Optimizing wealth with rebates

[zlaroc]

Warriors !!!!!

[HeeeHAWWWW]

So ask yourself, last time you checked, did you adjust your bet size after a set amount of bankroll growth, positive or negative; and if so, at what levels of growth and by how much?

It was:

a) a fixed % of my bankroll, adjusted daily (replicating my real staking).

b) to win - this doesn't make an awful lot of difference since I'm mostly betting around evens. However, it's just good discipline since it's higher +EG than fixed risk stakes.

[MonkeyF0cker]

A) Guy proposes a game in which people are guaranteed to go broke.
B) Guy gets challenged by someone else to play out said game against him for free, real money.
C) Guy denies challenge.
D) Guy continues to call himself a professional gambler and others amateurs afterward.

No sense in continuing a conversation with a self-proclaimed professional gambler who doesn't take up an offer to win GUARANTEED money from one he considers a lowly, ignorant amateur. He has a 100% estimated win percentage and wagers $0.00. Seems optimal to me.

[jmunzz1116]

This is a ridiculous notion.

This, along with the spreadsheet referenced earlier, gets at the very essence of what I am trying to say about the difference between amateurs and professionals. Some lessons you just have to learn.

Bettors just don’t understand that, even with a long term advantage, how bad it can go in the short term.

Even with a perfectly known edge, of course there will be variance. You simply will not get 6 out of every 10 white tickets, every time. Let’s make the math easier. Different markets may yield a slightly different plan, but let’s talk NFL…which I will focus on.

If you have an expectation of winning 57.5% of the time in the NFL, then on any given week, you have the basically the same probability of going 12-2 as you do of going 4-10.

Think about it. If you increase your bets after the 12-2 week and then go 4-10, or decrease after that 4-10 week and then hit 12-2, you will have a 16-12 record. That’s hitting over 57% of your bets and you will have lost money.

We are dealing with applied mathematics here. It’s real easy to create long term progressive betting schemes on paper. They always seem so good. The reason for this is that you guys can manage your percentages on paper.

But this is real life. And in real life, those percentages cannot be managed.

After learning to play online poker and attempting to make a living off it one thing I've learned very well is variance. You are absolutely right in that they're not understanding how much of a ************ variance is. 50% can lose 20 times in a row but over the long term it's supposed to be pretty close to 50% or whichever number...

[yak merchant]

After learning to play online poker and attempting to make a living off it one thing I've learned very well is variance. You are absolutely right in that they're not understanding how much of a ************ variance is. 50% can lose 20 times in a row but over the long term it's supposed to be pretty close to 50% or whichever number...

Maybe "they" already compute variance in the model and maybe that is why Kelly says to bet 0% on a 50/50. There is no such thing as pot committed in sports betting.

[MonkeyF0cker]

If you're a professional gambler worried about short term variance, you should probably get a job and save some money so you have enough to live off of for a while separate from your gambling bankroll. My bets are no different than an investment portfolio. Long term growth is what matters. Most sensible investors don't draw from their retirement funds to buy themselves a McDouble.