interesting analogy, but i disagree with your conclusion.
the fallacy is in believing that $5/hand with VAR 28 and 0.3% edge requires a lower bankroll than $50/hand with VAR 10 and 1.15% edge. it doesn't. bankroll requirement is directly related to variance, directly related to bet size, and inversely related to edge; decreasing variance by a factor of (almost) 3 and increasing edge by a factor of (almost) 4 almost exactly cancels out the increase in bet size by a factor of 10.
another way to look at it: compared to holding the full house, holding the three aces is worth 57 cents, with standard deviation of $158. you'd have to play 38 hands of $1 DB (28 VAR) at a 0.3% edge to make that same 57 cents, and the standard deviation of that play would be $5 * sqrt(28) * sqrt(38) = $163. choosing to break aces full requires slightly LESS risk tolerance than choosing to play this game to begin with.
i think the lesson here is that low-edge plays require way more bankroll than you might expect.
on the other hand, you only get dealt aces full once every 9000 hands or so. throwing away 57 cents every 10 hours of play is not going to break you. (it reduces overall return by like 0.001%.) so do whatever makes you happy; if you're playing a $1 game with a 0.3% edge, it's not like you're doing it for the money.
cheers,
five
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:44 PM, clementiyn <clementiyn@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm sure for many players this is an obvious, no-brainer, one of the first rules you learned, sort of thing. You keep the Aces, duh...
But after having it come up more than a few times during practice with WinPoker on the iPad, I disagree (at least for many players).
Let's say you are playing 10/7 DB at the $1 level and your bankroll is ok but not extravagant for the game, with an additional 0.20% back in comps/cashback. And a guy sitting next to you offered you a game that returns 101.15% with a little over a third the variance with no comps/cashback but you have to play it at the $10 level.
The choice to keep three aces is agreeing to play a game at $50 a hand that returns 101.15% with variance of 10.
The choice to keep the full house is to choose to play your original game at $5 per hand, returning 100.3% or so (adding comps/cashback and deducting for errors) with variance of 28.
I don't claim to be able to do bankroll calculations in my head, but I think there are many people who would consider themselves sufficiently bankrolled for $5 a hand 10/7 DB returning 100.3% that would not consider themselves bankrolled for $50 a hand at 101.15%. I don't doubt some of you would jump at the chance to play $50 a hand 101.15% with variance 10 and would be right to do so. But many of us, myself included might wipe out their bankroll waiting for the long run to show up.
------------------------------------
vpFREE Links: http://www.west-point.org/users/usma1955/20228/V/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
vpFREE-digest@yahoogroups.com
vpFREE-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
vpFREE-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
__._,_.___
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (10) |
.
__,_._,___
