Casino Catatrophe Insurance-Page 222 - Page 3 - Sklansky-Schoonmaker on DUCY? -- Two Plus Two Poker Forums

Except that it doesn't work like that in the real world as David has already admitted above. As a theoretical concept it is brilliant of course.

Actually there is one very sophisticated version of it that seems to work. Do you know why online sites make so much profit? People like you keep playing, because you all believe in Sklansky bucks as your form of catastophe insurance. You believe that you just had a string of bad luck and if you only play long enough you will get it all back, that and much more. This is the real lesson to be learned from that concept.

If it wasn't for David and his books, internet gambling would have probably gone out of business a long time ago. I may have underestimated him. It's a conspiracy! Damn, where is my tinfoil hat?

do you even have any idea what you're arguing anymore?

05-09-2010 , 03:19 AM

#52

JayTeeMe

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 29,409

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Sklansky

There are many variations on this theme by the way. Simple example: Your customer bets 110-100 on five games and gives you 550. It is advantageous for you to offer him a "free" sixth bet where he can up his max win to 600. He is betting six games but if he goes 0-6 he loses only the 550.

You would have had an EV of 25. Now it is 30 minus the 110 you eat 1/64 of the time. About a three dollar increase.

And if you were offerring me this deal at the window I'd snap call.

05-09-2010 , 08:53 PM

#53

msufan

adept

Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 735

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayTeeMe

And if you were offerring me this deal at the window I'd snap call.

me too

05-09-2010 , 10:04 PM

#54

Zoogs

grinder

Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 581

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayTeeMe

And if you were offerring me this deal at the window I'd snap call.

What I think is also interesting is that in most cases this seems as if it would be beneficial for both parties. The bookie increases his EV by 3 dollars which benefits him. The bettor is already taking a -EV bet presumably because it brings him pleasure. He increases his number of bets by 17% but only decreases his EV by 12%. Seems like a deal.

In other words, snap calling is the right decision for the bettor considering his intentions in making the bets are entertainment and he wants to get the best bang for his buck.

05-13-2010 , 10:02 AM

#55

Hoos Crazy

journeyman

Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 322

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shandrax

Why would you do that?

I think you fundamentally do not understand sports betting in a casino. EVERY bet carries this 10% vig for the casino. So if you want to bet on your team to win against the point spread - you always bet 110 to win 100.

05-14-2010 , 04:20 PM

#56

the steam

banned

Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 1,521

Just look at how it goes down in the real world.Bookies get half or less the money owed from bettors who have a terrible week quite frequently.

05-27-2010 , 01:21 AM

#57

ralph666

centurion

Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 176

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shandrax

See, there we have it! Other people create different models and come to different conclusions.

What are customers really thinking about? How can we find it out? In the initial model the customer doesn't want to lose more than $1000, but maybe he doesn't tell anyone about it. If he bets $125 on each hand, he may not even overbet his bankroll and have a much higher stop-loss-limit.

Should the pitposs walk up to the customer and ask him, "Sir, excuse me. How much are you prepared to lose today? I may have a great offer for you."...

You open a thread and you say 'I choose not to agree with this!'. You read the thread and you realize there is nothing to agree or not agree with. Frustrated, you say 'I choose not to understand the thread', and you go from there.

And what I've wrote above is your best case scenario.

Page 3 of 3

First

1 2 3

Last

...

Page 3 of 3

First

1 2 3

Last