Re: Roy Cooke article in Card Player is wrong.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hi Tapirboy:
We're talking about bankroll needed to play. Assuming you're a winning player, the more hands you play the more money you should win. That negates the swings you are talking about. I suggest you give my book Gambling Theory and Other Topics a good read. All of this is covered in there.
Best wishes,
Mason
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, your bankroll can remain relatively small as long as you never want the money for anything. You don't see the catch-22 in this? Treating poker as an end in itself is kind of silly.
[/ QUOTE ]
Man you really lost me on this one. Mason doesn't need me to confirm he's right. Mason is absolutely correct and I would suggest you get the book he recommends and read BruceZ's posts on the subject. You're thinking about this topic wrong. Do the math and you'll see what Mason is right.
The points you're making are in reality that the effects of being skilled dominate your variance at a faster rate. Put another way your point is that ones results converge to their true win rate at a much faster rate online. However, this doesn't mean you need a smaller bankroll for playing online since your risk of ruin is a function of your win rate, variance, and bankroll size. It just means you get into the "long run" at a much faster rate.
|