What is the Risk of Ruin in this scenario?

[Reef]

Poker Pro who plays for a living and makes 4-5 BB/100 at NL400 6-max, 4 tabling mostly. Say he takes $10k and takes a shot at NL1000 6-max. He would first be single tabling and at most 2 tabling until he felt comfortable to move up. This person has played maybe 40 hours of NL600 and has dabbled in NL1000 before, but for less than 2k hands.

What is his risk of ruin? Assume he does not move down limits if his roll drops X%.

How about with a $15k roll?

[dogmeat]

Need more data!

If the player is a full-time pro who beats the NL$400 game for 5 big blinds ($20 and hour) over 4-tables, then he has $10,000 available to try in the NL$1000 game each month (if we assume he plays 125 hours a month). With this income, I would say he can take a shot every few months - and not be in bad shape if the $10k is lost.

If you are saying he is taking his entire roll to play the $1000 game, and will be busted if he loses - the element of ruin is probably 90%. $15K roll, probably 65% - and this is assuming they are able to keep from tilting it off after the first couple times they get shown miracle hands at the $1k game.

This of course means noting if they don't have a good 100k hands at the $400 game.

Dogmeat [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[RikaKazak]

I hope you're being sarcastic about the %, cause if you think those numbers are true, I think you're WAY OFF!