Not necessarily a new topic, but I can’t find any in-depth discussion or explanation of why, for example, five-play is less volatile than single-play. If, in fact, it is, is there a formula for calculating the difference? And is it reasonable to assume 10-play is less volatile than 5-play?
Thanks for any help…
roaches@austin.rr.com wrote:
Not necessarily a new topic, but I can't find any in-depth discussion or explanation of why, for example, five-play is less volatile than single-play. If, in fact, it is, is there a formula for calculating the difference? And is it reasonable to assume 10-play is less volatile than 5-play?
Thanks for any help...
The rule of thumb I've heard, which makes intuitive sense, is that
volatility is based on the square root of the number of lines. 4-play
would be twice as volatile or, as I believe you meant when you wrote
that more lines reduces volatility, half as volatile per amount bet as
single line.
Deuces per bet variance = 3.14 + 22.695/N
About 26 for single line, about 11 for triple play, about 8 for 5-play, about 4 for 50-play
Kelly bankroll = bet size times variance divided by edge
If your real time present right now current gambling bankroll isn’t greater than the Kelly bankroll, then you can’t take that gamble, under the Kelly system.
Adding to NOTI fine reference to a Kelly bankroll: A Kelly bankroll figure optimizes bankroll growth, but generally represents an uncomfortable risk level for most players - 13.5% risk of ruin.
Some players I know use the kelly numbers, but inflate the suggested bankroll by 150% or 200% (respective ROR’s of 5% and 2%).
I'm not sure how there would be any ROR with Kelly betting. Does that
assume that the initial bet level would be retained forever? Under
that assumption, Kelly betting strategy might not optimize bankroll
growth.
harry.porter@verizon.net wrote:
Adding to NOTI fine reference to a Kelly bankroll: A Kelly bankroll figure optimizes bankroll growth, but generally represents an uncomfortable risk level for most players - 13.5% risk of ruin.
Some players I know use the kelly numbers, but inflate the suggested bankroll by 150% or 200% (respective ROR's of 5% and 2%).
harry.porter@… wrote:
Adding to NOTI fine reference to a Kelly bankroll: A Kelly bankroll figure optimizes bankroll growth, but generally represents an uncomfortable risk level for most players - 13.5% risk of ruin.
Some players I know use the kelly numbers, but inflate the suggested bankroll by 150% or 200% (respective ROR’s of 5% and 2%).
I’m not sure how there would be any ROR with Kelly betting. Does that
assume that the initial bet level would be retained forever? Under
that assumption, Kelly betting strategy might not optimize bankroll
growth.
In reply to above:
Obviously ROR isn’t applciable with Kelly betting. However, from a practical standpoint, most attractive video poker opportunities are not scalable in the manner that a true application of Kelly would dictate (limited by game availability).
In any case, in the context of this thread, a Kelly bankroll calculation was cited in response to the general question of what’s an appropriate bankroll for a specific multiline play (fixed denom) … neither the question, nor (I believe) the answer presumed Kelly betting, given these practical limitations.
—In vpF…@…com, <007@…> wrote:
It’s only “risk of ruin” if the amount represents the entire bankroll, but Kelly system gamblers would never risk the entire bankroll on anything other than a sure thing. For the Kelly system, it’s the risk of having to reduce the bet size or resume scouting for an acceptable play if they are already at the min bet for that particular gamble. If you blow through your entire gambling bankroll, of course you can no longer gamble at all, until you somehow find some more money or convince a casino or bank to give you a no-doc loan. If you hit the Kelly bankroll limit and you can’t reduce the bet size on your current gamble, you have to stop that particular gamble, but you can scout (scouting is free) and you might find another gamble that does qualify for your new reduced bankroll size. The smart consumer doesn’t just settle for the best offered at the moment, instead they look around for the better bargains.