i just did some research on this for big bet poker. some articles (a couple of repeats from k3nt):
http://www.jokersandaces.com/?p=26
http://www.jokersandaces.com/?p=31
http://www.sitandgoplanet.com/sitandgo/ ... erion.html
http://cardsharp.org/?p=52
(these next two are the same as k3nt's)
http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showfla ... t=all&vc=1
http://www.pocketfives.com/C56B7578-3C6 ... F97C9.aspx
the short summary that i can figure out is 13+3 (explained below) is a really aggressive br strategy for a 5 ptbb/100 player (i'm counting this as a 10% roi). 15+5 seems a bit more reasonable to me. for a half-kelly, then it's 25+8. for a quarter-kelly, it's about 50+20. these are armchair extrapolations, so don't kill me if the numbers aren't right.
15+5 means that you have 15 bis for your "backup" level and 5 bis for your "new" level. for example, if you're a 100 player and you want to move up to 200, then you need to have (15*100)+(5*200) for 2500. basically you have 1000 to work with at the 200s, and if that doesn't work out, you can rinse and repeat with 1500 (15*50)+(7.5*100) with a bit of cushion at the fallback level.
a few assumptions that i think people miss about aggressive br management are:
1) you must be a winning player at the higher limits.
2) it's usually not worth it to push it in with low +ev high variance plays.
3) tilting is ----ev
4) you must be willing to move down.
misc thoughts
gergery mentioned a 15bi minimum for aggressive br management over at 2p2, and i'm going to go out on a limb and say he's done the math on that.
fwiw, pzhon from 2p2 seemed to be rational about the mathematics and (seemingly) the psychology of aggressive br management.
just my 2 cents interpretation (that feels right intuitively)... feel free to refine the idea with actual math.