Re:A professor who beat roulette
by hansvm on Monday February 28, 2022 @08:28AM
(#30499558)
The bet sizing isn't totally implausible if the rest of the data is accurate:
The article implies he started out on double-zero machines with a 5.3% house edge. Assume 1 roll per minute and a Kelly-sized bet:
- It'd take on average 87h to 50x your bankroll at a 2.7% edge (half the supposed house edge). You're on average approximately doubling your money with every win, so he _might_ have just gotten a few more wins in the night than expected, but that would be very lucky.
- It'd take 9.5h on average to 50x your bankroll at a 7% edge (1.5x the supposed house edge). That's very achievable in a long night, and you're approximately quadrupling your bankroll every win, so just being a little lucky with a single extra win would drastically cut down the total time.
The article implies he started out on double-zero machines with a 5.3% house edge. Assume 1 roll per minute and a Kelly-sized bet:
- It'd take on average 87h to 50x your bankroll at a 2.7% edge (half the supposed house edge). You're on average approximately doubling your money with every win, so he _might_ have just gotten a few more wins in the night than expected, but that would be very lucky.
- It'd take 9.5h on average to 50x your bankroll at a 7% edge (1.5x the supposed house edge). That's very achievable in a long night, and you're approximately quadrupling your bankroll every win, so just being a little lucky with a single extra win would drastically cut down the total time.