9. Defining "Bad Year" was Re: Breaking Even
Date: Mon Jan 5, 2009 10:55 am ((PST))Can "Bad Year" be defined as playing a 99.5% game then adding cashback and comps
and still getting a 90% return (or worse)?I still find it amazing the push for NEVER playing negative games when even
though you are playing that positive game (or close to it) there's a good chance
(and if you are "unlucky" a very good chance) that you will receive much less
than expected.
Sad to say, if you receive the much less than expected for too many consecutive
sessions your bankroll will be wiped out long before you can ever see that
"assumed to come" set of positive sessions that are supposed to balance out the
negative.Even with a 6K bankroll, a serious negative roll can wipe out your bankroll
before ever getting near to expected returns and this is on quarters. A few
consecutive 80% returns is even a nasty little reminder that "expected" isn't
"guaranteed" and on the bell curve there's a position for EVERYONE.
Of course "expected" is not "guaranteed". Of course some people will do poorly playing games with an advantage for the player and some will do well playing games with an advantage for the house. But why would someone conclude that it is therefore NOT reasonable to choose the game with the player advantage???
If you want a guarantee, don't put your money into a game of chance (I'm not sure where you SHOULD put it these days for a "guarantee"!).
When you roll a pair of dice, there are 36 posibilities. Let's say you have a bet where you pay $1 for 17 of those possibilities and get paid $1 for the other 19. Let's say you have another bet where you pay $1 for 16 of those possibilities and get paid $1 for the other 20.
Are you saying that you would prefer to take the first bet rather than the second one, just because sometimes you'll lose money at the second one?
These (VP) are all games with an element of chance and an element of skill. The element of chance introduces some random variation in your return, sometimes causing you to lose when you have an advantage. That does not mean you should therefore play a game with greater odds against you.
Whether you will be lucky or unlucky is impossible to predict. If it is totally up to chance, and you have an equal probability of doing better than expected or worse than expected, the only thing you can control is a choice of game that determines what is "expected", so that the starting point from which the variation occurs is a better place to start from.
As for getting your bankroll wiped out before you arrive at the expected income, you need to learn how to manage bankroll. As your bankroll goes down, the amount of your bet should go down, so that you are not risking an amount disproportionate to your bankroll. As has been discussed at length here, most people underestimate the amount of bankroll they need to play at a given level in order to accomplish an acceptable risk of ruin. The only way to have a zero risk of ruin is to progressively bet less as your bankroll goes down (and even then you will eventually come up against the lower limit of what can be bet).
These are NOT games with NO element of chance that we are discussing - games like chess, for example. As long as there is an element of chance, you can do poorly no matter what your edge. Even a casino can have a losing day.
--BG
···
==================