Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="zachvac, post: 647268, member: 26306"] This actually brings up a very interesting point that I've thought a lot about in gambling in general. Basically the key to being consistent in winning is to take a lot of low-stakes (compared to your BR) bets where you have an edge (usually not a huge edge). Within a poker game, most people would go all-in with a 60% edge (cash game, not tournament, for the sake of simplicity). But this assumes you can afford to lose it. Would you put your life savings on the line to a 60% coin flip? Most people would say no. 70%? 80%? 90%? 99%? 99.999%? Is there ever a point where you'd say yes? I'd feel comfortable with the 99.999%, although I probably wouldn't even put it on the line with a 99% edge. Others would. I've thought about how to quantify that, and it's tough. I would probably put $1,000 on the line for 99%. And I'm just a college kid without a job (during school, I work summers), so that represents a little under half of my entire net worth. The calculations are so easy when you're playing within your means, and I'm sure if you thought you were a 90% favorite to win you'd play in a $5/10 game (ok, I'm not sure, just guessing). The problem in poker is that there's never that much of an edge. If I played a poker professional I could play in such a manner that their edge was less than 90%. And most of the time your edge will be more like 55-60%. So I agree with you, but I just remember watching deal or no deal and thinking that even though the +ev decision was to say no deal, I'd take the $300,000 rather than the 50/50 for a million or a penny. As I mentioned, I'm giving up $200,000 in ev, but I only get to do it one time. If I got to choose a thousand times, I'd pick no deal, but when I get one shot, and if I lose I lose $300,000, I'll take the money. Similar concept. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us