Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > General Gambling > Probability
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-17-2005, 11:05 PM
RedeemerKing RedeemerKing is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 70
Default answer this

Is playing two 1/2$ any better or worse than one 2/4$. Assuming your skill does not drop a lot when multitasking. Is this better or worse as far as becoming a more consistent winning player. How does this affect good/bad streaks and standard deviation and all that crap. Basically are you any less likely to go broke
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-17-2005, 11:09 PM
AaronBrown AaronBrown is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 505
Default Re: answer this

Assuming the competition is the same at both limits and, as you say, you are not affected by multitasking, your standard deviation per hour or per dollar bet will go down at two $1/$2 games than one $2/$4 game. With the same bankroll, you're less likely to go broke in a given amount of time, assuming you're a breakeven or winning player. If you're a losing player, you might have a better chance of surviving with higher standard deviation, because you need luck to avoid going broke.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-17-2005, 11:41 PM
SheetWise SheetWise is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 841
Default Re: answer this

[ QUOTE ]
Assuming your skill does not drop ...

[/ QUOTE ]
However you honestly answer that, that is your answer.
[ QUOTE ]
... standard deviation and all that crap.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you honestly believe that, therein lies your answer.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.