Re: GD: 10k Asylum Bankroll Challenge
WVU,
To clarify I meant statistically unlikely given the constraints I have imposed on betting denominations, i.e. bankroll distribution and money management. I haven't really spelled it out on here but basically once the bankroll reached a certain threshold I would be betting like $10 a game. If it continued the downward pattern it would get all they way down to $1 a game. Of course, in the real world likely someone under these conditions would overbet and chase their losses with a large wager (say once someone was down 40% they would put $4000 on a game in an attempt to recoup the losses).
Mathematically speaking as the bankroll decreased so would the bet size. In real terms and with a $1 bet minimum the lowest the bankroll could possibly get would be between $0.83 and $0.99, so thus the wording of never being able to lose the entire bankroll would be fundamentally correct. In actual terms it would take a very long time for this scenario to unfold and my intent was never to bring it down as close to zero, thus my statement.
Cannon,
I think one of the things we can take from this experiment is in fact that exact observation. I touched on this in the random notes when I spoke of the fact I was exactly 50% after a substantial amount of time.
I would say it is pretty clear that the importance of getting lower juice is exactly one of the things we can learn from this and after a thorough analysis am reasonably sure that the data will back this up.