Wiz's 1% Advantage Coin-Flip Simulation
January 12th, 2010 at 10:30:55 AM
permalink
In The Wiz's Betting Systems section, toward the bottom of this page: https://wizardofodds.com/gambling/bettingsystems.html, The Wiz talks about a 1% and 2% advantage coin flip, and betting on that coin to parlay $100 to $1,000,000.
This is the wording of the simulation set-up:
Why limit the win to exactly $1mil? I think I can vouch that most of us are greedy, and would be happy to win more, so why limit it?
Wiz -
If I've piqued your curiosity any, and if you still have that simpuation program (or can re-write it easily), I'd be very curious to know the results of the following challenge:
Modify the simulation to run with two 'players' betting on the same coin flip. One player limits their bet as you wrote, the other simply always bets 1% rounded down to the nearest whole dollar.
Summarize the number of coin flips for each player to either bust out or make that million. And provide a high, low and average total for the player that gets over $1mil/
I'd also be very curious to see if, during any simulation, one player busts out while the other hits the million.
Thanks.
For what it's worth, if I could trust the RNG in my PC, I'd venture into writing it myself....
This is the wording of the simulation set-up:
My question is about that last line.Quote:System salesmen usually promise ridiculous advantages. For example, even with just a 1% advantage on an even money bet, it would not be difficult to parlay $100 into $1,000,000 by betting in proportion to bankroll. I was asked to prove this claim so I wrote a computer simulation based on the toss of a biased coin, with a 50.5% chance of winning. At all times the player bet 1% of his bankroll, rounded down to the nearest dollar. However, if a winning bet would put the player over $1,000,000 then he only bet as much as he needed to get to exactly $1,000,000.
Why limit the win to exactly $1mil? I think I can vouch that most of us are greedy, and would be happy to win more, so why limit it?
Wiz -
If I've piqued your curiosity any, and if you still have that simpuation program (or can re-write it easily), I'd be very curious to know the results of the following challenge:
Modify the simulation to run with two 'players' betting on the same coin flip. One player limits their bet as you wrote, the other simply always bets 1% rounded down to the nearest whole dollar.
Summarize the number of coin flips for each player to either bust out or make that million. And provide a high, low and average total for the player that gets over $1mil/
I'd also be very curious to see if, during any simulation, one player busts out while the other hits the million.
Thanks.
For what it's worth, if I could trust the RNG in my PC, I'd venture into writing it myself....
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, irrational, childish rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
January 12th, 2010 at 10:57:46 AM
permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBearMy question is about that last line.
seems to me the issue of going bust or not is answered at a million, that continued betting would add almost nothing to the percentage of busts, which is the only thing that would keep you out of the clover infinitely ?
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
January 12th, 2010 at 11:45:24 AM
permalink
I think the point being made does not hinge on the results of the final bet. And as a matter of curiosity most coin tosses are infact biased by almost one percent. Yep! Its not 50-50, its more like 51-49 with the bias toward whichever side is 'up' at the toss.Quote: DJTeddyBearMy question is about that last line. Why limit the win to exactly $1mil?
This is one reason I doubt dice-controllers. You would need a really hefty "edge" to make any money and even then you would still have to contend with mistakes, fatigue and distractions.
January 12th, 2010 at 12:02:33 PM
permalink
If you win that last bet, then having bet only enough to hit a million as opposed to betting the full 1% would be irrelevant for the purpose of scoring it a success or not.
However, if you MISS, then betting the full 1% puts you further away from that $1,000,000 finish line. Which, I guess, answers my own question of "Why?".
But I'd still be interested in seeing a side-by-side simulation.
However, if you MISS, then betting the full 1% puts you further away from that $1,000,000 finish line. Which, I guess, answers my own question of "Why?".
But I'd still be interested in seeing a side-by-side simulation.
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, irrational, childish rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
January 12th, 2010 at 12:03:59 PM
permalink
I'm not going to argue if your claim is accurate or not, but, for the record, 51% / 49% is a 2% advantage, not 1%.Quote: FleaStiff...tosses are infact biased by almost one percent. Yep! Its not 50-50, its more like 51-49...
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, irrational, childish rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
January 12th, 2010 at 12:18:18 PM
permalink
Quote: FleaStiffYou would need a really hefty "edge" to make any money
I thought the Wizard's point was the opposite, that a 1% edge is so tremendous you should risk just about all you've got, if you ever could get it. But what is 'hefty' to you?
Quote: FleaStiffeven then you would still have to contend with mistakes, fatigue and distractions.
I'm with you there
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
January 12th, 2010 at 1:39:36 PM
permalink
Well, you should not risk everything you've got. You should "grind" out a win if there is a slight house edge. Think of it in the reverse. A game like craps has a low house edge; if you place ONE big bet, you have a slightly less than 50% chance of doubling up. If you place many small bets, you will slowly succumb to the house edge and lose. In the coin flip scenario, you want to use the player edge to slowly GROW your bankroll. One bet for everything you've got would be foolish...you are tempting variance when the deck is stacked in your favor for once!
January 12th, 2010 at 1:47:21 PM
permalink
cclub -
You might want to re-read this thread, and/or read the section of the main site that this was pulled from.
Nobody suggested one big bet.
You might want to re-read this thread, and/or read the section of the main site that this was pulled from.
Nobody suggested one big bet.
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, irrational, childish rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
January 12th, 2010 at 2:03:39 PM
permalink
Yeah there were a couple of things going on here at once, and I saw the:
>>Quote: FleaStiff
You would need a really hefty "edge" to make any money
I thought the Wizard's point was the opposite, that a 1% edge is so tremendous you should risk just about all you've got, if you ever could get it. But what is 'hefty' to you?
<<<<
Risking "all you've got" is what threw me for a curve. You never should really be risking "all you've got" with the system that the Wizard suggested. It would be better to say that you would never have to stop betting and you'd continue to win. Risking all you've got is never in play if you are a grinder.
>>Quote: FleaStiff
You would need a really hefty "edge" to make any money
I thought the Wizard's point was the opposite, that a 1% edge is so tremendous you should risk just about all you've got, if you ever could get it. But what is 'hefty' to you?
<<<<
Risking "all you've got" is what threw me for a curve. You never should really be risking "all you've got" with the system that the Wizard suggested. It would be better to say that you would never have to stop betting and you'd continue to win. Risking all you've got is never in play if you are a grinder.
January 12th, 2010 at 6:16:52 PM
permalink
First, if you had a coin toss type game with a 1% edge, then the Kelly Criterion would suggest you bet 1% of your bankroll very flip.
Second, my point in the program was to demonstrate how easy it would be to grow $100 to a $1,000,000 with a 1% edge. If system really did work, it would be very easy to make millions from it. You wouldn't need to find buyers for it, like the many system cons do. Do a search on "roulette strategy" at YouTube, and you'll get tons of vermin, making promises of advantages much higher than 1%.
Third, I wrote that program quite a while ago, and don't remember what I named it. However, fiddling with it is very low on my priority list. I will say it doesn't quit working at a million, that was just an arbitrary number. With a 1% edge you could go as high as you wanted as long as you didn't bump against casino limits. The more you play, the more the ratio of wins will approach 50.5%.
I hope that helps.
Second, my point in the program was to demonstrate how easy it would be to grow $100 to a $1,000,000 with a 1% edge. If system really did work, it would be very easy to make millions from it. You wouldn't need to find buyers for it, like the many system cons do. Do a search on "roulette strategy" at YouTube, and you'll get tons of vermin, making promises of advantages much higher than 1%.
Third, I wrote that program quite a while ago, and don't remember what I named it. However, fiddling with it is very low on my priority list. I will say it doesn't quit working at a million, that was just an arbitrary number. With a 1% edge you could go as high as you wanted as long as you didn't bump against casino limits. The more you play, the more the ratio of wins will approach 50.5%.
I hope that helps.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
January 12th, 2010 at 8:09:55 PM
permalink
Wiz -
OK. I understand the low priority thing.
Thanks for the reply / clarification.
OK. I understand the low priority thing.
Thanks for the reply / clarification.
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, irrational, childish rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
January 13th, 2010 at 7:23:53 PM
permalink
You're welcome.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
January 8th, 2013 at 1:27:30 AM
permalink
Isn't +1% edge too low to play big?
The Kelly criterion keeps you safe from ruin.
Fluctuations are bold when your edge is 1%.
The HE is 2,7 or 5,27% but they play against hundread of playears at the same time for many hours a day.
It becomes an ordeal to cope with a +1% edge.
I'm taking only advantage situations.
We know the regular player loses the house edge %.
The smarter idea is to find a more biased coin.
When and how you know the biased coin gives you +1%?. You'd need to test it before. And a 1% edge is so low that it would be easy to vanish for several days or weeks.
The Kelly criterion keeps you safe from ruin.
Fluctuations are bold when your edge is 1%.
The HE is 2,7 or 5,27% but they play against hundread of playears at the same time for many hours a day.
It becomes an ordeal to cope with a +1% edge.
I'm taking only advantage situations.
We know the regular player loses the house edge %.
The smarter idea is to find a more biased coin.
When and how you know the biased coin gives you +1%?. You'd need to test it before. And a 1% edge is so low that it would be easy to vanish for several days or weeks.
January 8th, 2013 at 1:38:08 AM
permalink
Quote: ybotIsn't +1% edge too low to play big?
The Kelly criterion keeps you safe from ruin.
Fluctuations are bold when your edge is 1%.
The HE is 2,7 or 5,27% but they play against hundread of playears at the same time for many hours a day.
It becomes an ordeal to cope with a +1% edge.
I'm taking only advantage situations.
We know the regular player loses the house edge %.
The smarter idea is to find a more biased coin.
When and how you know the biased coin gives you +1%?. You'd need to test it before. And a 1% edge is so low that it would be easy to vanish for several days or weeks.
almost everything you said is completely wrong.
January 8th, 2013 at 1:42:55 AM
permalink
Ok, I might be wrong. where?
And, where was I right?
And, where was I right?
January 8th, 2013 at 1:44:58 AM
permalink
Quote: ybot
It becomes an ordeal to cope with a +1% edge.
The only "ordeal" you'd have with a 1% edge is finding enough banks to deposit your millions in.
January 8th, 2013 at 1:49:57 AM
permalink
Have you ever played with 1% edge?
What do you mean by "findind enough banks to deposit your millions in"?
What do you mean by "findind enough banks to deposit your millions in"?
January 8th, 2013 at 2:03:33 AM
permalink
Quote: ybotHave you ever played with 1% edge?
What do you mean by "findind enough banks to deposit your millions in"?
FDIC only covers the first quarter-mill.
No, I have never played with a 1-percent edge every decision, available as long as I wanted, with significant table limits, and the ability to play as much as I wanted. Else I would be posting this from my fleet of yachts.
January 8th, 2013 at 2:11:10 AM
permalink
1% edge would have to work hard to give you a yacht.
There are many AP who have +1% edge, just take a look at BJ card counter players
There are many AP who have +1% edge, just take a look at BJ card counter players
January 8th, 2013 at 2:43:03 AM
permalink
Quote: ybot1% edge would have to work hard to give you a yacht.
There are many AP who have +1% edge, just take a look at BJ card counter players
Comparing the advantage posted about in this thread to card counting is absurd.
In fact you wouldn't have to work hard to get a yacht with a 1% edge, which is exactly what the wizard proved with his program.
I think you missed the entire point of this thread.
January 8th, 2013 at 11:52:31 AM
permalink
There's very low variance with a coin flip. 1% with high variance could have its frustrating stretches.
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
January 8th, 2013 at 12:08:12 PM
permalink
Supose at frech roulette playing 18 numbers.
The chance is 18/37
+1% edge means 18,18/36. To break even and have the 1% edge.
In 100 spins you could hit only 33 times or 63
It means that in 100 spins you could lose 612 units(-3 standard deviations) or win 468 units
Drawdowns are bad.
1e know there is lower variance than playing 4 numbers but it takes plenty of time to win
The chance is 18/37
+1% edge means 18,18/36. To break even and have the 1% edge.
In 100 spins you could hit only 33 times or 63
It means that in 100 spins you could lose 612 units(-3 standard deviations) or win 468 units
Drawdowns are bad.
1e know there is lower variance than playing 4 numbers but it takes plenty of time to win
September 17th, 2014 at 4:23:32 PM
permalink
Quote: sodawaterComparing the advantage posted about in this thread to card counting is absurd.
In fact you wouldn't have to work hard to get a yacht with a 1% edge, which is exactly what the wizard proved with his program.
I think you missed the entire point of this thread.
For a single player with +1% edge takes plenty of time to win the million.
The Bank plays against thounsend of pkayers at the sa me time and gets it quicker.
Suppose you play with Kelly Criterion, you will be able to play 400 tosses a day. Starting with 100 bankroll you must spend many weeks playing.
September 17th, 2014 at 4:45:58 PM
permalink
I have played BJ on a standard IGT with over A 1% edge, playing over 4k hands and still lost.Quote: sodawaterComparing the advantage posted about in this thread to card counting is absurd.
In fact you wouldn't have to work hard to get a yacht with a 1% edge, which is exactly what the wizard proved with his program.
I think you missed the entire point of this thread.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
September 17th, 2014 at 5:33:39 PM
permalink
Quote: AxelWolfI have played BJ on a standard IGT with over A 1% edge, playing over 4k hands and still lost.
In the end you succeed, but it might take many weeks.
The worst AP enemy is fluctuations.
September 17th, 2014 at 8:00:17 PM
permalink
Quote: ybotFor a single player with +1% edge takes plenty of time to win the million.
Suppose you play with Kelly Criterion, you will be able to play 400 tosses a day. Starting with 100 bankroll you must spend many weeks playing.
I calculate 230 days required. (ok, wizard says 174,972 tosses or 437 days)
If you get a job and save to 2k bankroll, then only need 155 days of gambling.
September 17th, 2014 at 8:01:45 PM
permalink
Quote: AxelWolfI have played BJ on a standard IGT with over A 1% edge, playing over 4k hands and still lost.
After 4k tosses at equal size bet with 1% edge, I calculate 1 in 4 people will be losers.
September 17th, 2014 at 8:15:45 PM
permalink
Quote: supergrassI calculate 230 days required.
If you get a job and save to 2k bankroll, then only need 155 days of gambling.
The edge must be stronger to worth be played.
But, how much stronger?
An economist might answer.
My experience for these case which p=0.50 is over 3% edge.
Fluctuation are brave too but you can handle them.
Thank you Supergrass for your data.
September 17th, 2014 at 8:29:00 PM
permalink
Quote: supergrassAfter 4k tosses at equal size bet with 1% edge, I calculate 1 in 4 people will be losers.
Casinos take care of minimun chip value on their wheels and bj tables to know their winning per total money wagged.
As players fill layout, tha Bank cashes its edge(2.7% 5.26) with almost no fluctuation.
A single player on coin toss, roulette, bj or any game needs a gigantic time and expenses to reach the goal.
I remember ph Alan Wilson spent several days studying and playing wheel the 1960's and highlighted the importance to chose the appropiatte chip value to afford a long week/month play.
September 18th, 2014 at 3:55:51 AM
permalink
Yes I was just pointing out, you shouldn't start buying hookers and blow while dreaming about where you are going to store your millions just because you find a 1% advantage on a table game.Quote: ybotIn the end you succeed, but it might take many weeks.
The worst AP enemy is fluctuations.
I know guys that gave up 3 card poker hole carding with a supposed 3% advantage. I say supposed because I don't know how accurate their hole carding was.They seemed to be objective about it. I'm not sure how 3CP compares to a coin flip.
Kelly is a great guy however, I won't trust him with my BR. I will stick with my gut, personal experiences and tolerance. I might bet more or less then Kelly and his math says.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
