Search results

I stand by all I said and see no confusion. I also agree with all your comments (except for the above sentence).

His edge is 51.77%-48.23%=3.54%.

I use the same definition as you. For even money bets in European roulette, p = 19/37, q = 18/37, so the edge is equal to p - q = 1/37 = 2.70% (and not 1.35%).

Good point about rebates, H2O. Some gaming establishments give selected clientele a rebate (certain percentage) of their losses. When used judiciously, this can make a session in a negative expectation game (like roulette) have a positive expectation.

Harry, your method of calculating "edge" does injustice to the gaming industry. The house edge for European and American roulette is 2.70% (1/37) and 5.26% (1/19) respectively.

Depending on the house rules, a "mimic the dealer" blackjack strategy results in a house edge of about 5.5%. If the casinos had a 25% edge, there would be little or no repeat business.

They have those games here in Vegas too ($2-$4 blinds, $200 buy-in, and higher). IMHO, the game should not be played as a tournament, but rather as a cash game; I therefore would never go all-in pre-flop with AKs, or almost any other hand for that matter, unless I wanted an excuse to go home or...

45,000% growth would grow a dollar to $451, not $450.

<IMG SRC=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=461921 >

You find something else that rhymes!

In a bid to prop up the morale, Of the boys at the OK Corral, The choice was a quickie, With Becky or Glickie, Or a blowjob from Lesley Stahl.

Regular Trading Hours

(Hmmmm, a quickie with Becky or a lickie from Glickie? :confused: )

Had you bothered to put things into a spreadsheet as I suggested, you would have seen that PP stays constant. I'm sorry, but as much as I've tried, I still don't understand your problem with the RoR formula. It is complicated enough as it is - I find that breaking it down into its components is...

CNN just confirmed.

OK, I have found the formula you are referring to in another Kaufman book ("Trading Systems and Methods", p. 616) and have copied it into a spreadsheet (see attached gif). When I refer to trading capital, it is "Investment", or B3. Clearly, as B3 increases, risk of ruin (B12) decreases. Try it...

I do not have Kaufman's "Smarter Trading", nor have I looked at your formulae. But you seem to have trouble understanding that risk of ruin decreases with an increase in trading capital. Please explain why?

There was a young trader from Bright, Who blew up his account overnight, He shorted the yen, And then buggered a hen, Much to Donald and Robert's delight.

1) First make sure that the file is under 100 kbytes, as this is the maximum allowed. 2) Hit Browse to the right of Attach file: in the posting screen, highlight your file and click on Open. 3) Submit Reply

As an uninvolved and neutral observer, my general recollection of some of your earlier posts was that of a cocky bastard ready for a fall. I sincerely hope you work things out.