vpFREE2 Forums

Long Term and CLT

I have found a lot of the confusion people have about the Central
Limit Theorem comes from lack of exactnes.
CLT = For large random samples the sampling distribution of the mean
is approx. normal

In VP we take it that a random sample applies. The mean or average
profit is what converges to the normal - nothing related to
individual hands apply except for the "randomn" part.

How large is large? This depends on the underlying distribution of
each individual sample or in VP each hand. The more the skewness in
the individual distribution in each hand the longer it will take the
distribution of the mean to be "normal". The skewness of the sample
mean payout for an individual game is dependend on the sample size or
number of hands and when this gets close to zero a large sample is
reached. Other measures of nonnormalness could be used.

But I think may players are really interested in their aggregate play
and convergence of realized payouts to the expected payout for
individual games. This is the Law of Large Numbers. The trouble is
that while the mean converges to the EV for any game the sum or
aggregate of all payouts does not converge.

This last part in my view is an interesting paradox in the practical
application of vp

http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Bank_NO.htm

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rosspark100" <rosspark100@...> wrote:

But I think may players are really interested in their aggregate play
and convergence of realized payouts to the expected payout for
individual games. This is the Law of Large Numbers. The trouble is
that while the mean converges to the EV for any game the sum or
aggregate of all payouts does not converge.

This last part in my view is an interesting paradox in the practical
application of vp

But I think may players are really interested in their aggregate play
and convergence of realized payouts to the expected payout for
individual games. This is the Law of Large Numbers. The trouble is
that while the mean converges to the EV for any game the sum or
aggregate of all payouts does not converge.

This last part in my view is an interesting paradox in the practical
application of vp

If you ever worked with a commercial-grade video poker analyzer, you'll
get a better appreciation of the math in action. While there are design
limits with 500-play or 1,000-play or more, it's obvious to see that
you can hit a royal cycle in as little as 40 hands. Based on IGT's
patents (they are stated on the machines), it's obvious, at least to
me, to see the future trend of multi-line video poker.

Given the sensitivity of patents, I can't comment too much about this
except to say expect to see within the next 3 - 4 years video poker
games that can get you to the long run within a few spins. Image
hitting 9*N(0) within a few minutes. The downside is these games would
give new meaning to royal flush droughts.

would give new meaning to royal flush droughts.

I forgot to add if you think 9*N(0) is something, wait until you see
results under 16*N(0)(4 std dev) or 25*N(0)(5 std dev), etc. My
favorite is 49*N(0)(aka 7 std dev).

There's nothing like seeing math in action and still be in a losing
position after 7 std dev; I must be cursed with really bad luck.
Somewhere out there, there is some really lucky guy enjoying his 7 std
dev. It's just the way the math works -- it's all about expectations
(and having an adequate bankroll).

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "chungsterama" <chungsty@...> wrote:

Given the sensitivity of patents, I can't comment too much about this
except to say expect to see within the next 3 - 4 years video poker
games that can get you to the long run within a few spins. Image
hitting 9*N(0) within a few minutes. The downside is these games