The Gambler's Ruin Problem: Is Betting Mathematically Impossible Without Infinite Bankroll?

Princess unless you track your bets and know your actual win rate and ROI, just bet a conservative fixed percentage like 1-2%.

Full Kelly requires knowing your edge, which most people don't.
 
I do 2-3% depending on confidence level.

Higher edge = higher Kelly percentage. But I use fractional Kelly to reduce variance.
 
Agree with fractional Kelly approach.

Full Kelly mathematically optimal but emotionally difficult.

Half Kelly sacrifices some growth for stability.

Quarter Kelly extremely conservative but nearly ruin-proof.
 
You lot talking fractions of Kelly and I'm over here just trying not to bet more than 50 quid.
 
Taffy if your bankroll is £2500, then £50 is 2%, which is perfect Kelly sizing.

You might be following Kelly without realizing it.
 
Bankroll is more like £3200 mate.

So 50 quid is...

*gets calculator*

About 1.5%.

So I'm doing quarter Kelly or something?
 
Actually Taffy you're doing fractional Kelly correctly.

1.5% very sustainable bet sizing.
 
Accidentally doing math right.

I'll take that as a win.
 
$25 bet on $380 bankroll = 6.6%.

That's pretty aggressive Princess. You're betting full Kelly or higher assuming you have an edge.

If you don't have an edge, you're over-betting significantly.
 
Princess this is exactly why most bettors fail.

They want excitement more than profit. Over-bet their edge. Eventually go broke.
 
Entertainment versus profit trade-off.

If betting for entertainment, larger bets acceptable with acceptance of higher ruin probability.

If betting for profit, Kelly discipline mandatory.
 
Back
Top
Odds