Multitabling Risk of Ruin

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is no mathematical reason to require a larger bankroll while multitabling if your win rate and standard deviation stay the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

So are you saying if you multitabled 25/50 NL you would have a the same risk of ruin and downswings?

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm making a mathematical assertion. The same bankroll formula applies to playing one table and multitabling:

adequate bankroll = c * standard deviation^2 / win rate

where c is a number that depends on your risk tolerance and ability to move down to lower stakes if you hit a bad streak. Most people seem comfortable using a value of c between 2 and 4. Note that this formula does not involve the number of tables you are playing.

You seem to be arguing that this answer to the original poster is meaningless, since your win rate might change, and I'm not guessing how your win rate changes. I disagree. Each person can test this for himself, and people have reported many different results.

[ QUOTE ]
I pointed out in my first post that this question is entirely too broad.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, it is not, and I gave an informative answer.

If you find you are having much larger downswings while multitabling (or playing shorthanded), this is an indication that your win rate is lower. However, this is not the case for everyone.