|
|
#11
10-08-2003, 03:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: when to say when
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The first wager was $500 and the second $1000, this is like moving up or down in limits in poker. [/ QUOTE ] Except for the whole 2:1 thing. I don't get this analogy. Maybe I'm thick-headed as well. Anyway, back to the young man. Why do you think he was thick-headed? You wouldn't have taken the bet the first time? You wouldn't have taken the bet the second time? [/ QUOTE ] The point is that even tho you have an edge, even a big edge, you can wager too much of your bankroll to ever get anywhere. There is an optimum amount to wager to maximize bankroll growth based on your edge and variance. If you wager twice the optimal amount you will never get anywhere over the long run (unless you are lucky). If you wager over twice the optimal amount then your bankroll will spiral into the felt (again, unless you are lucky). 
|
|
#12
10-08-2003, 12:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: when to say when
Thanks everyone for the advice, I will take heed.
Al, i pm'd you my email.....eagerly waiting for your articles. take it easy morg
|
|
#13
10-08-2003, 03:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: just my opinion
[ QUOTE ]
Of course, that would mean I'd have a lot less, so maybe you should just shut up. [/ QUOTE ] Classic. Hahahaha[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] .
|
|
#14
10-08-2003, 03:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: when to say when
How can you wager "twice the optimal amount" when you're only given one betting possibility: half your total wealth.
In essence, at the end of every coin flip, your net worth will either double or halve. You're statistically as likely to turn your money into 1/16x as 16x, 1/32x as 32x, and so on... Wouldn't you risk your $1000 if you were as likely to end up with $62.50 as $16000, or $31.25 as $32000? I still fail to see the "lesson" of your parable.
|
|
#15
10-08-2003, 07:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: when to say when
Yeah, I think I'm still missing the point as well.
I agree that this might not be a good wager if you for some reason will just keeping taking it forever regardless of results. But what if the young man simply says this: I'll take the wager. If I lose the first coin-flip, I'm done. If I win, I'll keep taking the wager until I lose two in a row, at which point I'm done. That was just off the top of my head and I haven't really thought about it, so I might be wrong. But, I think that the result of that policy is that he caps his loss at $500 but with a little luck can win a lot more than that. Anyway, the main reason I don't think this analogy applies to moving up is that while you have to increase the amount of your bet when moving up, most players are actually faced with far worse odds (in comparison to the limit they came from), not better!
|
|
#16
10-09-2003, 12:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: when to say when
Because I've had problems with attachments, I am just cutting and pasting all three articles into a PM. I've done the same with several other people. If you requested these articles, please check your PM at twoplustwo.com. I'd appreciate confirmation that they all arrived in readable form.If you didn't get them, send me another PM.
|
|
#17
10-14-2003, 01:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: when to say when
[ QUOTE ]
How can you wager "twice the optimal amount" when you're only given one betting possibility: half your total wealth. In essence, at the end of every coin flip, your net worth will either double or halve. You're statistically as likely to turn your money into 1/16x as 16x, 1/32x as 32x, and so on... Wouldn't you risk your $1000 if you were as likely to end up with $62.50 as $16000, or $31.25 as $32000? I still fail to see the "lesson" of your parable. [/ QUOTE ] In the story, half of your bankroll *IS* twice the optimal amount. Just do the math or something. Stop relying on others to explain every last thing to you.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
