Originally posted by 8lrr8
So why the discrepancy after 600 bets?
The two approximations you've noted apply to (geometric) average growth rates, while the median bankroll is a compounded growth figure. As Albert Einstein allegedly quipped, “The most powerful force in the universe is compound interest.”
Now while Einstein's authorship of the above statement is dubious, there's no question that the effect of compound interest over a large number of trials can be substantial.
So let's look at your example above:
- US Odds: -113
- Win Prob: 59%
- Bankroll: $10,000.000
- Trials: 600
At full-Kelly:
- Stake: $1,267.000
- Expected Growth: $71.807 (71.807/10,000 = 0.71807%)
- Median bankroll after 600 trials: $731,869.998 ≈ (1+0.71807%)<sup>600</sup> (slight difference due to rounding)
At 70%-Kelly:
- Stake: $891.031
- Expected Growth: $65.375 (65.375/10,000 = 0.65375%)
- Median bankroll after 600 trials: $498,855.372 ≈ (1+0.65375%)<sup>600</sup> (slight difference due to rounding)
At 50%-Kelly:
- Stake: $638.125
- Expected Growth: $53.905 (53.905/10,000 = 0.53905%)
- Median bankroll after 600 trials: $251,696.177 ≈ (1+0.53905%)<sup>600</sup> (slight difference due to rounding)
So indeed what we see is that 50%-Kelly expected growth is about 75% of full Kelly growth (0.53905% / 0.71807% = 75.069%), and that 70%-Kelly growth is about 90% of full Kelly growth (0.65375% / 0.71807% = 91.043%).