Sure, the occasional dopamine hit from quad aces feels like "fun", but the more likely outcome is burning $35 and the cortisol/stress hit that goes with that. So, the overall question is: does the rare dopamine hit from breaking aces full and drawing quad aces compensate for the frequent cortisol hits of missing the draw? As far as the Kelly system goes, it's just cold mathematics, you are either taking too much risk for your current bankroll or you are not. Of course "too much bankroll risk" is likely to end in a nasty bout of cortisol/stress/bankroll-shrinkage and not the final dopamine hit you were hoping for after all. Read "Fortune's Formula" if you want real life stories of what happens when Mr. Kelly's math is ignored.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <vpfree@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
When I started playing 10/7 DB I had similar thoughts (although they were primarily focused on the risk tradeoff in holding 3A vs the sure win FH ... a nominal EV benefit with a significant risk increment).
Over time, however, I found that going for the $50 "sure win" didn't make much of a dent against the variance of the balance of the game. Ultimately, I decided to just indulge in the thrill of the 3A draw, with greater satisfaction.
Over time, however, I found that going for the $50 "sure win" didn't make much of a dent against the variance of the balance of the game. Ultimately, I decided to just indulge in the thrill of the 3A draw, with greater satisfaction.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <vpfree@yahoogroups.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.
__._,_.___
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (5) |
.
__,_._,___
