Search BlackjackInfo

 Blackjack and Card Counting Forums - BlackjackInfo.com Kelly-betting for FX trading
 FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

#11
June 2nd, 2011, 06:33 PM
 blackjack avenger Executive Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 2,267
Lost in Translation?

Quote:
 Originally Posted by matt21 Can you clarify what you mean by "3rd or 4th Kelly" and "4th through 8th Kelly"? I think your other point is dead on - I consider myself to have one single BR that is used for AP and trading simultaneously.
3rd kelly = .33 kelly = 1/3 kelly
4th kelly = .25 kelly = 1/4 kelly

5th = 1/5 kelly
6th = 1/6 kelly
7th = 1/7 kelly
8th = 1/8 kelly

or is my terminology wrong?
#12
August 23rd, 2011, 12:46 PM
 matt21 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 368

bump.

I have a follow-up question here. I started this thread off with reference to the Kelly formula that states that the amount to be wagered on a bet or trade should be calculated by: Edge% / Odds. In this case odds refer to the amount of a winning payoff. Thus the higher the payoff (and thus the higher the variance) the lower the fraction of the BR that should be wagered.

What happens in the situation where the win result is less than a loss result? For example, a FX trading strategy that results mostly in winning trades of \$10 and few losing trades of \$50. The win rate is 90%, thus the edge per trade is \$4 (90% x \$10 + 10% x -\$50) or 8% (\$4/\$50).

The win pay-off is equal to 0.2 of a loser - surely it would be wrong to divide 8% by 0.2, and then bet 40% of the bankroll?

It would be great if somebody could shed some light on this for me.
I am currently dealing with an FX strategy where I encounter this situation a lot, and am not sure how much to risk per trade using a fractional Kelly approach.
#13
August 23rd, 2011, 02:22 PM
 DDutton Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Atlanta area Posts: 41

Quote:
How can one apply Kelly without a reasonable degree of confidence in what the +EV is?
#14
August 24th, 2011, 08:40 AM
 matt21 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 368

Quote:
 Originally Posted by DDutton How can one apply Kelly without a reasonable degree of confidence in what the +EV is?
Hey DDutton, I am assuming that I know what the +EV is. I need to do that in order to ask the question. You are of course right in pointing out that with the FX markets the probabilities are not certain as they are in casino games.
#15
August 25th, 2011, 09:16 AM
 blackjack avenger Executive Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 2,267
conservative

Bj bank 1/4 Kelly
Fx bank 1/6 Kelly, because of uncertainty
The above may balance the 2 investments.

How important is it to know exact advantage when being this conservative? I would think not much. It's one of the reasons we bet a fraction of Kelly, because of uncertainty.

Consider this:
An investment/game with an advantage of 1%.
Player A thinks its a .5% advantage
Player B thinks its a 2.25% advantage
They both bet 1/6 Kelly based on their perceived advantage.
Throw in a lot of variance. Both will be fine because they were conservative.

If player B had bet full Kelly, he would experience bank decline.

Also, being conservative allows one to have a low N0 because they don't have to resize bank down on losses as frequently.

Never be afraid of being conservative.
#16
August 25th, 2011, 10:18 AM
 Thunder Executive Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 2,197

Quote:
 Originally Posted by blackjack avenger Bj bank 1/4 Kelly Fx bank 1/6 Kelly, because of uncertainty The above may balance the 2 investments. How important is it to know exact advantage when being this conservative? I would think not much. It's one of the reasons we bet a fraction of Kelly, because of uncertainty. Consider this: An investment/game with an advantage of 1%. Player A thinks its a .5% advantage Player B thinks its a 2.25% advantage They both bet 1/6 Kelly based on their perceived advantage. Throw in a lot of variance. Both will be fine because they were conservative. If player B had bet full Kelly, he would experience bank decline. Also, being conservative allows one to have a low N0 because they don't have to resize bank down on losses as frequently. Never be afraid of being conservative.
I'd go with 1/3 but this is just me. How many trades have you had so far to lead you to thinking that you win 90% of them and lose 10%?

Last edited by Thunder; August 25th, 2011 at 10:21 AM.
#17
August 25th, 2011, 03:32 PM
 matt21 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 368

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Thunder I'd go with 1/3 but this is just me. How many trades have you had so far to lead you to thinking that you win 90% of them and lose 10%?
Hey Thunder. Again I wanted to proceed on the assumption that the win rate, and the EV, is known. What I was perplexed about is how to apply the Kelly formula - I have tried to explain my confusion in the post above.

Any thoughts?
#18
August 25th, 2011, 06:28 PM
 Thunder Executive Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 2,197

Well if you have \$1000 let's say, in that scenario, you'd want to risk 40% of your bankroll so that the maximum loss you'd have is \$400 while the max gain would be \$80. This would be full Kelly. Your bankroll will grow at a rate of 1.82% per trade. The difference between this and having a trading system where you win 70% of the time and lose 30% of the time (but the loss amount equals the win amounts) is that in the 70/30 trading system, you don't have these huge drawdowns which essentially kill any growth in your bankroll.

Last edited by Thunder; August 25th, 2011 at 06:30 PM.
#19
August 26th, 2011, 12:10 AM
 blackjack avenger Executive Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 2,267
overcomimg variance

One should be able to overcome (edit MANAGE) variance in a tough game/trade if they bet conservatively. In Thunders \$400 bet example, make it \$100 or \$40.

Last edited by blackjack avenger; August 26th, 2011 at 09:42 AM.
#20
August 26th, 2011, 02:28 AM
 zengrifter Executive Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: SoCal Posts: 10,532

Quote:
 Originally Posted by blackjack avenger As one is less certain of their advantage they should be more conservative, as is the case with market trading.
But how certain can you be? zg

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 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 Rules
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Welcome to the BlackjackInfo Forums     Site Announcements Blackjack Forums     Blackjack - General     Blackjack - Voodoo Betting Strategies     Blackjack - Card Counting     Blackjack - Advanced Strategies     Blackjack - Variations     Blackjack - Theory and Math     Blackjack - Online Casinos     Blackjack - Stories Land Based Casinos     Las Vegas     Nevada - Outside Vegas     Eastern US     Southern US     Midwest US     Western US     Canada     Australia     Europe     Asia, Africa & Far East     Caribbean & Latin America Online Casinos     Reputable Casinos     Problem Casinos     Latest Promotions Miscellaneous     Other Games     Gambling Law     Blackjack in the Media     Site Discussion     News     Sports Betting     Investing and Financial     Anything Else

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:27 AM.