Poll on risk aversion: a continuation of the Bankroll on AA thread

[meep_42]

I voted 4 because I would need 2.5 months to get back to my current game + the loss of the excess of my BR equal something in the neighborhood of 1.5x my bankroll in losses + expected opportunity cost. I chose 4 so it would be more +EV, but if I had to at 3, I would probably consider it.

-d

[Derek in NYC]

[ QUOTE ]
might want to go to mars just in case

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no oxygen or water on Mars.

[meep_42]

sthief beat me to it. :\

-d

[TakeMeToTheRiver]

The correct answer is 3.

If you answered anything greater than 3, you are either (1) presently living (dangerously) off your poker bankroll, or (2) a nit. It doesn't mean that you wouldn't prefer better odds, but you still need to recognize a good bet when it is offered.

[sfer]

You're being needlessly argumentative so I'll help out. You take bigger gambles each day, even though you don't consider them "gambles." There is a risk of death associated with every action you take but nearly all you consider acceptable. From driving a car to taking a shower. The downside is larger than the gamble in the poll and the upside much smaller. So, obviously, there is some probability you are willing to accept for your bankroll.

[W. Deranged]

... by the intermediate value theorem ...

[img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You would not take a one-time gamble to get paid 2:1 on your money, where the odds of losing were one trillion factorial-to-1? Come on.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did I say that I wouldn't?

I just don't understand a one time risk of your roll when you're a huge underdog just because the potential to make a huge payout is there. I say again, if this is a bet I could repeat over and over, yes I would take 6-1 odds. But this poll has been presented as a one time deal, in which case I decline.

[/ QUOTE ]

Underdog? How are you an underdog when the probability of winning is 1-(1/x) where x is greater than 2?

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
The correct answer is 3.

If you answered anything greater than 3, you are either (1) presently living (dangerously) off your poker bankroll, or (2) a nit. It doesn't mean that you wouldn't prefer better odds, but you still need to recognize a good bet when it is offered.

[/ QUOTE ]



everyone has different bankroll and expectations. how could you possibly say there's a correct answer. you may not be (1) or (2), but you are (3), which is just as bad

[MrStretchie]

[ QUOTE ]
I said ten as that is a great bet, but I am tempted to do more. The reasoning that I want an even better bet, and more than 20 times my bankroll might not be negative EV for him. So I want him dropping as much as possible, as its all peanuts.

After all, this is a guy who loses $ if he takes time to go out of his way and pick up a twenty. He's gonna have to cough it up. That's why I'm gonna get him wasted before making this wager.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhh.. but that's not how it works. Regardless of the range, if you win, you double your bankroll. The only question is what are your odds of winning.

Edit: also, wtf does this mean?
"The reasoning that I want an even better bet, and more than 20 times my bankroll might not be negative EV for him."

[MrStretchie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There should be a choice in the poll for "I'd never take this bet. Period."

[/ QUOTE ]

This is clearly untrue. If X were 1 billion, you would take the gamble.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well... if you were a professional, living off of your bankroll, with no parents, no other job, bad credit so you can't take out any loans, and no friends to stake you, then you'd still have to think very long and hard to take even 1 billion : 1 odds.

just saying. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

No you wouldn't. WTF?
You wouldn't risk it for a 999,999,999/1 billion chance of doubling? You're taking a far worse risk just playing poker..