Will you play this game?

[ZenMaster_Flash]

"It was hard to resist playing a 3.4% advantage side bet."

The side bet advantage was 4.326%.
I provided you with the spread sheet.
My results suffered from awful variance.
Easy to imagine, as the advantage was
linked to the occurrence of a hand that is
dealt 3% of the time, at a glacial pace !

In any case, a ploppy flat betting the game
and the side bet was certainly in "fat city."

The house lost money. It was obvious to see,
simply by watching the never-ending stream
of chip "fills."

Being as stupid as casino administrators are,
they "threw out the baby with the bathwater"
by removing the games and replacing them
with alternate "carnival games."

[Meistro123]

But three suited sevens is not 35,000 to 1 against. Presumably OP forgot to take into account the decreased pool of sevens of that suit on subsequent draws.

See WoO analysis for lucky lucky :

https://wizardofodds.com/games/black...s/lucky-lucky/

he gives probability of three suited sevens as .000016 or 1:62490 so you have over seriously over stated your edge.

Although I guess the 32,000:1 number could be accurate for conditions with higher seven density.

[Three]

The side bet advantage was 4.326%.

Of course you are right. I hit the keys in the wrong order or was having a brain fart. Thanks ZMF. And thanks for the useful networking info on the opportunity.

[Three]

he gives probability of three suited sevens as .000016 or 62490:1 against so you have over seriously over stated your edge.

That's what I thought when he used the same ratio twice. Multiply the OP's odds by 4/5 and you fix the issue.

[Joe Mama]

Making a wager when EG is > 1 implies there is no risk of ruin.

Kelly ratio yields the highest EG possible for a wager.

The only time there is no risk of ruin is if you are guaranteed at least a push on every bet. Extreme example is to wager your entire BR on one bet and lose.

[bigedge]

You don’t seem to understand the concept of real-life risk of ruin with a finite bankroll.

I would advise BJGenius to stop playing this side bet unless his BR can withstand $100k swings.

I would also advise him to sell you the game, in return for a mere 10% of your EV.

Playable games become unplayable for several reasons, including insufficient bankroll. That is real life.

There is no risk of ruin involved solving this problem because the AP will walk away to better opportunities when EG < 1.

[bigedge]

The only time there is no risk of ruin is if you are guaranteed at least a push on every bet. Extreme example is to wager your entire BR on one bet and lose.

The only time one should wager his/her entire bankroll on a wager is if it were 100% certain of no loss, with a non-zero probability of a win. So your example of losing is mathematically impossible because the bet would never bet made with a non-zero probability of losing.

There is no risk of ruin when the wager is made if EG > 1.

[Sharky]

...probability of three suited sevens as .000016 or 1:62490 so you have over seriously over stated your edge.

Although I guess the 32,000:1 number could be accurate for conditions with higher seven density.

my thoughts exactly....I got 0.0000159....so 1:63k...not sure how he's getting 35k???