|
|
#11
10-20-2007, 02:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Kelly Criterion deduced from ROI & Prize Structure.
[ QUOTE ]
this is an outstanding piece of work quantifying br requirements, which is greatest reason gamblers end up busto. [/ QUOTE ]I think the most common reason for going busto is being a losing player [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] 
|
|
#12
10-20-2007, 02:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Kelly Criterion deduced from ROI & Prize Structure.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] this is an outstanding piece of work quantifying br requirements, which is greatest reason gamblers end up busto. [/ QUOTE ]I think the most common reason for going busto is being a losing player [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] lol..... of course , i was speaking about winning players. many do not realize they are doomed to failure over a large number of events if they don't pay proper respect to kelly.
|
|
#13
10-20-2007, 02:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Kelly Criterion deduced from ROI & Prize Structure.
[ QUOTE ]
OK, Let's see if I understand this correctly: I play the $2.20 sat's into the Sunday $100K (Flat $11 T$ payout to top 20%) That tournament is closely approx'd by this table: [ QUOTE ] 90 player SnG, top 18 itm. return on investment : 100.0% kelly criterion : 14.51% return on investment : 50.0% kelly criterion : 6.27% return on investment : 25.0% kelly criterion : 2.85% [/ QUOTE ] My ROI is around 25%, so my bankroll should be $2.20/2.85% or $77 for optimal growth or $154 for a more conservative approach. My gut says that no way will a 25% ROI player bust a $77 bankroll 1/3 the time playing the $2.20 sats... The variance is too small. I put the likelyhood closer to 1 in 50... (or smaller) Where am I going wrong? [/ QUOTE ] 1/3 chance of your bankroll being cut in half i think, so down to $39
|
|
#15
10-20-2007, 05:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Kelly Criterion deduced from ROI & Prize Structure.
[ QUOTE ]
OK, Let's see if I understand this correctly: I play the $2.20 sat's into the Sunday $100K (Flat $11 T$ payout to top 20%) That tournament is closely approx'd by this table: [ QUOTE ] 90 player SnG, top 18 itm. return on investment : 100.0% kelly criterion : 14.51% return on investment : 50.0% kelly criterion : 6.27% return on investment : 25.0% kelly criterion : 2.85% [/ QUOTE ] My ROI is around 25%, so my bankroll should be $2.20/2.85% or $77 for optimal growth or $154 for a more conservative approach. My gut says that no way will a 25% ROI player bust a $77 bankroll 1/3 the time playing the $2.20 sats... The variance is too small. I put the likelyhood closer to 1 in 50... (or smaller) Where am I going wrong? [/ QUOTE ] The flat payout of the satellite reduces the variance compared to normal tournament structure.
|
|
#16
10-20-2007, 05:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Kelly Criterion deduced from ROI & Prize Structure.
[ QUOTE ]
I can calculate it for other prizestructures & ROIs, post them here (include the entire prize structure, not just ITM) and I'll run it trough the program, also include the rake and ROI(s) you want. [/ QUOTE ] This is good stuff. I'd be curious to see the results for Stars 180's, 45's, Sunday Million, and Sunday Hundred Grand.
|
|
#17
10-20-2007, 06:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Kelly Criterion deduced from ROI & Prize Structure.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] OK, Let's see if I understand this correctly: I play the $2.20 sat's into the Sunday $100K (Flat $11 T$ payout to top 20%) That tournament is closely approx'd by this table: [ QUOTE ] 90 player SnG, top 18 itm. return on investment : 100.0% kelly criterion : 14.51% return on investment : 50.0% kelly criterion : 6.27% return on investment : 25.0% kelly criterion : 2.85% [/ QUOTE ] My ROI is around 25%, so my bankroll should be $2.20/2.85% or $77 for optimal growth or $154 for a more conservative approach. My gut says that no way will a 25% ROI player bust a $77 bankroll 1/3 the time playing the $2.20 sats... The variance is too small. I put the likelyhood closer to 1 in 50... (or smaller) Where am I going wrong? [/ QUOTE ] The flat payout of the satellite reduces the variance compared to normal tournament structure. [/ QUOTE ] I think your right... I'll even go out on a limb and say that the variance is probably less than a SNG...(?)
|
|
#18
10-20-2007, 07:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Kelly Criterion deduced from ROI & Prize Structure.
[ QUOTE ]
OK, Let's see if I understand this correctly: I play the $2.20 sat's into the Sunday $100K (Flat $11 T$ payout to top 20%) That tournament is closely approx'd by this table: [ QUOTE ] 90 player SnG, top 18 itm. return on investment : 100.0% kelly criterion : 14.51% return on investment : 50.0% kelly criterion : 6.27% return on investment : 25.0% kelly criterion : 2.85% [/ QUOTE ] My ROI is around 25%, so my bankroll should be $2.20/2.85% or $77 for optimal growth or $154 for a more conservative approach. My gut says that no way will a 25% ROI player bust a $77 bankroll 1/3 the time playing the $2.20 sats... The variance is too small. I put the likelyhood closer to 1 in 50... (or smaller) Where am I going wrong? [/ QUOTE ] Lets see, where to begin... One thing is that playing according to kelly criterion you will never go bust, assuming you can continue lowering the stakes (which in practice you cant). The second is that you should factor in that you are not actually winning when you win the satelite, you are winning when you win the satelite AND the make it in the money in the actual event, which lowers the kelly criterion ALOT because the variance is so much higher. If you choose to ignore the fact that you are not "winning" when you make it trough the satelite, then the satelite has higher kelly criterion because of the flat prize structure. I'm not at home right now so I cant perform the calculations, but because the prize structure is flat you can perform the calculation using any available online kelly criterion calculator.
|
|
#19
10-20-2007, 09:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Kelly Criterion deduced from ROI & Prize Structure.
Typohh,
They don't care about cashing in the actually event. Many people play the events for $T which can be exchanged for $ at like a 95-99% rate. So I don't think this point, [ QUOTE ] The second is that you should factor in that you are not actually winning when you win the satelite, you are winning when you win the satelite AND the make it in the money in the actual event, which lowers the kelly criterion ALOT because the variance is so much higher. [/ QUOTE ] is very critical. Sherman
|
|
#20
10-21-2007, 02:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Kelly Criterion deduced from ROI & Prize Structure.
Sherman is right. The $2.20 sat into the Sunday 100K and the $5R sat to the 55K are easy T$ generators... Are there others??
Do you have a calculator that you could recommend? Thanks!
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
