| |
BGonline.org Forums
Backgammon vs Poker bankroll calculations
Posted By: Daniel Murphy In Response To: Backgammon vs Poker bankroll calculations (Stanley E. Richards)
Date: Saturday, 13 October 2007, at 8:37 p.m.
Well, let's calculate the rake effect -- it's huge -- and make a guess at a comparable poker game.
For example, if you're playing at BGRoom and paying their basic 3.9% rake, and an average game is worth 2.3 times the stake, and you're playing 12 games/hour for $5/point, and your expected win is 0.2 ppg, then
your expected win for 1 hour of play not counting rake is $5*12*0.2 = $12
but the rake is $5*2players*2.3*12*0.039 = $10.76, of which approximately
(a little hand-waving here, but it shouldn't matter much -- I'm assuming that if your win rate is 0.2 ppg then you win 3 games out of 5 and 7.2 games out of 12 and every game is worth 2.3 points)
$5*2*2.3*7.2*0.039 = $6.46 comes out of your session win and approximately
$5*2*2.3*4.8*0.039 = $4.30 is added to your opponent's session loss,
which leaves you with $5.54 for the hour-long session of backgammon.
Is that the return for which you wrote that "an approximate $500 bankroll" is sufficient? By the way, what risk of ruin did you calculate? I (obviously) haven't checked the math, and 100 points seems an insufficient bankroll (note Gary Wong's comment about backgammon's "long tails") but let's suppose you're right that $500 is enough.
So then what kind of poker do we have to play to net ~$5.54 per hour?
I'd suggest f.ex. small stakes Limit Hold'em, assuming B&M winrate of 2 BB/hour at 30 hands/hour ~= online win rate of 5 BB/hour at 75 hands/hour. Then a $0.50/$1 game is almost large enough, and your cited article on "bankroll requirements" suggests that a $345 bankroll is sufficient to reduce your risk of ruin to 0.1%.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.