Win Rates & Standard Deviations & Your Edge

[WurlyQ]

From our discussions, I believe our fundamental thought process as it relates to statistics is quite different and is the primary source of our disagreements. I am a huge numbers guy and use a ton of math, statistics, and logic for almost anything that can be analyzed because I think it gives me a big edge in anything I do on non social fronts. As a result, I have a very hard time understanding the logic behind some of the statements you make. I'm not saying they're wrong by any means but I will probably never agree with you because of the way my thought process works. For example, things like statistical improbabilities (except as a one of many possibilities in a distribution) and misapplication are never in my scope of thinking when it comes to poker. I will admit misapplication and considering the extreme downside are practical issues that need to be addressed. However, from my perspective, misapplication should not be a factor when analyzing a model and overprotecting against extremely improbable events reduces expectation.

Therefore I am no longer going to debate anything on a statistical front. However, I will still read your responses and elaborate on or explain anything I have previously stated.

WurlyQ, there's no time limit. Take all the time that you need.

However, I do think that you missed some critical points. Namely, that in regards to our debate, I have become confused. To me, you seem to be switching the focus of you argument. That's probably not the case but...

To help me narrow down the points of our debate, could you answer the following questions? In regards to our goal being, to play at a limit where on any given hand we have maximum expectation (risk adjusted):

Do you think a poker player should use the KC to find that limit?

Should they use the KC to determine their BR size for that limit?

And in regards to moving up sooner rather than later being optimum:

Do you think a poker player should use the KC (with conservative inputs) to determine how large his bankroll needs to be to move up in limits?

Yes, no, and yes.

The first and third are based on the same principle. By finding which limit we should be playing to maximize expectation, we will know when to move up or down at any given point in time.

As I have stated before, bankroll size is fixed. We are under the presumption that there are no deposits or withdrawals. Therefore, there is no way to altar our BR size without playing hands. When we are going to play any given hand, we can use the KC to determine the limit we play. Therefore our bankroll (along with other inputs) determines the limit we play, not the other way around.

 

[Double-A]

Yeah, I'm not a numbers guy. I spent most of my time in math arguing with my teachers about misapplication. I'm a skeptic and a contrarian gambler. Whenever anyone expresses certainty my response is usually, "What kinda odds are you willing to lay me?"

I will also agree that if my thought process has errors (apart from talking first and thinking second) most of them could be attributable to over protecting against the improbable.

I agree with you, in that, a poker player shouldn't use the KC to determine their bankroll size for a given limit. I disagree with you that, a poker player should use the KC to determine what limits to play or when to move up.

I'm not sure how willing I am to debate those points of disagreement. It seems I would be lured into using your own viewpoints of impracticality against you (moving backwards) and I'm confused as to why you'd find something impractical and then argue for its application.

My point, which took me a considerable amount of rhetoric to find, is that:

Kelly's gambler has a "special" edge that is very difficult to find. That being a better knowledge of the "true" odds than the odds maker.

I agree with Kelly's model and haven't attempted to disprove it or analyze it with the intent of finding error. He's right.

Kelly's requirements for the application of the theory are: the ability to reinvest profits and to control the amount of money bet in different categories. Both of which, poker players have.

I'm skeptical of whether poker players have his "channel" (better knowledge of the possibility of future events than the odds maker) or "insider information" (information that is only available to us).