Does EV ever Trump Game Quality?

[Sonny]

And the ONLY time you need to worry about your EV "in relation to risk" is in the case of long shot bets, which simply do not occur in standard BJ bets.

Are we only considering standard BJ bets or all bets, all techniques and all games? I agree with the post above for the most part, but it only applies to that limited situation. Once you start to move beyond card counting it breaks down very quickly. Your expertise with sequencing and roulette give you firsthand knowledge of this. I'm sure you've passed up games with higher EV than many people here will ever see. Even simple things like side bets often rely on high payout longshots that make the opportunity less appealing. Any VP players here? How about OCP? Both seem to be "gateway" games for young APs and both are good examples of risk-ridden opportunities.

While I agree with much of what you wrote, the OP's question is very general so perhaps it requires a more broad answer.

-Sonny-

 

[iCountNTrack]

I think many posters have answered the OP question. The answer is pretty simple. The expectation value expressed as a percent could be misleading as you lose some information due to information smearing, the best thing is to use an expectation value in units/hour i.e win rate and specifying number of rounds per hour and what fraction of Kelly you are using.
SCORE as defined by Don Schlesinger is a standardized win rate with fixed number of rounds per hour (100), bankroll size ($10000) , and full Kelly, making it easier for comparing two different games.

 

[aslan]

I think many posters have answered the OP question. The answer is pretty simple. The expectation value expressed as a percent could be misleading as you lose some information due to information smearing, the best thing is to use an expectation value in units/hour i.e win rate and specifying number of rounds per hour and what fraction of Kelly you are using.
SCORE as defined by Don Schlesinger is a standardized win rate with fixed number of rounds per hour (100), bankroll size ($10000) , and full Kelly, making it easier for comparing two different games.

That should be the last word on this. Blackjack avenger?

 

[blackjack avenger]

Concise

I tried to be a bit vague to see what would happen. The ev ra discussion ran down the tracks. I even bought a ticket!:laugh:So as Sonny suggested let's get more precise.

Many have stated and agreed that with an infinite bank one bets whatever they can at any advantage.

A player is betting a kelly fraction and resizing on wins and losses. He bets an optimal bet ramp. His bets are now bouncing into table max's. He can continue his risk of drawdown and just raise stakes and place max bets sooner chasing ev. However, this will raise NO and lower SCORE & score. So, Kelly theory seems to go against SCORE, score and NO.

Should the player keep a high SCORE, score and low NO and just let the bank build
or
Should the player chase EV

I am thinking one should perhaps let the bank grow until it has a very small chance of drawdown risk, so you are not risking large drawdowns chasing ev. In other words in practical terms your bank is near infinite. Perhaps .25 kelly resizing or 8th kelly fixed. The very large bank will lower the NO because one does not have to resize down as often on losses, this should have a mitigating effect on placing max bets sooner and having your spread shrink.

Is there a math formula to answer this question? Perhaps CE looking to certainty of growth vs drawdown or when does CE = EV if possible.

or going back to an earlier statement:
With an infinite bank one bets what they can at any advantage, then the goal would be to have a large enough bank that it takes on the characteristics of an infinite bank ie. one does not have to resize down on losses so they can chase ev.


:joker::whip:
Are we now cooking with heat?
good cards

 

[sagefr0g]

damm it's confusing

just piping in here, lol. i can't even begin to fathom the question, don't fully understand kelly, N0, SCORE or score.
EV?, i think i have half a clue, lol.
whatever, maybe i'm wrong but i think kelly being a utility function maybe subjectifies the question?:whip:
cause well anyway, i just know this, from real life experience, heck man when i'm out in the jungle i'm always making decisions. should i make this play or maybe not. which opportunity should i take a shot at first? ect. ect. ..probably i shouldn't be bothering with such decisions, but ok just me, the whole thing is underpinned with this utility question.
at some point, the question becomes, who am i?, what do i want? how is this going to affect me psychologically? is quality of life while investing plus ev? but ok, i know that's pretty much bull crap, but it's real, lol. even more real, even if it may not happen is what happens if the specter of risk is realized.
well whatever, come to think of it, if money is the ultimate goal then isn't icnt's solution of units expected over time or hands played the ultimate answer? risk be dammed, lol, since it's always gonna be there anyway,
just me maybe, i suspect utility is more of a factor than math is able to fathom. the jungle, lol, is more of an unknown than we think, how much bounty it will yield for any given individual just may depend more on that individual than we can know.:cat:

 

[blackjack avenger]

Truly Wise Old Froggie

kelly being a utility function maybe subjectifies the question?

the question becomes, who am i?, what do i want? how is this going to affect me psychologically? is quality of life while investing plus ev?

even if it may not happen is what happens if the specter of risk is realized.

if money is the ultimate goal risk be dammed, lol, since it's always gonna be there anyway,

i suspect utility is more of a factor than math is able to fathom. the jungle, lol, is more of an unknown than we think, how much bounty it will yield for any given individual just may depend more on that individual than we can know.:cat:

Wise indeed
:joker::whip:
good cards

 

[aslan]

just piping in here, lol. i can't even begin to fathom the question, don't fully understand kelly, N0, SCORE or score.
EV?, i think i have half a clue, lol.
whatever, maybe i'm wrong but i think kelly being a utility function maybe subjectifies the question?:whip:
cause well anyway, i just know this, from real life experience, heck man when i'm out in the jungle i'm always making decisions. should i make this play or maybe not. which opportunity should i take a shot at first? ect. ect. ..probably i shouldn't be bothering with such decisions, but ok just me, the whole thing is underpinned with this utility question.
at some point, the question becomes, who am i?, what do i want? how is this going to affect me psychologically? is quality of life while investing plus ev? but ok, i know that's pretty much bull crap, but it's real, lol. even more real, even if it may not happen is what happens if the specter of risk is realized.
well whatever, come to think of it, if money is the ultimate goal then isn't icnt's solution of units expected over time or hands played the ultimate answer? risk be dammed, lol, since it's always gonna be there anyway,
just me maybe, i suspect utility is more of a factor than math is able to fathom. the jungle, lol, is more of an unknown than we think, how much bounty it will yield for any given individual just may depend more on that individual than we can know.:cat:

Money is it, as you say, up to a level of risk you are willing to take. That's how I figure everything. What I am working on is how to stick to it.

 

[sagefr0g]

as an aside

Money is it, as you say, up to a level of risk you are willing to take. That's how I figure everything. What I am working on is how to stick to it.

yeah how to stick to it.
see i think you and i have a situation in common, both of us have this recreational sort of a foundation far as this AP stuff goes.
retired, so yeah heck yeah, extra money coming is, yeah man that's icing on the cake, but ultimately not really that big a deal, so part of the ev is the action. it's got a sporting aspect for us. therein lay a problem cause an action junkie an AP don't wanna be. the best pro AP i know told me, "if you're not bored you're not doing it right", lol.
see? it's a bit of a paradox, no?
the trick to me, is to really learn to enjoy boredom, lol.
but still it's not so simple, cause well maybe this is voodoo, just me, i think it has to do with one's status in the grand scheme of things, ie. what are one's needs.:
Ye may make plays for yourselves, and your mates,
and your cubs as they need, and ye can;
But make plays not for pleasure of making plays,
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showpost.php?p=192946&postcount=71

at least maybe we (seeing as how we a'int spring chickens or broke) can take solace in the idea behind this verse:
Cave-Right is the right of the Father --
to hunt by himself for his own:
He is freed of all calls to the Pack;
he is judged by the Council alone.

Because of his age and his cunning,
because of his gripe and his paw,
In all that the Law leaveth open,
the word of your Head Wolf is Law.

 

[aslan]

yeah how to stick to it.
see i think you and i have a situation in common, both of us have this recreational sort of a foundation far as this AP stuff goes.
retired, so yeah heck yeah, extra money coming is, yeah man that's icing on the cake, but ultimately not really that big a deal, so part of the ev is the action. it's got a sporting aspect for us. therein lay a problem cause an action junkie an AP don't wanna be. the best pro AP i know told me, "if you're not bored you're not doing it right", lol.
see? it's a bit of a paradox, no?
the trick to me, is to really learn to enjoy boredom, lol.
but still it's not so simple, cause well maybe this is voodoo, just me, i think it has to do with one's status in the grand scheme of things, ie. what are one's needs.:
Ye may make plays for yourselves, and your mates,
and your cubs as they need, and ye can;
But make plays not for pleasure of making plays,
http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showpost.php?p=192946&postcount=71

at least maybe we (seeing as how we a'int spring chickens or broke) can take solace in the idea behind this verse:
Cave-Right is the right of the Father --
to hunt by himself for his own:
He is freed of all calls to the Pack;
he is judged by the Council alone.

Because of his age and his cunning,
because of his gripe and his paw,
In all that the Law leaveth open,
the word of your Head Wolf is Law.

heh heh heh

Like the poetry.

The boredom. Yeah. I find counting superissimo boring. Then that scares me 'cause being so relaxed and bored looking must make me look like a counter, and I don't want to look like that. That's where I put on the act a bit, because otherwise I "look" too much in control, and that can't be good.

So I've got snap myself out of it all the time and be a good ploppy, not an ostentatious one (most the time), but just an ordinary run-of-the-mill everyday ploppy. But I like how some of the APs or more knowledgeable APs do the drunk act, something I learned in my pool room days (slap a little whiskey cologne around my face and neck), when you wanted to tempt lesser hustlers to take advantage of you. It can't hurt to look four sails to the wind, and it does break up the monotony and boredom of the process.

Yup, tomorrow I'm going to the casino and so I will take that opportunity to have a little fun with it. BTW, it's the casino where Newt used to play the MMs. So I'll have two plays, which also helps break up the boredom.

PS-- When I first started counting I played the ostentatious ploppy, sweating and nervous and jumping up when winning with max bet out. Still do that to a limited extent. But the point being is that "acting" nervous and high strung can get you being that way too, and that can have an adverse effect on your game, 'cause it's hard to still be that quiet little computer on the inside watching one's antics on the outside. You want to be the way you act, so the deception is at least for me hard to pull off without some danger of being the idiot I'm play acting as. Many would say that shouldn't be too hard in my case, but everyone has critics and if they didn't, they must never have stood for anything at all or done anything that mattered anyway.

 

[sagefr0g]

further more of an aside

heh heh heh

Like the poetry.

The boredom. Yeah. I find counting superissimo boring. Then that scares me 'cause being so relaxed and bored looking must make me look like a counter, and I don't want to look like that. That's where I put on the act a bit, because otherwise I "look" too much in control, and that can't be good.

So I've got snap myself out of it all the time and be a good ploppy, not an ostentatious one (most the time), but just an ordinary run-of-the-mill everyday ploppy. But I like how some of the APs or more knowledgeable APs do the drunk act, something I learned in my pool room days (slap a little whiskey cologne around my face and neck), when you wanted to tempt lesser hustlers to take advantage of you. It can't hurt to look four sails to the wind, and it does break up the monotony and boredom of the process.

Yup, tomorrow I'm going to the casino and so I will take that opportunity to have a little fun with it. BTW, it's the casino where Newt used to play the MMs. So I'll have two plays, which also helps break up the boredom.

PS-- When I first started counting I played the ostentatious ploppy, sweating and nervous and jumping up when winning with max bet out. Still do that to a limited extent. But the point being is that "acting" nervous and high strung can get you being that way too, and that can have an adverse effect on your game, 'cause it's hard to still be that quiet little computer on the inside watching one's antics on the outside. You want to be the way you act, so the deception is at least for me hard to pull off without some danger of being the idiot I'm play acting as. Many would say that shouldn't be too hard in my case, but everyone has critics and if they didn't, they must never have stood for anything at all or done anything that mattered anyway.

i guess i've never had much of an act, i try and stay out of their face, i guess and try and not be obnoxious. sometimes, i'll purposely act more bored than i am, lol. whatever, i guess when it comes to an act, i pretty much try and keep it the really me, as much as possible with out broadcasting what it is i'm up to. try and fly under the radar, sorta thing, what ever i imagine they might be thinking with regard to me. maybe act out of a healthy dose of paranoia sorta thing? i dunno, lol.
the boredom thing, is well, i guess it has to do with the fact that AP stuff is work related as opposed to fun and what is the ole saying about work, 'they wouldn't call it work, if you like it' , lol. but anyway AP stuff has become to me pretty much like hunting in nature, so it's i guess a primordial sort of a thing, as such it's pretty well rooted in our nature, so there is a sense of satisfaction about the practice of it.
well, fair thee well at that joint tomorrow, errhh i doubt that guy will be there as i saw him not to long ago down in my neck of the woods. hopefully no one else has moved in but you may well find some competition there.
so whatever, maybe there's plenty of stuff to juggle besides ev, game quality, SCORE, score and optimality, lol. certainly one hopes to have all that stuff on one's side best as possible. that stuff's a good way for a hungry predator to decide what's edible or not i guess, lol. kind of can give one an idea of how things are working out as far as one's ventures as well.

 

[blackjack avenger]

Rushhhhhhhhhh

The boredom. Yeah. I find counting superissimo boring.

Think I have a cure for the boredom.
1. Bet a higher fraction of kelly
2. If don't want to raise big bets, throw a few big bets out in lower counts.
3. Spread more

Try to keep your ror under control
I think you may find your blood running a bit!

:joker::whip:
good cards

 

[mikeyd]

Sucker,

I am glad to hear that we are on good terms in the academic arena.

Now permit me to explain why your reasoning is incorrect here, as relates to to this example.

You are confusing TBA (Total Bet Advantage) with IBA (Initial Bet Advantage), and therein lies the problem. You are not considering the fact that the advantage on your hand changes when you decide to split or double-down. In fact, you are making it less likely that you'll win the hand, at the exchange of being able to put more money on the table. In the example I gave, the advantage relates to your initial bet.

So, back to the example. You'd have a 2% advantage with respect to your initial wager on your hand if you decided to take a hit (and play your hand from there. However, if you were willing to put up another max-bet by doubling-down, then you'd have a 2.1% advantage, with respect to your initial wager.

However, by doubling-down, you do not have an advantage of 2.1%, with respect to your total wager (IOW, your initial bet plus double-down bet). Indeed, by doubling down, you are decreasing your chance of actually winning the hand, and thus, you are decreasing the advantage with respect to your total wager. However, so long as you are not decreasing your advantage by more than a factor of 2, then the EV is still positive because you are doubling your wager. Therefore, the EV-maximizing index is determined by the point where you are giving up less than half of your edge to be able to double your wager. With this enlightenment, let's revisit the example.

By taking a hit and playing our hand from there we have an advantage of 2% with respect to our initial wager, but if we are willing to double the money on the table then we'd have an advantage of 2.1%, with respect to our initial wager. This then means that our advantage on the hand has only become 1.05%, but by doubling our wager, we get a 2.1% return with respect to our initial wager.

So, if we assume our max-bet is $200, we have an expectation of acquiring $4.00 by not doubling (since we have a 2.0% advantage). However, if we put out another $200 to double-down our total wager becomes $400, but doubling decreases our chance of winning the hand to 1.05%. Therefore, by doubling we expect to earn $4.20. Hence, we have jeopardized another $200, just for an additional expectation of $0.20.

As you can see, your advantage decreases by doubling, but so long as you are able to double your bet and your advantage decreases by less than a factor of 2, then the EV will be positive. However, looking at things from only an EV perspective leads to some non-SCORE maximizing outcomes that greatly increase RoR for a disproportionate return.

Furthermore, TBA (Total Bet Advantage) is not to be confused with IBA (Initial Bet Advantage).

Best,

SP

Great post Southpaw.
Thanks for clarifying this.
MikeyD

 

[zengrifter]

Because of his age and his cunning,
because of his gripe and his paw,
In all that the Law leaveth open,
the word of your Head Wolf is Law.

Shut the f**k up! .. z:whip:g

 

[sagefr0g]

Shut the f**k up! .. z:whip:g

awe ok zen, but only cause i like you.:1st:
ps. it was that poem you posted by Kippling that got me reading that stuff in the first place.

 

[blackjack avenger]

Math is Not Always so Subjective Nor Forgiving

Money is it, as you say, up to a level of risk you are willing to take. That's how I figure everything. What I am working on is how to stick to it.

If you bet over double kelly resizing, your bank shrinks.
If you bet double kelly resizing your bank fluctuates and does not grow.

If you bet kelly resizing down to 1/5 kelly resizing one still has a chance of losing half their bank.

If you bet about 1/6th kelly resizing CE = WR and then you are just playing for the long run; ror is all but eliminated, as is the chance of a major drawdown. One should not lose half. This is probably the real world practical infinite bank and perhaps when you can chase raw EV even if raising NO and lowering SCORE and score.

:joker::whip:
good cards

 

[aslan]

If you bet over double kelly resizing, your bank shrinks.
If you bet double kelly resizing your bank fluctuates and does not grow.

If you bet kelly resizing down to 1/5 kelly resizing one still has a chance of losing half their bank.

If you bet about 1/6th kelly resizing CE = WR and then you are just playing for the long run; ror is all but eliminated, as is the chance of a major drawdown. One should not lose half. This is probably the real world practical infinite bank and perhaps when you can chase raw EV even if raising NO and lowering SCORE and score.

:joker::whip:
good cards

That's all too complicated for me. I just keep my RoR low based on a fixed replenishible bankroll. You don't have to resize, if the size remains the same. But if I were to keep losing, I would try something else, like tending bar or selling real estate, if I needed the money.

 

[zengrifter]

Because of his age and his cunning,
because of his gripe and his paw,
In all that the Law leaveth open,
the word of your Head Wolf is Law.

Shut the f**k up! .. z:whip:g

awe ok zen, but only cause i like you.

You better like me or you will know my gripe and paw. -zenWolf

Now this is the Law of the Jungle -
- as old and as true as the sky;
And the Wolf that shall keep it may prosper,
but the Wolf that shall break it must die.​

 

[sagefr0g]

You better like me or you will know my gripe and paw. -zenWolf

Now this is the Law of the Jungle -
- as old and as true as the sky;
And the Wolf that shall keep it may prosper,
but the Wolf that shall break it must die.​

believe it or not i was gonna say almost exactly that but didn't feel like editing my post again.
edit: zg the top doggie:dog:

 

[blackjack avenger]

I Like This

That's all too complicated for me. I just keep my RoR low based on a fixed replenishible bankroll. You don't have to resize, if the size remains the same. But if I were to keep losing, I would try something else, like tending bar or selling real estate, if I needed the money.

You play fixed which keeps the NO low and you can do this because your bank is replenishable. A replenishable bank, must be nice to have a job or another source of income!

:joker::whip:
good cards