In the thread we talk about: Risk

The difference is when your trading forex you can have your whole roll on the line on one bad trade. In poker there's BRM. Its like having a 1k roll and play NL1000.

Hey,

Maybe you will get more feedback in the learning to win forum and we can discuss risk here. Will rename the thread

So who is experienced with risk? Who practices cautious brm? Who practices aggressive brm? Why? What would make you change this? Is age important? Does our edge change things?

Very interested.

Originally posted by MatejM47
The difference is when your trading forex you can have your whole roll on the line on one bad trade. In poker there's BRM. Its like having a 1k roll and play NL1000.

Highly doubt this is true.
There must be some sort of BRM in forex, too.

forex is rigged.

and on other news.. forex BRM = like 3% for each trade, all the way to 10% for each trade.. Even thats a gamble if you dont have inside info.. (which is (un)fortunately illegal)

I came here hoping to discuss the board game

Originally posted by pleno1
So who is experienced with risk? Who practices cautious brm? Who practices aggressive brm? Why? What would make you change this? Is age important? Does our edge change things?

Very interested.

I guess the more inexperienced you are, ie the less edge you have, you're better off going with cautious brm, and the opposite is true, ie the more skill/experiences equals the more edge - you can play if aggressive brm if you feel like it.

Because while playing you'll also keep improving, and the more room you have to play longer (more BIs), the better you will be and will be avoiding stupid mistakes (= losses) further on.

That's my philosophy on that, but to connect with your question

Is age important?

I've actually read a book, where author said age plays a good role, and basically the younger you are (and the money for poker isn't crucial for your living at the time) it's better to go aggro brm, because you can hit midstakes sooner, and had you lose it all - hey you're young, you can deposit again..

But I like my philosophy better ♦

(in reply to OP)

No, I don't think it is any different.

In Forex trading (or any other kind of commodity trade), what you are talking about in your example is your return. It is the same in poker. Your return is you BB/100. In Forex and any other trading markets, you use what is called the Kelly criterion in order to avoid risk of ruin. Usually when trading you roughly take a 5% at risk per trade rule until you can kind of know your win rate and adjust accordingly. So in trading the Kelly criterion gives birth to Portfolio management while in poker gives place to BRM.

Something that adds extra risk in commodities/forex trading is leverage. Usually you buy leveraged, and you 'bet' per pip. This can give place to terrible losses as you can loose more that what you invested, so all becomes a little bit more complicated, while in poker you don't loose more than what you sat at the table with. So risk in poker is much less and it is capped to your brm reaching 0. Also it is easier to assess your overall true win rate in poker than it is while trading markets.

Hope that helped.

I don't think you can compare forex trading and poker here. Let's say you have a bankroll of $1000. You lose $250 of it. Now in forex, you lost 25% of your bankroll. But to get back to $1000 you need to increase your bankroll (which is $750) by 33%. And as your winrate is %, you need to win more than you lost to get back to level 0.

In poker, you lost $250 which might be 1000bb. To get that back you need to win 1000bb. To get back to level 0, you need to win as much as you lost.

At least in cash games it works that way. But if you are using Kelly-method to calculate your buyin and playing tournaments, you could compare forex and poker.

In cash games, your mindset should be like this when you face a risk:

1) Is it +EV? If yes, go to line 2.
2) Does my BRM allow it? If yes, go to line 3.
3) Proceed.

You can look at your buy-in as the amount you are putting at risk. That is not any different than sngs. That is how you choose what level of cash game you play, and you do it according to your win rate, in both cases of sngs and cash games.

In poker, you have a bankroll of 1000. You lose 250 of it. You lost 25% of your bankroll. To get back to 1000, you need to increase your bankroll by 33%.

Looking at your second point from the trading point of view is not any different. You lost 250 in a trade. You need to make 250 again in order to break even.

I think there is some way to look at it (not sure here how the equivalence will go though). Say you have some xbb/100 rate. You lose $y in a hand badly played. How many more hands do you have to play to wipe out your mistake? Or, for waht percentage you need to increase the number of hours played to make up for it? (Again, I need to think more about this way of looking at it)