18th November 2005, 04:49 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 1970
Location: Mt Tamborine
Posts: 574
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stebbo
Why don't we go to 1 billion bets then... on one single test, the LRO is 90 and the MaxDD is 460 units. I can tell you right now that there would be very few punters who would keep betting a strategy if they got 90 losers in a row. I would reckon that most punters would ditch a new system if they got 10 or 20 losers in their first 10 or 20 bets..... These sorts of numbers are great for academic purposes, but get thrown out the window in RL.
Should we seriously start betting this strategy with 0.2% of bank? If we did, then I'd need $25,000 to begin with a $50 bet and a chance to actually make serious money.... I'd much rather put that $25,000 to work over a number of strategies...
|
Hey Stebbo,
I guess we end this discussion in the usual way with the ever truthful comment of "Each to his own".
You see, I get quite some comfort from your Billion bet experiment. A MaxDD of 460 is not a great deal more than I was getting for a million bets. It looks like the MaxDD is like one of those exponential shaped curves that rises sharply at the start and then levels out at around the 460 - 500 mark. I wouldn't mind betting also that the variability from run to run on consecutive runs of the same number of bets would even out when the number of bets is high - wheras they vary a lot (proportionately) in the 2000 bet range - I think this is important too.
Now if I had a $25,000 bank to use I would feel quite comfortable using it knowing that there is little chance of it reaching 0 if I made a billion bets. I wouldn't risk it in a fit if I thought there was a 12% chance of it dissappearing.
But then I don't regard backing horses as gambling - I'm one of these weirdos who consider it an investment. :-)
May your MaxDD never exceed your bank and your POT grow luxuriantly.
KV
|