What is the risk of ruin of a large but finite bankroll played
indefinitely against a breakeven (EV=0,ER=100%) gamble?
Alternately, what is the bankroll required to play a breakeven gamble
indefinitely?
Something to ponder ...
nightoftheiguana2000 wrote:
What is the risk of ruin of a large but finite bankroll played
indefinitely against a breakeven (EV=0,ER=100%) gamble?Alternately, what is the bankroll required to play a breakeven gamble
indefinitely?
Intuitively I would think it's a no-brainer that over the course of
infinity you'd plunge to the depths of hell and soar to the gates of
heaven.
- H.
Well put. But there's a trick here. The "gates of heaven" are
unbounded, there's always a bit more money (virgins?) around the
corner - it's the "depths of hell" that test you, and everybody has a
breaking point. In the real world of course the casino cuts off your
fun at some point, so the "gates of heaven" are in fact limited, for
example the story (true? or fiction?) about Bob Dancer at the MGM in
"Million Dollar Video Poker". But, the casino is actually doing you a
favor, by cutting you off at some point they are improving the odds
that you will emerge victorious. For a breakeven gamble with a limited
bankroll but unlimited upside potential the risk of ruin is 100%. On
the other hand if the upside potential is cutoff at the same amount as
your bankroll the risk of ruin is reduced to 50%. And of course there
are ways to reduce the risk even further, cue Mr. Kelly, if you can
find an edge.
ยทยทยท
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@...> wrote:
nightoftheiguana2000 wrote:
> What is the risk of ruin of a large but finite bankroll played
> indefinitely against a breakeven (EV=0,ER=100%) gamble?
>
> Alternately, what is the bankroll required to play a breakeven gamble
> indefinitely?
Intuitively I would think it's a no-brainer that over the course of
infinity you'd plunge to the depths of hell and soar to the gates of
heaven.