Re: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 19 MAY 2015

 

007 wrote: ""Sloppily" applying the Kelly
Criterion, without significantly and consistently overbetting, with
significant positive expected value, will still accomplish almost all
of what Thorp did."

OK, but you still need a definition for "significant and consistent overbetting". The book also has examples of those who forgot that step.

There are two hurdles here, the first is to find an edge, the second is to not overbet your bankroll. You have to clear both if your expectation is bankroll growth with zero risk of ruin.

[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 (31)

.

__,_._,___

RE: [vpFREE] The Dice Challenge

 

Alan has made so many snide remarks about the Wiz being wrong that I think the Wiz is motivated to prove Alan wrong. I don't know how well they know each other but Alan has been a long time member of the Wiz's forum.

__._,_.___
Posted by: mickeycrimm@yahoo.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (15)

.

__,_._,___

RE: [vpFREE] The Dice Challenge

 

MC wrote: For the record, Alan accepted the Wizard's challenge on April 29th. He
said he would be in Las Vegas on May 25th. That was last weekend which
has come and gone. Alan posted that he was in Las Vegas last weekend.
But nothing has been posted in any of the forums about the results of
the challenge. I wonder what happened. I know the Wiz is chomping at the
bit to play. Alan accepted the challenge but it appears now that he is
avoiding it.

Why would Shack be chomping at the bit?

Win or lose it's a lunch bet with somebody he doesn't know! For sure, Shack will honor the agreement and go through with the bet and the meal --- but it's hardly something to be looking forward to.

Bob



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: Bob Dancer <bobdancervp@hotmail.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (14)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 19 MAY 2015

 

A year or two ago, someone posted that he and his wife were doing a cruise out of NYC and one or both of them had never done the tourist thing here. I offered to show them a Chinatown Dim Sum meal. The response I got was that their time was worth $200 an hour. Those of us with normal day jobs can afford not to be as 'aggressive' as others who do this full time.

Rich

__._,_.___
Posted by: cdgnpc@aol.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (30)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 19 MAY 2015

 

At your recommendation, I read this and it was interesting, but I
think it exaggerated the value of the Kelly Criterion. I believe
Thorp's success was primarily due to positive expected value, not that
he didn't overbet his bankroll. "Sloppily" applying the Kelly
Criterion, without significantly and consistently overbetting, with
significant positive expected value, will still accomplish almost all
of what Thorp did.

>if you want a basic understanding of Kelly that doesn't require any math background, read Poundstone's "Fortune's Formula".

__._,_.___
Posted by: 007 <007@embarqmail.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (29)

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] LVRJ: Paragon Gaming to take over Westgate LV operations

 

LVRJ: Paragon Gaming to take over Westgate LV operations

http://www.reviewjournal.com/business/casinos-gaming/paragon-gaming-approved-take-over-westgate-las-vegas-operations

or

http://goo.gl/3IeytJ

*************************************************
This link is posted for informational purposes
and doesn't constitute an endorsement or approval
of the linked article's content by vpFREE. Any
discussion of the article must be done in
accordance with vpFREE's rules and policies.
*************************************************

__._,_.___
Posted by: vpFREE3355 <vpfree3355@gmail.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1)

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Horseshoe Baltimore "Legendary Gift" 6/7/15

 

Got an email saying I have a Legendary Gift on 6/7/15 but nothing is listed when I log into my total rewards acct.


What is it? (I'm a Diamond.)


Thx



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: stut70@yahoo.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1)

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 19 MAY 2015

 

Dan wrote: "2. What to do if any RoR is unacceptable? Kelly does not answer this
adequately for video poker because it is impossible to vary your bet
size in small increments. The only way to absolutely avoid ruin is,
DON'T PLAY AT ALL."

If this were true, Kelly would be useless in the real world. When was the last time you were able to bet $23.42 at a blackjack table? The solution is that it's not true, it's just more Kelly bashing.

Now, I'll let you in on a little secret. Any fractional betting system will avoid bankruptcy. It's just that Kelly is the optimal fractional betting system if you assume a log utility function, or in plain English it is important to you how long it takes to double your bankroll. And yes in the real world there are only certain fixed bet sizes, but given this constraint Kelly is still the optimal solution given a log utility function.

Here it is 2015 and it still amazes me the kind of misinformation that floats around about Kelly. Seriously, if you want a basic understanding of Kelly that doesn't require any math background, read Poundstone's "Fortune's Formula".

[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 (28)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 19 MAY 2015

 

Very well said. I agree wholeheartedly

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: loren barber <kona623@aol.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (27)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 19 MAY 2015

 

It's entertaining to see the professionals getting into a who posts for
profit squabble.

Let's face it, I for one don't think any of them would make any sort of a
post if they didn't think it would help them professionally.
This is strictly an opinion that I hold, and I am just expressing it. I am
just referring to Bob, Jean and Dan here. The few others that
make the occasional post don't strike me as being as heavily into self
promotion.

I think that the rules as they stand are pretty reasonable, and a little
promotion being mentioned as long as the main thoughts being expressed are
germane to the discussion is O.K. as is stated in the rules.

Regards
A.P.

__._,_.___
Posted by: "Albert Pearson" <ehpee@rogers.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (26)

.

__,_._,___

RE: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 19 MAY 2015

Queenie wrote: We can – and do – disagree on this forum about some of the issues – but personal insults are never appropriate....or helpful.


I didn't see any personal insults --- but then again I never claimed to be an English teacher

I suggest you check Dan's former posts. My rough estimate is more than 75% of his posts over the past five years (and this year as well) all have the subtext of "buy my products."

If you think hes a gentleman, Jean, and want to buy multiple copies of all his stuff, go right ahead (although that would be a rather un-frugal thing to do.) But everybody else on this forum who wants his materials probably already has whatever they want.

If Dan has constructive things to say on this forum, it's his right (currently) to say them. But if the vast majority of his posts are self-promoting, those of us who don't appreciate that should have a right to speak up.

You can accurately say I'm disrespectful of Dan's contributions here. But you are not correct in saying I've personally insulted him in this thread.

Bob





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

------------------------------------

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:
https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/

RE: [vpFREE] The Dice Challenge

 

For the record, Alan accepted the Wizard's challenge on April 29th. He said he would be in Las Vegas on May 25th. That was last weekend which has come and gone. Alan posted that he was in Las Vegas last weekend. But nothing has been posted in any of the forums about the results of the challenge. I wonder what happened. I know the Wiz is chomping at the bit to play. Alan accepted the challenge but it appears now that he is avoiding it.

__._,_.___
Posted by: mickeycrimm@yahoo.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (13)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 19 MAY 2015

 

Bob Dancer wrote:
<<Happily, Dan's post comes with a special bonus...It's his second post in two weeks in which he has promoted his software. That puts him in violation of the rules around here and allows us all to find out what kind of penalty the administrator will invoke!>>

I happily appreciated Dan's contribution to the Kelly criterion thread even though I don't personally use Kelly myself. His mention of what his software could do in this area was very appropriate and on topic, giving us another choice and point of view. It was not a "promotional" post since it directly related to the subject being discussed and therefore was not breaking any rules. Dan is a real gentleman and I always find his posts polite, with the purpose of giving good math-based information.

We can – and do – disagree on this forum about some of the issues – but personal insults are never appropriate....or helpful.

------------------------------------------
Jean $¢ott, Frugal Gambler
http://queenofcomps.com/
http://jscott.lvablog.com/
UPDATED TAX BOOK
(Download 2015 eBook now)

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: "Queen of Comps" <queenofcomps@cox.net>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (24)

.

__,_._,___
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)