I'm not sure what the original scenario was, but here is the distribution of outcomes after playing 2000 hands of $5 9/6 JOB when starting with a $10K bankroll:
FINAL BANK % CHANGE PROBABILITY
0 lose 100% 4%
1 - 1999 lose 80% to 99% 0%
2000 - 3999 lose 60% to 80% 1%
4000 - 5999 lose 40% to 60% 8%
6000 - 7999 lose 20% to 40% 26%
8000 - 9999 lose up to 20% 33%
10000 - 11999 win up to 20% 19%
12000 - 13999 win 20% to 40% 6%
14000 - 15999 win 40% to 60% 1%
16000 - 17999 win 60% to 80% 0%
18000 - 19999 win 80% to 99+% 0%
20000 + double or more 5%
Here is what you get if you play 9/6 DDB instead:
FINAL BANK % CHANGE PROBABILITY
0 lose 100% 4%
1 - 1999 lose 80% to 99% 6%
2000 - 3999 lose 60% to 80% 12%
4000 - 5999 lose 40% to 60% 15%
6000 - 7999 lose 20% to 40% 15%
8000 - 9999 lose up to 20% 13%
10000 - 11999 win up to 20% 9%
12000 - 13999 win 20% to 40% 7%
14000 - 15999 win 40% to 60% 5%
16000 - 17999 win 60% to 80% 3%
18000 - 19999 win 80% to 99+% 2%
20000 + double or more 9%
(sorry if the formatting is a mess.)
So, if you start with $10K,
40% of the time you will lose more than 20% of your bankroll in 2000 hands of 9/6 JOB.
52% of the time you will lose more than 20% of your bankroll in 2000 hands of 9/6 DDB.
--Dunbar
(I used DRA-VP for the calcs)
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "vp_wiz" <harry.porter@...> wrote:
>
> Bob B succinctily responds to that claim ;)
>
> Your posts reflect a decent measure of common sense and rationality (which is why I bothered to probe your motivations for the $5 foray). But it's clear that thre's much fodder on these groups from which you can benefit.
>
> You suggest that most of your short session jb results stay within a 2%-4% loss cap. That would be rather exceptional. My gut reaction (from 15 years of play) would be that a 6% cap would cover 60% of 2000 hand sessions, with 10% loss experience hardly being an outlier (20% would be an outlier, but not unheard of).
>
> Software tools, such as VP for winners, provide an exceptional means bywhich to guage potential loss exposure when tackling a play that lies outside of your standard monetary risk exposure, and is well worth the investment.
>
> As far as potential venues for taking a Diamond in a day run, vpfree2.com is chock full of accessible alternatives. I would suggest that a something such as a multiplay $.25 machine (or perhaps 3-play $1) machine would be much more apt, in terms of bankroll risk. These are available in several venues.
>
> Researching alternative venues by browsing archived posts here and te harrahscasinos forum will offer some intel on where thr rewards for such play might be a bit richer.
>
> Frankly, I'm gonna speculaye that you benefit fron a guardian angel, who shied you away from the CLV $5 machines, before you found yourself heabily invested in an adverse session. (True, it would have been far kinder to just flop a RF for you ... But, I've yet to stumble on that type of leprachaun :)
>
> - H.
>
>
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "richard d" <cdgnpc@> wrote:
> >
> > You can stare at the stats but my $1 9/6 play never had anywhere near that swing. My typical $5-10k session is plus or minus $1-200. So I let the anecdotal trump them impirical. I am not the only guilty of that. I also had an idea of trying to make up that lost EV at a invitation only multiplier event.
> > I live in NYC so my options are slimmer than in LV.
>
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (23) |
