Poll: Reality check

[pzhon]

In this thread, someone asked,

[ QUOTE ]
I think I have found a system that could make anyone money, playing roulette. [Martingale betting progression.]
Why doesn't everyone do this?

[/ QUOTE ]
Someone responded, in part,

[ QUOTE ]
If your bankroll is bigger than the house's and they allow you to play with a sufficiently high limit at the table, you can beat the crap out of them, through a simple progression.

[/ QUOTE ]

[cardcounter0]

pzhon casino sets up a coin toss game, heads the casino wins, tails the player wins. The coin used is absolutely fair. However, pzhon casino charges a $1 fee per toss and allows a $100 max bet, giving it at least a 1% house edge.

pzhon casino figures this 1% +EV coin toss game will allow it to win the world eventually, if people will toss the coin enough times.

Kerry Packer hears about the game, cleans up some spare change he finds underneath a seat cushion, and shows up at the casino with $15,000 ready to flip coins at $100 a pop.

pzhon casino figured it didn't need much money to become a winner with its locked in 1% edge, and only has a $200 bankroll. pzhon greedily eyes Kerry Packer's $15,000 bankroll and figures after 15,000 or so tosses of the coin, all that money will be his.

Somewhere within the first 100 tosses of the coin, Kerry Packer manages to put together a string of three tail tosses in a row (3 tails in a row isn't really hard in 100 tosses, is it?) and wipes out pzhon's bankroll and all the accumulated $1 per toss profits gained up to that point.

Cursing what he figures to be pure luck to overcome his 1% house edge, pzhon can't believe he is broke. He convinces some investors to put up another $200, and goes up against Kerry Packer's bankroll which is now $15,200.

Again, pzhon is charging $1 per $100 toss and thinks he has Packer by the shorts. Again, somewhere in the first 100 tosses, tails outnumber heads by 3, and again pzhon goes bust.

How many times will pzhon have to lose his $200 bankroll to realize his 1% edge is useless against a much larger bankroll, when the bet size is $100????

Is Chapter 13 close behind, or will someone else take over the coin toss game and adjust the maximum bet size?
[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[tomdemaine]

at some point there will be a run of 100 and the 15000 guy will go stone broke.

[cardcounter0]

"at some point there will be a run of 100 and the 15000 guy will go stone broke."

It is far more likely that an advantage of 3 tails will always occur before a run of 100 heads does. The tiny bankroll will be wiped out before that "at some point" run has a chance to happen.

Hence, the whole point, you need a proper bankroll to weather the bad streaks in order for the long run expectation to occur.

PS >>>>> To keep risk to the casino at an acceptable level, with a $200 bankroll and a 1% edge, the max bet should be around $2 dollars, not $100.

[other1]

Just to be devil's advocate a bit.. People keep talking about 100 tosses, but remember, the better only needs 8 loses in a row before he no longer has the bankroll to continue his progression. This makes it much more reasonable that the better can go bust.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
pzhon casino sets up a coin toss game, heads the casino wins, tails the player wins. The coin used is absolutely fair. However, pzhon casino charges a $1 fee per toss and allows a $100 max bet, giving it at least a 1% house edge.

[/ QUOTE ]
For simplicity, assume the casino wins 50.5% of the time instead. That way, there is no need to deal with bets under $100.

[ QUOTE ]
[Out chipped 150:2] Cursing what he figures to be pure luck to overcome his 1% house edge, pzhon can't believe he is broke.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have dozens of posts here on bankroll management (and several of my comments were even added to the Beginners FAQ), and I stated on the earlier thread that there was a high risk of ruin for a casino with a small bankroll. How do you come up with the idea that I would be shocked to lose? You are grossly misrepresenting my position. You are attacking a straw man because that is all you can defeat.

[ QUOTE ]
How many times will pzhon have to lose his $200 bankroll to realize his 1% edge is useless against a much larger bankroll, when the bet size is $100????

[/ QUOTE ]
The 1% HA is not useless, despite your repeated statements that it doesn't matter in the face of the bankroll disparity. In fact, the average amount the casino would have at the end is $626, for a $426 profit. The average number of rounds is 426. The casino wins 1/24 of the time instead of 1/76. That looks like the 1% edge has a large effect to me.

Perhaps you wouldn't want to be the casino here, getting 75:1 on a 23:1 shot. However, the question was whether the situation is good for the player, who loses $426 on average. My position is that this gamble would not be a good one for the player, particularly if the player is risk-averse.

The size of your opponent's bankroll does not affect whether your wagers are +EV or not. That your opponent mighht be risk-averse, and might not be happy to accept a wager in his favor, does not make it a good one for you.

By the way, cardcounter0, the other 9 out of the first 10 people who voted disagreed with you. The consensus is that answer Cyrus gave was not appropriate. You were also alone in voting to say that his comment suggests progressions are a bad idea. You are trying to defend what Cyrus admitted was "intentionally provocative."

[Thythe]

[ QUOTE ]
You are attacking a straw man because that is all you can defeat.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Straw man" is one of the best-named fallacies, because it is memorable and vividly illustrates the nature of the fallacy. Imagine a fight in which one of the combatants sets up a man of straw, attacks it, then proclaims victory. All the while, the real opponent stands by untouched.

When your opponent sets up a straw man, set it on fire and kick the cinders around the stage. Don't worry about losing the Strawperson-American community vote.

[cardcounter0]

Why does the Bellagio have 10 million in it's cage?

Every bet you can make there has a house edge. Couldn't they just use the losers to pay off the winners? Why the need for a 10 million dollar reserve?

Except for a few select individuals, $10,000 is the most you can bet. Why? Why won't they allow a 10 million dollar bet.

You better contact the Bellagio with your "facts". They have a lot of money sitting around that could be better invested elsewhere.
[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]

You better contact the Bellagio with your "facts". They have a lot of money sitting around that could be better invested elsewhere.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm a professional mathematician. Are you saying you disagree with what I am saying is a fact, as opposed to your distortions and hallucinations? Please clarify, and further damage your credibility.

If your opponent is underbankrolled, that does not convert a -EV game to a +EV game for you. That is a fact. If a casino were underbankrolled, it would not suddenly become a good idea to play roulette there.

[cardcounter0]

woooooooshhh!!!! over your head again.