So there is a term called "Full Kelly" which is were you actually wager the amount given by the formula. This is pretty aggressive and not for the faint of heart. Usually, you do something like a "half Kelly" where you halve the suggested bet amount. Usually because you assume you might be incorrect in your estimated advantage.
What I haven't found yet is some mental math rule to apply this. Given some assumed advantage, what percentage should I "wager"?
What bet you can make consistently gives you at least 51% odds? As far as I know, the best you can do in a casino is 48%. If I plug 48% into the simulation, it states there is no Kelly edge for that bet.
As far as casino games, you might find yourself in this situation with a half-decent poker hand or if you're counting cards in blackjack. Casinos don't hand out advantages over the house, which is why the former is coming from other players and the latter is against the rules. As the sibling comment notes, it is generally irrational to participate in casino games and the simulator is correct to tell you not to do so.
This comes up more when you have (or at least believe you have) information that the counterparty doesn't have.
Bets with a positive edge can be found most commonly via sports betting, poker games, and the stock market. Although note that most bets you can find via such methods do not have a positive edge, and the edge is not labelled.
More generally, look for any area where bets can be made, and professionals exist who make their living winning such bets. There are professional poker players and sports gamblers; there are not professional roulette players.
the first lesson here is that betting is easy when you believe that you know the important variable, your edge.
the second lesson is that, no matter how poorly you perform, you are going to be able to make the case to your stakeholders that,
contrary to all evidence, you do in fact have an edge and you are in fact exploiting it correctly.
the lesson not here is that, in practice, continuing to believe that you know your edge is going to be virtually impossible in the long run, partly because of volatility, but mostly because, in practice, you do not know it.
15 comments
[ 5.2 ms ] story [ 59.8 ms ] threadSo there is a term called "Full Kelly" which is were you actually wager the amount given by the formula. This is pretty aggressive and not for the faint of heart. Usually, you do something like a "half Kelly" where you halve the suggested bet amount. Usually because you assume you might be incorrect in your estimated advantage.
What I haven't found yet is some mental math rule to apply this. Given some assumed advantage, what percentage should I "wager"?
This comes up more when you have (or at least believe you have) information that the counterparty doesn't have.
More generally, look for any area where bets can be made, and professionals exist who make their living winning such bets. There are professional poker players and sports gamblers; there are not professional roulette players.
What's the difference between "win probability of win" and "odds", please? The seem the same thing to me.
And also, what are "decimal" vs. "american" odds, please?
Thanks.
the second lesson is that, no matter how poorly you perform, you are going to be able to make the case to your stakeholders that, contrary to all evidence, you do in fact have an edge and you are in fact exploiting it correctly.
the lesson not here is that, in practice, continuing to believe that you know your edge is going to be virtually impossible in the long run, partly because of volatility, but mostly because, in practice, you do not know it.