100 SCORE, 29% Risk, Would you do it ?
It isn't possible to have any other ROR except 13.5% when you quote a SCORE, because you're supposed to be betting optimally but not resizing. So, what you quote as a SCORE is just an hourly win rate, which isn't the same thing. Cut your bet size in half, win $50 an hour, and lower your ROR to 8%.Originally Posted by code red
Don
SCORE has a very precise definition. Win rate per 100 rounds betting Full Kelly optimally to a $10,000 bankroll. Full Kelly with no resizing strategy has a 13.5% Risk of Ruin. If your bankroll and betting strategy meets that definition then your EV and SCORE are the same thing.
Last edited by bigplayer; 06-05-2014 at 06:11 PM.
If your risk of ruin is 1.5% you are playing at around 0.45 Kelly. This makes your $6,500 actual bankroll equivalent to a Full Kelly $14,444 Bankroll. If your SCORE is $98 then your EV is likely ($98x1.44)x0.45=(141.12)x0.45=$63.50 per 100 Rounds. (if you are betting optimally). CVCX will give you (as DS says above) the correct amount but it should be in the $60 range.
No software will give you a true hourly win rate. That will depend on the number of rounds you play per hour which is not a constant. They give win rate per 100 rounds and it is up to you to adjust that to your playing conditions at any given time to get your hourly at that table. You will see extremes for 30 rounds per hour or less (you shouldn't be playing this table) to hundreds of rounds per hour if you can play that fast depending on table conditions.
I understand SCORE is a standardized measure and refers to, among other things, a 13.5% RoR.
However, I believe the usefulness of such a measure is to compare different games per se. By a "game per se", I mean rules, spread, penetration, bet ramp. So, whenever you want to tell someone what kind of game you are playing, you quote SCORE.
But, if by any reason, you are crazy enough (or risk averse enough) to bet a much higher (or lower) percentage of your bankroll, then you are playing with a much higher (or lower) RoR in reality, right?
However, the SCORE of the game you are playing is the same regardless of the magnitude of your bets, as long as you are playing optimally with respect to each TC, right?
Thus, it seems to be "possible" and, much more important, very useful to quote (i) SCORE and (ii) whatever RoR you are playing with, so as to provide information about (i) the quality of the game and (ii) the specific way you decided to play that given game.
Just my humble opinion.
“Life's true face is the skull.” - Nikos Kazantzakis
Agree with everything you wrote. Just can't call your win rate, when you choose a different ROR, a SCORE. See the whole section of BJA3, chapter 9, entitled "More on SCORE," pp. 177-183. And yes, I do understand that I have lost this argument, as stated in the article. But read it anyway. :-)
Don
SCORE is a standardized method used to compare games. It has nothing to do with your EV unless you play at the standards that SCORE uses. SCORE would give the quality of the game. EV would give the expected return of the game the way you play it. You might have a SCORE of 100 and use a play all approach flat betting and have a negative EV. I hope using the extreme example counter that only uses the count to make playing modifications (no betting ramp) helps you sort out the difference.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks