Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Gambling > Probability
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 09-23-2007, 10:49 PM
jay_shark jay_shark is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,277
Default Re: Am I using this ROR Formula Correctly?

Right , stupid me .

Any multiple of 10 works.

r=0.5 + [0.5^10r^11 + 0.5^20r^21 + 0.5^30r^31+...]

Notice that [..] is a geometric infinite series with
a=0.5^10r^11
ratio= 0.5^10r^10
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-24-2007, 01:00 AM
pzhon pzhon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,515
Default Re: Am I using this ROR Formula Correctly?

[ QUOTE ]
r=0.5 + [0.5^10r^11 + 0.5^20r^21 + 0.5^30r^31+...]


[/ QUOTE ]
That still contains multiple errors. There is no simple way to fix it.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-24-2007, 01:08 AM
BruceZ BruceZ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,078
Default Re: Am I using this ROR Formula Correctly?

[ QUOTE ]
Right , stupid me .

Any multiple of 10 works.

r=0.5 + [0.5^10r^11 + 0.5^20r^21 + 0.5^30r^31+...]

Notice that [..] is a geometric infinite series with
a=0.5^10r^11
ratio= 0.5^10r^10

[/ QUOTE ]

NO, it's still no good. You are only considering the highly unlikely cases where he wins multiples of 10 in a row, and ignoring the primary cases such as winning less than 10 games and losing 1 more than he wins.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-24-2007, 02:44 AM
pzhon pzhon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,515
Default Re: Am I using this ROR Formula Correctly?

[ QUOTE ]

The formula says e^-2000/441 = 0.0107253, if you use a bankroll of 50, and 0.0111722, if you use a bankroll of 49.55 to make up for ending up with an amount from 0 to 0.9 when you bust out.

The actual value is 0.01114212036696421114353026474437004599225433570306...
which is pretty close.

Since I knew this would be slightly off asymptotically, I was surprised that it was so accurate.

[/ QUOTE ]
The accuracy might be just a coincidence.

That the adjustment by 0.45 units is not quite accurate. You are almost twice as likely to end up with 0.9 as you are to end with 0.

0.0 0.0006948208005020496252
0.1 0.0008859642953569293349
0.2 0.0009940893229263886848
0.3 0.0010712675444494628930
0.4 0.0011330034250735614834
0.5 0.0011857261540454036738
0.6 0.0012326439947740134358
0.7 0.0012755630322889410147
0.8 0.0013155907260234342068
0.9 0.0013534510715240267910

partial Mathematica code:

<ul type="square">
// {t[k]} are the solutions of t^10 = (1+t^21)/2 with norm less than 1
equations[k_] := Table[Sum[a[ii] t[ii]^j, {ii, 10}] == If[j == k, 1, 0], {j, 0, 9}]
solutions[k_] := solutions[k] = NSolve[equations[k]]
bustprob[n_, k_] := Sum[a[ii]t[ii]^n, {ii, 10}] /. solutions[k]
Table[{k, bustprob[500, k]}, {k, 0, 9}][/list]The average amount you have when you bust out is .4988 units, so in some sense a better adjustment was to use a bankroll of 49.5012, but that produces a less accurate estimate of the risk of ruin, 0.0112217, which is even higher.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.