Bob wrote: "...going broke is tougher at age 60 than it is at 25 because you have less opportunity to "make it back." So whatever the video poker software tells you that you need for a bankroll, if you're a senior citizen, you probably need more than that. In both games, senior citizens are rightfully more concerned with preserving whatever bankroll they have, while a young player might rightfully be more concerned with building her bankroll for bigger and better things down the road"
I couldn't agree more. Some gamblers might want to push things right to the Kelly optimum, maybe even a little beyond as there is bankroll growth right up to double the Kelly bet, but for the majority it makes more sense to back down a bit and make safer bets. Any betsize that's less than the Kelly optimum still produces bankroll growth, it may be less than optimum however there is also less risk involved, and trading off growth for less risk is a very reasonable tradeoff. In addition, there is another problem. Sure, computers can tell you the computer perfect EV and Variance of a gamble, however, even Bob Dancer has admitted to making play mistakes in the highly distracting environment of an actual casino. Heck, even I make play mistakes, mostly due to bad buttons, there I admitted it. The result is that probably no one actually gets the computer perfect EV and Variance in the actual casino environment. Short of doing extensive studies (which can be done) this means gamblers must estimate their actual EV and Variance and assume it will always be different from the computer perfect values. This introduces an "unknown unknown" in the equations and almost all players underestimate how far off from computer perfect they are. This is another reason to stay on the safe side of the Kelly optimum and to even bet well clear of it. Betting half the Kelly optimum is the typical approach, so there is absolutely nothing disgraceful about not betting the Kelly optimum. You don't have to be "extreme" about everything you do, sometimes just being able to survive to tell the story is enough excitement. Leave the broken bones stories to the teenagers.
And one note of clarification: I wrote this in terms of selecting a bet size, which is the typical way of thinking of Kelly. However, in video poker, the betsizes typically have few options, perhaps only one. But you have control over the bankroll you chose to play with. The Kelly optimal bet can be approximated by bankroll x ev / variance. In video poker, it's more useful to think of the Kelly optimal bankroll, which is betsize x variance / ev. Bankrolls greater than the Kelly optimal bankroll are in the safe zone where there is always bankroll growth and less risk for larger bankrolls. Bankrolls less than the Kelly optimal bankroll are in the danger zone, and at less than half the Kelly optimal bankroll there is bankroll shrinkage. Smart gamblers would be wise to stop gambling if their bankroll gets depleted to less than the Kelly optimal and often times even before. At such a point the gambler either needs to rebuild their bankroll from a day job or find a gamble that is a better fit for their current bankroll size.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Posted by: nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (3) |
