Kelly confusion

[22foru]

If your wins are going to be your advantage times time your bet why would your bank grow quicker limiting yourself to Kelly? I suppose because the ror is so high. I just got back into positive territory after 3 yrs playing off and on and about 200 hrs of playing over about fifty sessions. I had a positive variance over a six hr period that made me about 250 units. So on a tc of 4 with about 2% advantage I should only bet like two units.

if you took ror out of the equation by virtue of being able to save again to get back in the game is there some law by which Kelly in and of itself generates faster capital growth. I am getting older and don't want to dink around my whole life with small bets. With my 250 units I am comfortable spreading one unit to 20 units on a das, ns, 6d game with 80% pen, h17. My ror is huge I suppose and is guaranteed (nearly) to wipe me out again right.

[Bodarc]

Kelly betting does not guarantee that you will win or lose. Neither is it applicable in the short run. It is a balance between risk of ruin and maximizing your growth over time.

You did not say what strategy your are using but lets assume hi-lo with full indexes on the game you described. If your minimum bet is 1 unit and your bankroll is 250 units, your risk of ruin is approximately 68%. That is to say that in the short run, with a 1 to 20 spread, just a losing streak of 13 top bets ( not necessarily in a row) will wipe you out.

But, if you take risk of ruin out of the equation and don't consider optimum bets, and if you can replace the 250 units if it is lost, then you just bet whatever spread you want ----- hail Mary! As long as you realize that on average, your chance of going broke before doubling your 250 units is very large.

[22foru]

Kelly betting does not guarantee that you will win or lose. Neither is it applicable in the short run. It is a balance between risk of ruin and maximizing your growth over time.

You did not say what strategy your are using but lets assume hi-lo with full indexes on the game you described. If your minimum bet is 1 unit and your bankroll is 250 units, your risk of ruin is approximately 68%. That is to say that in the short run, with a 1 to 20 spread, just a losing streak of 13 top bets ( not necessarily in a row) will wipe you out.

But, if you take risk of ruin out of the equation and don't consider optimum bets, and if you can replace the 250 units if it is lost, then you just bet whatever spread you want ----- hail Mary! As long as you realize that on average, your chance of going broke before doubling your 250 units is very large.

.

Thanks Bodarc I appreciate the rapid reply. I use UAPC and try to Wong out at -1. To get a feel for the risk of ruin would it be safe to say with 500 that the 68% drop to 34%?

[Bodarc]

Sorry 22 but I am at the office and don't have Norm's prog available right now. I am sure someone else will run it for you.

Take care

[ZenMaster_Flash]

22foru,

In general, if you attempt to spread as boldly as you are suggesting, one of two things will happen to you.

The R O R will be very large, and if the shoe game is marginal re: penetration (and rules), you will lose it all.

If you do not go broke, your name and photos will be widely circulated by O.S.N. and Casino Owners alike.

ƒ£å§h