Your ENTIRE bankroll on AA...do you do it?

[Izverg04]

[ QUOTE ]

Another post commented: well, what happens when you win, do you do it again? It brings up an interesting point, because of course the expected value of taking this proposition to infinity is that you'll eventually go broke (and most likely in the first 10 such 'double up' scenarios).

So the scenario is a little flawed. But as a one-time shot, i'd put my entire online bankroll on AA all-in preflop in a heartbeat.

[/ QUOTE ]
This a good illustration that everyone who said Yes uses an artificial definition of "bankroll". When you win, the wins are added to your bankroll, right? So if you call the amount of money that you put initially on the line "bankroll", it is now doubled, and since you agreed to put your "bankroll" on the line, you'll put it again and again until you lose it.

The reason you are willing to put what you call "bankroll" on AA is because it is a small fraction of your bankroll. When you double it up a couple of times, this amount becomes a much larger fraction of your bankroll, and so you are no longer willing to put it on AA.

Personally, I use Kelly/20 betting, and I'd put at most 8% of my bankroll on the line -- independent of the size of my bankroll.

[teddyFBI]

I don't deny that perhaps I'm using a different definition of "bankroll".

If you framed the question -- as many here are attempting to do -- would you wager on AA (or any 80 - 85% game of chance) with the understanding that not only would you lose your entire poker bankroll, but you would be bound never to play poker again (or even not play for the next 5 years), I would not take it. MicroBob is correct that I'm simply not willing to take a 20% chance of being unable to make my steady poker income.

But of course that scenario is flawed (depending on your def. of bankroll, i suppose). If you extrapolate the hypothetical to a very real real-life decision, though -- and for me that scenario looks like this:

- Would I put my entire accumulated poker winnings, perhaps $110,000, on AA (or any 80% favorite game of chance), with the understanding that if I lost it, I'd be free to dip into my savings, exercise part of my accumulated 401(K) (even with the early withdrawal penalty), or heck, even take out a personal bank loan at a shitty interest rate, so I could fund my poker playing, then yes - i would do it. If it meant that my poker career would be over, then no, i wouldn't.

I don't think that's cheating with a modified definition of bankroll. TO the contrary, I think the situation just described presents the most realistic scenario in which to consider this problem. It's those who choose to define bankroll as "future ability to ever play poker again" who I think are 'cheating' here.

[Izverg04]

I just wanted to point out that when the answer to the OP's question depends on how big your bankroll is, the definition of bankroll used to come to that conclusion is not very meaningful. I like to use the size of my bankroll to guide my gambling decisions (as well as investments and insurance and any other risk-taking decisions), and my Neteller balance is an artificial measure for making these decisions.