CVCX – Change Risk of Ruin

Thanks Norm for the quick reply!

I had the Vancura/Fuchs book in mind, which on page 79 contains the rule of thumb “bankroll should be about 100 max bets” (in the previous example, I had entered bankroll = 5000, max bet = 50, min bet = 5, spread = 1:10, 6 decks into CVCX). And on page 107, there is a chart claiming that a bankroll of 1000 units reduces the RoR to about 1 percent. But later I realized that the chart is for Double Deck, not six decks.

Today, I played around with CVCX using the same parameters as in the book page 107 as far as possible (Double Deck, S 17, 75 percent pen, DOA, no DAS, 1:5 spread). Unfortunately, the book does not say if RSA is allowed, and how many players at the table. However, I tried out different desired RoRs (see screenshots). If I understand the user scenario correctly, I have to enter the decks, rules, pen, bankroll and _desired_ RoR. The CVCX simulation then computes an optimal betting scheme to _approximate_ this RoR. But the resulting RoR can still be quite different from the desired RoR. Also, the proposed min (and max) bet can change, as long as I do not set “Manually Adjust Min Bet”. (If I do set this option, the box for entering the desired RoR disappears).

For example, if I set 5000 dollar bankroll and 1 to 5 spread, and then a desired ROR of 2 percent, CVCX suggests a bet ramp from 5 to 25 dollars, which leads to a very low 0.3 percent RoR, which is six times lower than originally desired:


If I slightly increase the desired RoR from 2 to 3 percent, CVCX suddenly suggests a bet ramp from 10 to 50 dollars (doubling min and max bet and also win rate). But the RoR then climbs to 6 percent, which is twice as much as originally desired:


Am I missing something and doing wrong? I just am not sure, but intend to play around some more with CVCX (testing how different decks, rules and bankroll affect the results).

Latest posts