THen the 1/3 will provide the bigger win rate. Whichever game plays the deepest.

One place usually has 2-3 1/2 $300 max going.

Other place usually has 6-7 1/2 $200 max going.

So, I usually choose other place and table select/bum hunt.

Ima start playing more at the $300 max.

I've got a quick bankroll-related question for all the math guys.

Assuming 2/5 NL live pro with $30/hour win-rate and 10k poker bankroll above and beyond 6 months of expenses saved...

If a 2/5 NL reg offers you a 5% overlay on a $1000 coin flip (he pays you $1050 if you win and you only pay him $1000 if you lose), should you take the bet?

Is the small amount of +EV worth the potential damage that it could do to your bankroll?

If it isn't worth it at 10k bankroll, is it worth the risk at 15k bankroll or even 20k bankroll?

I'd do it and my life roll is less than 10k.

Well, I have snap-accepted these kinds of prop bets in the past. I am just wondering if they are -EV to a winning poker pro who increases his risk of ruin significantly. There has got to be some -EV for going busto and taking yourself out of action when you are a profitable poker pro who makes $30/hour.

How many coin flips? I don't think I can suck it up losing just one time.

If you are a good pro I see no problem doing it for fun. Just don't be hurt if you lose 2k

Without crunching numbers the Kelly Criterion says that the largest "coin flip" (55/45 ~ 60/40) you should take for your bankroll is 5% or 500 dollars of a 10k roll. You probably want a ~30k roll to safely do that since the overlay means its 51.2/48.8. This is the basic premise of the 20 BI rule (which still has a significant ROR).

Living expenses are not part of your poker bankroll and are part of your "life roll" which keep the two separate. If you bust your bankroll you probably aren't too keen on dipping into your rent money and will likely look for a stake instead.

Well, I usually like to encourage regs to coin flip with me at the table because I feel that they are likely to tilt more from losing flips than I am.

I still would like a math guy to give me a real answer to my hypothetical question though.

Basically taking small edges for a significant percentage of your betting capacity is much more -EV than not taking the bet.

Think of it like this: the immediate EV of the bet for you is +EV as you stand to net some $ value. However, the net present value of option A (not taking the bet which is immediately -EV compared to taking the bet) is actually less -EV than the net present value of option B (taking the bet) because of increased risk of ruin.

the math is in the wiki, you got a calculator. do it up.

anway I was curious f = (bp-q)/b, b = odds, p = propability winning, q = losing, f = amount of br to bet

((1.05*.5)-.5)/1.05 = .024 so if you are a betting 1k, you want a 41,666$ bankroll to maximize your bankroll growth in the long run.

Also people often say we should push all edges but if you do the math it takes so many iterations to actualize a very small edge in poker it is basically just a variance trap that you won't ever realize in your life time.

11t,

Thanks for the analysis. Seems very accurate.

I guess that I have been overly degenerate in these prop bets then because I have been giving even money coin flip bets to fish in order to keep them entertained. Basically, I adhere to the DGAF school of giving gamble action to fish to keep the game atmosphere light and gambly. My past experience also indicates that certain fish and regs will start tilting if they get stuck on coin flips, so there is often +EV metagame benefits for me to do coin flip prop bets because I don't tilt when I get stuck.

FWIW, I have done coin flip prop bets for significantly more than than 1k in the past.

Recently, however, certain regs have been offering me odds on my prop bets, so I was curious about the bankroll implications.

11t,

I guess your analysis also applies to high-variance slightly +EV poker spots for winning live pros who aren't over-rolled for their games.

Most 2/5 live pros probably operate on 15k bankrolls or less (minus 6 months of saved expenses). Therefore, they can't really afford to be taking too many slightly +EV spots in 1k+ pots, I guess.

Interesting concept to consider.

ha really makes you think about the profitability of playing PLO live amirite?

Run it 2x please.

and like all of these analysis are measured against "optimal" decisions, although iirc Kelly would argue that it is much more profitable to take the bet for under the criterion value than over where if you imagine a bet right at f* and the bet under the value of (f* - X) and a bet over the value (f* + X) where like Risk/Reward of (f* - X) = Y you would get Risk/Reward of (f* + X) = Y*(greater risk).

Basically I am saying that risk/reward is much higher over f* than under f* where the curve is very flat up to f* and f* is likely an inflection point and it rises exponentially (might be a different gradient) after that

Also interesting is how this affects "shot taking" if you actually have to live off your roll.

i am totally averse to showdown/coin flips. I do however push any perceived edge in game. Some kind of mental switch for me I guess. Helps my image as well. In game. I don't mess around on the side.

I love doing Roll'ems (everyone puts some amount of money in pre without looking at their cards and then no more action) but I dislike non poker betting at the poker table. I also like board props and the 72 game.
Floor often stops us when we try to get these going tho.

I do play the color flop game for small amounts if the action is dying or im losing focus. I run so bad in it though.

A fun game I have played a few times with multiple people is you all pick a card. If one of that card comes out everyone has to give you $5, two of that card is $10 a person. Three is $25 and Four is $50.
Cool thing is if quads are on board and there is 5 guys in, you could win $200.

We started a bounty game at Red Rock where you get $5 for everyone you felt from anyone that's participating, and you pay everyone else in the game $5 when you lose an all-in (don't need to get felted on the losing side). Last time one of the dealers told the floor and they told us not to do it anymore since we were passing chips around the table. Fun game though...great when you win, really sucks when you lose a few of them.

Define felt, do they have to leave the table? Or can they just lose all their chips and reload? It would really suck if you lost an All in on your last buyin in you pocket and were done playing for the day so you had to go to the ATM to pay the other players.

Anybody care to guess a reasonable amount of hrs before putting any stock in figures derived from playing entirely PokerPro tables? Seems 1k hrs is standard for live $1$/$2 (which in my experience is ~28 hands/hr), where PokerPro comes in around 45ish. Between 600-700 I'm guessing given the difference in hands/hr but thought I'd ask.

Thinking of shotting $2/$5 but currently only +$6900 over 240 hrs ($28.81/hr) and approx 10.8k hands. Really feel like winrate should be north of $30 given the player pool in my room and the fact that a good chunk of my play has been admittedly b-game prior to the last half dozen sessions I've taken more seriously. Obviously I have no tipping to worry about and I'm playing considerably more hands/hr so winrates should be higher than a normal live $1/$2, just not sure by how much. Anyone have any experience in this environment?

I like games like this. Or Trips/Quads when playing Omaha.

It's a good neutral EV way of promoting an "action" image and helps keep your focus on the board and the game even when you're not in the hand.

Don't have to leave the table, they just have to lose all their chips, reload is fine. Making someone pull money out of their pocket after they get busted is the best part of the game. People have gone to the ATM to pay the other players in the game before...it's great.

EX: I have $500 and beat someone in an all-in hand that only has $200. If there are 4 people in the game, they would each pay me $5. If the person with $200 beats me, I have to pay the other 4 people $5 each. If I only have $200 and the other person has $500 and I lose, I would have to pull $20 out of my wallet to pay the other 4 people.

Floor considered it adding to our stacks which you can't do if you have more than $300, so they told us to keep it off the table and use cash instead of chips if we were going to do it. That made it less fun.

You can't have more than 4-5 people in the game though otherwise the all-ins against other people that are in the game wind up evening out money-wise and nothing happens.

30/hr at 1/2 on your B-game? You should be playing 2/5, man your good doing that at 1/2. Stop wasting your time at 1/2.

What if someone goes All In for like $30 and you call and lose? Do you still have to pay everyone $5?