So Am I A NIt?

[Arnold_O]

i wouldn't bet anything on this 7-5 wager.

if i had 1.25 million and didn't want to bust my ass working any longer then i am in protection mode. losing hurts 10x's more than the thrill of winning.


however, if working is easy and i am making an almost guaranteed $200,000/yr then i risk maybe $10,000 of it.

actually i dont even do that becasue i am against gambling.

[Artsemis]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
a) i think david would bet ((1.2 * .5) - .5) / 1.2 = 1/12th of his bankroll

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't a repeated game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't need to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
the Kelly criterion, or Kelly formula, is a formula used to maximize the long-term growth rate of repeated plays of a given gamble that has positive expected value.

[/ QUOTE ]

Short-term simply has to do with how much you value your money and how much "gamble" is in you, no formula will fit that.

[wsock23]

[ QUOTE ]
actually i dont even do that becasue i am against gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you're posting here why?

[wardkaew]

I would probably bet 20-25% of my br. Notice that I also am pretty overrolled the stakes I play, and I have blown 10-20% of my roll a couple of times in massive tiltsessions. So I know losing 25% really wouldnt kill me. Guess Im still a nit for having 100+ buyins tho..

[Prime Time]

A. Kelley Obv.

B. Most would over bet

[BDaws]

[ QUOTE ]
honestly i think people generally might gamble more than you expect. there is that popular tv show... i forget what it is called but there are all the different suitcases with different amounts of money in them, and people get offered buyouts by some dude, and they have to decide whether to take the buyout or continue to gamble.

im always really surprised at these poor families who pass up on 100k to go for more, when they have a 1 in 4 (or whatever) shot of getting like $50.

i dunno, just sort of an anecdote, but either that show selects people that tend to be gamblers, or people are bigger gamblers than you would think.

[/ QUOTE ]
You're talking about Deal or No Deal. The banker is essentially making an offer on the specific suitcase you hold. 95% of the time the offer on the suitcase is lower than the expected value of the suitcase. People still take the money a good portion of the time, indicating they are risk averse. The few times the offer was better than the EV, the contestant took the money.

It is fair to say that the majority of the American public is much nittier than Sklansky.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
a) i think david would bet ((1.2 * .5) - .5) / 1.2 = 1/12th of his bankroll

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion

[/ QUOTE ]

This isn't a repeated game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't need to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
the Kelly criterion, or Kelly formula, is a formula used to maximize the long-term growth rate of repeated plays of a given gamble that has positive expected value.

[/ QUOTE ]

Short-term simply has to do with how much you value your money and how much "gamble" is in you, no formula will fit that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Utility formulas will fit that.

Saying Kelly doesn't apply to one time only situations is like saying you shouldn't use EV calcs to figure out whether to take a one time only bet.

That being said, Kelly won't necessarily be best if your utility from of differing bankroll sizes does not work on a linear scale, or if you gain utility from gambling more.

[sweetjazz]

I read somwehere that:

"You may think that a particular play is profitable, but sometimes it may not be the best play because an alternative play is more profitable."

While risking 10% of your bankroll is profitable, you make even more profit risking 100% of your bankroll.

"Therefore [risking 100%] has the higher positive expectation and is the better play."

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[shootaa]

this is retarded. you are a nit because you play limit.

[aramfingal]

[ QUOTE ]
Any good gambler who says more than 25 percent is a moron.

[/ QUOTE ]

dear mr. sklansky,
if you want to be one of us, which you apparently do, you're gonna have to start spelling it "moran"