all. Many people get entertainment out of only the winning and winning $5 on a hand of blackjack does nothing for them.



Last suggestion is something a few people in my family do. They mainly play slots so using that as an example but it would really work with any game. They will have their daily limit. They put a 20 into a machine. 20 minutes later they are up to $50 and cash out. The initial 20 they put back into their daily limit and continue to gamble with it the rest of the day. The 30, they put away and don't touch it until the end of the trip. There is nothing to stop you from dipping into that, but generally I think people will be willing to stop when they see their wallet is empty for the day. You still have to make your money last, but at least this makes you put winnings away and then at the end of the trip you leave with something.

Another idea in the same vein - bring your bankroll in cash and pay cash for your meals. It's usually more rewarding to say "I went to Vegas for three days and had a great steak one night and an awesome buffet the next" vs. saying "I went to Vegas for three days and won $100 which I'm going to use to pay the heating bill." Even better, if you do this and you leave with more cash than you came with, you know you're a winner.

This obviously doesn't apply if your average bet is already the cost of a meal -- I'm assuming a red-chip player, not a black-chip player (for whom bringing a cash bankroll would be unwieldy).

Thanks guys... Okay, I'm going to do my best to stick to this plan. It's hard because I have a habit of gambling until I win big or losing it all.. Typically, I lose it all.


But - I have my new strategy ready to go. Doing my best to keep the house edge to a minimum.

Going to:

Place to play the Doey/Don't for $25 and then lay full odds. Every so often, might throw down $50 on the Don't Come after I already have a point established. I figure if the 7 hits on my Don't Come, i still make a profit off my Lay bet and maybe I'll get lucky and have 2 numbers and have the shooter 7 out.

Heading to Vegas tonight for 3 nights.

Wish me luck!

Quote: JimmyMac

Thanks guys... Okay, I'm going to do my best to stick to this plan. It's hard because I have a habit of gambling until I win big or losing it all.. Typically, I lose it all.


But - I have my new strategy ready to go. Doing my best to keep the house edge to a minimum.

Going to:

Place to play the Doey/Don't for $25 and then lay full odds.

By playing doey-don't, you're not keeping the house edge to a minimum, because you're paying two ev's to get your point up.

Quote: JimmyMac

Every so often, might throw down $50 on the Don't Come after I already have a point established. I figure if the 7 hits on my Don't Come, i still make a profit off my Lay bet and maybe I'll get lucky and have 2 numbers and have the shooter 7 out.

But, if the 7 hits on your DC, you offset some of the winnings on your laid odds. So, you have two hedges going, the doey-don't and the occasional DC, which isn't always a hedge, of course. OTOH, laying full odds (which are?) is a high-variance game, and laying the long end can kill you if a shooter hits a few points early in your session. So, it seems to me you're sort of "pulling in two directions".

You haven't mentioned what your session bankroll generally is, so I can't comment on the levels of those bets.

Quote: JimmyMac

Heading to Vegas tonight for 3 nights.

Wish me luck!

Good luck,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA

Quote: mkl654321

The above method ensures that you will never be betting over your head. It also removes the temptation to bet bigger because you've been winning, or because you've been losing, both of which are slippery slopes that lead to disaster.

Try, "...that can lead to disaster". Betting bigger when you're winning is advocated by lots of experienced players, and is the cornerstone of the methods of "The Dice Doctor". Of course, progressive betting often gives back money you've already won; it also increases your expected loss, which is always edge * action. OTOH, it also takes better advantage of a hot roll. On the thread about the world-record craps roll, somebody was very surprised by the low table profit on the 154-roll hand, saying that he/she would have won a lot more, i.e. with progressive betting. If you start with some reasonable bankroll, something that won't hurt you greatly to lose, then you get ahead, the question becomes: am I satisfied with these winnings, or do I want to "go for it" and try to win twice as much. If you increase your bets, lose your profits and your starting bankroll, as well, is that a "disaster"? Is it any more of a "disaster" than if you never got ahead in the first place?

Of course, you might continue to have good luck and win more than the guy standing next to you that made the same bets but didn't increase them.

Mkl persists in making these absolute statements like "you will lose", "betting bigger...leads to disaster", etc.

If you start with a bankroll (or a loss limit) that you can afford to lose, then you can't really have a "disaster", it seems to me.

I have a blog post about "Five Guys", comparing flat betting, progress-on-a-win, progress-on-a-loss, loss limit and win goal:

https://wizardofvegas.com/member/goatcabin/blog/#post38

Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA

Quote: goatcabin

Mkl persists in making these absolute statements like "you will lose", "betting bigger...leads to disaster", etc.

Driving the Titanic into an iceberg was definitely a disaster, even though many people survived it.

What is dangerous is the tendency to increase bets when you're losing, and in fact, the WORSE outcome is to win as a result of that tactic. That will just reinforce that behavior, so next time you're losing, you'll just tell yourself, "Well, all I have to do is make bigger and bigger bets and I'll eventually get even".

And I draw very little distinction between the total absolute and the practical absolute. If I say, "The casino will win", that obviously is not a certainty, but it might as well be for all intents and purposes, n'est ce pas?

Quote: blount2000

I like that methodology. As a relatively novice gambler, I've been searching for something like that myself.

Its old as the hills. Thats where MKL probably found it, he was walking in the hills and stumbled over it and hit his head.

Quote: EvenBob

Its old as the hills. Thats where MKL probably found it, he was walking in the hills and stumbled over it and hit his head.

I can just feeeeeeel the loooove........

Quote: mkl654321

I can just feeeeeeel the loooove........

Was I wrong?

Quote: blount2000

I like that methodology. As a relatively novice gambler, I've been searching for something like that myself.

Sounds nice doesn't it? The guy DOES APPEAL to novices, even when he's making it up on the go....no, ESPECIALLY when he's making it all up on the go.

Quote: JerryLogan

Sounds nice doesn't it? The guy DOES APPEAL to novices, even when he's making it up on the go....no, ESPECIALLY when he's making it all up on the go.

It did sound nice to me. Is it not a good methodology for a novice?

Quote: mkl654321

What is dangerous is the tendency to increase bets when you're losing,

I quote you: " It also removes the temptation to bet bigger because you've been winning, or because you've been losing, both of which are slippery slopes that lead to disaster."

Quote: mkl654321

and in fact, the WORSE outcome is to win as a result of that tactic. That will just reinforce that behavior, so next time you're losing, you'll just tell yourself, "Well, all I have to do is make bigger and bigger bets and I'll eventually get even".

Some people may mislead themselves that way, but others realize that they were just lucky to come back to winning as the result of making bigger bets when behind. Here again, if you are losing your bankroll, it doesn't really matter whether you lose it by keeping your bets at the same level or by increasing them. If you increase them and get lucky, you will gain back more quickly than if you didn't increase. With a set bankroll (or loss limit) you can't make "bigger and bigger bets" anyway. You are assuming a high degree of ignorance when you say "That will just reinforce that behavior"; of course, many gamblers are that ignorant.

Quote: mkl654321

And I draw very little distinction between the total absolute and the practical absolute. If I say, "The casino will win", that obviously is not a certainty, but it might as well be for all intents and purposes, n'est ce pas?

Yes, but that does not apply to individual players, and you keep applying it to them.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA

Quote: blount2000

It did sound nice to me. Is it not a good methodology for a novice?

You may be relatively new to this board, but if JerryLogan doesn't like something, that's about the strongest possible recommendation in its FAVOR.

Quote: EvenBob

Was I wrong?

That I found a bankroll management system lying on the ground while I was out walking in the hills? Yes.

"""I quote you: " It also removes the temptation to bet bigger because you've been winning, or because you've been losing, both of which are slippery slopes that lead to disaster."""

goatcabin, you'll find this clown puts his foot into his mouth, and gets caught, at a very uncomfortable rate for other readers. And if he didn't do it on purpose then he'd only have a problem 1/2 the time.

Quote: goatcabin

I quote you: " It also removes the temptation to bet bigger because you've been winning, or because you've been losing, both of which are slippery slopes that lead to disaster."
Some people may mislead themselves that way, but others realize that they were just lucky to come back to winning as the result of making bigger bets when behind. Here again, if you are losing your bankroll, it doesn't really matter whether you lose it by keeping your bets at the same level or by increasing them. If you increase them and get lucky, you will gain back more quickly than if you didn't increase. With a set bankroll (or loss limit) you can't make "bigger and bigger bets" anyway. You are assuming a high degree of ignorance when you say "That will just reinforce that behavior"; of course, many gamblers are that ignorant.
Yes, but that does not apply to individual players, and you keep applying it to them.

I think we differ more in terminology than in points of view.

Obviously, a player can win, not only DESPITE engaging in progressive betting, but actually BECAUSE of doing that. However, it is more likely (assuming a -EV game) that increasing bet amounts will result in a WORSE outcome (than if the player had continued making the same size bets) than it is that the bet increases will result in a BETTER outcome. I assume we agree on that---that's simple probability mathematics at work.

I have seen, time and time and time again, a player lose his entire bankroll--for the day, for the week, for his lifetime, whichever--because he/she adopted the "increase your bets when you're losing" method. And yes, I view it as a disaster if you were playing a game at a modest bet level that gave you virtually no chance of suffering a major loss, and then you suddenly went berserk in a misguided attempt to "get even" (misguided, especially because "getting even" is illusory anyway), and dumped your entire bankroll in ten minutes. Those are the people you see sitting morosely on the bench in the bus loading area, trying to kill the next five hours.

I suppose that you and I view a "loss of bankroll" differently---you consider it pretty much inevitable, because everybody's playing -EV and that's like death and taxes: the only question is when, not if. Since I'm primarily an AP, I view loss of bankroll as a disaster---it's working capital that you MUST preserve if you're going to win. I've known plenty of talented APs who overbet their bankroll, and went busted even though they had no real exposure to RoR--until they started playing at higher denominations/bet sizes.

Of course, "the casinos always win" doesn't apply to individuals, but....so what?

Quote: mkl654321

I think we differ more in terminology than in points of view.

Obviously, a player can win, not only DESPITE engaging in progressive betting, but actually BECAUSE of doing that. However, it is more likely (assuming a -EV game) that increasing bet amounts will result in a WORSE outcome (than if the player had continued making the same size bets) than it is that the bet increases will result in a BETTER outcome. I assume we agree on that---that's simple probability mathematics at work.

Absolutely. At any point in time and bankroll, if you increase your bet and the guy next to you doesn't, your expectation is "worse" than his (higher expected loss). OTOH, if you are making the same bets and have good luck, you will win more than the flat bettor, and that's what some people want, in full understanding of the consequences. Of course, that same reasoning should tell you never to start playing in the first place, because you're more likely to lose the next bet than win it (lay bets aside). People play for different reasons -- fun, excitement, cameraderie -- and the hope that they will win; it's not a forlorn hope, either, because of variance.

Quote: mkl654321

I have seen, time and time and time again, a player lose his entire bankroll--for the day, for the week, for his lifetime, whichever--because he/she adopted the "increase your bets when you're losing" method. And yes, I view it as a disaster if you were playing a game at a modest bet level that gave you virtually no chance of suffering a major loss, and then you suddenly went berserk in a misguided attempt to "get even" (misguided, especially because "getting even" is illusory anyway),

"Getting even" is not illusory, here again, for the individual player. You can get even for a session or for a lifetime, with different probabilities, of course.

Quote: mkl654321

and dumped your entire bankroll in ten minutes. Those are the people you see sitting morosely on the bench in the bus loading area, trying to kill the next five hours.

Perhaps. I have had sessions when I was down half my session bankroll and come back to have a winning session, and I didn't even increase my bets. If I had, I would have won even more. It's really the same issue as progressing when you're winning - if I increase my bets and win, I will come back quicker, but it's more likely that I will just lose faster. It's a choice the individual player should make in full knowledge of both sides of the coin.

Quote: mkl654321

I suppose that you and I view a "loss of bankroll" differently---you consider it pretty much inevitable, because everybody's playing -EV and that's like death and taxes: the only question is when, not if.

No, no, no!! It is NOT inevitable for any player. You persist in ignoring the difference between all players and individual players.

Quote: mkl654321

Since I'm primarily an AP, I view loss of bankroll as a disaster---it's working capital that you MUST preserve if you're going to win. I've known plenty of talented APs who overbet their bankroll, and went busted even though they had no real exposure to RoR--until they started playing at higher denominations/bet sizes.

That is the "other side of the coin". Obviously, if you believe you have an advantage, your outlook is going to be different; you do NOT want variance, because it increases your chance of losing, not of winning.

Quote: mkl654321

Of course, "the casinos always win" doesn't apply to individuals, but....so what?

So, individuals can win, that's what.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA

Quote: goatcabin

If you increase your bets, lose your profits and your starting bankroll, as well, is that a "disaster"? Is it any more of a "disaster" than if you never got ahead in the first place?

Yes, because you lost more of your money! As soon as the casino hands you that red chip, it's your money! If you want to bet more, that's fine, but if you bet more, you lose more!

This is also why I think the notion of "the casino's money" is a little silly too; the casino's money is in the racks, not your hands. Having the casino's money in your hands would be called "stealing".

Of course, to a certain extent this is all semantics, and I'll press my bets on occasion, if I'm feelin' lucky. I do realize I'm risking more of my bankroll, though.

Edit: woah, looking at a way older post in this thread and I didn't realize it... apologies.

Quote: goatcabin

"Getting even" is not illusory, here again, for the individual player. You can get even for a session or for a lifetime, with different probabilities, of course.

It's illusory in every circumstance except that where you have just made the last bet you will ever make in your life. Again, there is NO reality attached to "sessions" or "stopping points" or any other arbitrary division of your total lifetime play. You may be "even" for this day, or this week, or the portion of your life from birth up to this moment, but what real significance does that have?

Quote: mkl654321

It's illusory in every circumstance except that where you have just made the last bet you will ever make in your life. Again, there is NO reality attached to "sessions" or "stopping points" or any other arbitrary division of your total lifetime play. You may be "even" for this day, or this week, or the portion of your life from birth up to this moment, but what real significance does that have?

"Getting even" is simply a fact, whether you're talking about a session, a visit to Vegas, a year or a lifetime. If I say, "I've been playing craps for 30 years, I've kept close track and I'm even", what's the illusion? (It's more likely to be a lie, of course. >:-) It doesn't mean I think I have "beaten" the game or that I expect to stay ahead if I keep playing. If it's true, it's just a fact. If somebody gets behind in a session and then catches up to even and ends the session, that doesn't mean he/she thinks it means more than it does, or that it isn't just one small part of a lifetime's play. Sometimes it's just satisfying to be down and then catch up, so you take your bankroll and "live to play another day".
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA