HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: Samuelson (was Re: Yeah... ANOTHER variance vs expectancy posting.)
Organization: my opinions only
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 22:56:24 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.031736.17377@leland.Stanford.EDU>
zwiebel@leland.Stanford.EDU (Jeffrey Zwiebel) writes:
>In article <1992Jul22.233732.19558@fid.morgan.com> sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart) writes:
>>>> In article <1992Jul15.235907.17186@leland.Stanford.EDU> zwiebel@leland.Stanford.EDU (Jeffrey Zwiebel) writes:

>Sorry to nitpick here, because the great majority of the points you made
>in your set of posts, Seth, were right on the money.  But bragging rights
>won't justify playing Kelly unless (almost tautologically) you want to brag
>"I made more money than you" (and you don't care by how much) or "I played
>Kelly with little justification and still made money" etc ... And this is 
>then equivalent to specifying preferences that imply you have log utility.
>If you instead want to brag "I made money this trip", or "I made $500 this
>trip" or almost any other brag you can imagine (including "I made $x more
>than you" where the larger x the more the satisfaction) then your utility
>function will not be logarithmic, and you should not bet Kelly.   

At first, I was thinking that Kelly optimizes the probability of being
able to say "I made more money than you" or "I made a lot more money
than you" (in the latter case, minimizing the probability that the
other person can say it).  But I came to realize that there is a
strategy that with probability > 50% will outperform Kelly by almost
double.  So, for any form of brag you want to make (except for one
that implies log-optimality, such as the value of $X is log (X/Y)
where Y is the other person's bankroll), there is a better strategy.

The strategy that beats Kelly by a lot 60% of the time: play Kelly,
except the first time you have a bet with a 60% chance of winning, bet
your entire bankroll.

So, Kelly optimizes bragging rights iff (1) you want to be able to say
"My lifetime result is better than yours" _and_ (2) your opponent
plays an admissible strategy.

>>I just realized that there is another situation in which Kelly might
>>be optimal.  Under all admissable strategies, I think Kelly has the
>>highest probability of ending up ahead after a large number of bets.
>>(An admissible strategy is one where the percentage of bankroll to bet
>>is a function of the odds and payoffs.  Otherwise, a strategy like
>>"Play Kelly until you're ahead, then play 0" will obviously dominate
>>Kelly.)

>See above.  Kelly will with probability approaching 1 beat all these 
>(and almost all other strategies as well); but, and hopefully this is 
>clear by now, it sure isn't optimal.  

That was my point initially.  I missed the bit about Kelly not even
optimizing bragging rights, though.

Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com
From: murraysd@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Stephen D Murray)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: Roulette
Summary: Request for info
Date: 23 Jul 92 14:44:42 GMT
Organization: Glasgow University Computing Science Dept.


         I'm sorry if this has been mentioned before, but does anyone know
if it's possible to throw a ball to within five numbers- i.e. no more than
two either side of a chosen number- at roulette? I have a friend who's
dad is a casino manager and he claims that it can be and is done all the time
whenever a large bet is placed.

         Thanks for any info.

       <murraysd@dcs.gla.ac.uk>
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: beers@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Jim Beers)
Subject: Re: Trip Report: New York City (not really a trip report)
Keywords: It's a Crime...! 
Organization: Cornell Theory Center
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 13:19:27 GMT

>  No kidding.  Who hasn't seen all those movies about all those
>  gangsters who got rich with prostitution, drugs ... and
>  "the numbers racket" ...?
>
>  You pick a three-digit number (one in a thousand) and place your
>  bet with the local deli clerk or bartender, and the numbers runners 
>  would come around and collect the bets.
>
>  Then you read tomorrow's New York Times (or wherever), and if the
>  last three digits of the Dow-Jones averages (or somesuch) match
>  your number, you win!
>

In Pennsylvania a charitable organization had a numbers game, but had
the advantage of a nice legitimate organization to pick the three
digit number, the PA lottery.  (except that once when they rigged the
lottery)

Jim


Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: mzimmers@netcom.com (Michael Zimmers)
Subject: Re: Variations of Poker wanted
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 18:37:49 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Jul28.141514.28018@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> cobarruvias@asd2.jsc.nasa.gov writes:

>I have a monthly poker game that is more for socializing than winning $$. I
>feel we are in a rut with the same games being played over and over. Can anyone
>pass on their favorite variations of poker? We play the usuals:
>
>5 stud
>7 stud
>5 draw, jacks to open, trips to win
>7 stud hi/low
>7 stud roll your own
>Follow the queen
>Imaginary
>
>We rarely play any wild card games (except for follow the queen) but would try
>anything interesting.

- Jacks-back:  draw that goes to lo-ball if no one opens
- Anaconda:  get seven cards, pass two left/one right, keep five and roll 'em
- Select/reject:  like five stud but for an extra ante, you can pass your
 latest card to the left and gett another
- 2/22, 7/27, 10/30: cross between BJ and poker.  Goal is to make closest
  to high or low score (split pot).  Aces count 1 or 11, paint is 1/2.
  Once you stop taking, you can't start again.  Inside beats out (29 1/2
  beats 30 1/2) and fewest cards breaks a tie.
- Chicago:  low spade in hole splits pot (ace counts as high)
- Black Mariah:  high spade in hole splits pot
- Three-toed Moe:  three-card lo-ball.  Two rounds of draws.
- High-lo Moe:  split-pot version of above
- Tahoe Moe:  same as High-lo Moe, but need a 6 or better for low

-- 
Michael Zimmers                                    |  Home:  408 996 1984
SoftHelp                                           |  Work:  408 996 1965
Software Solutions for Open Systems                |  Data:  408 996 1974
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: jacobs@cs.utah.edu (Steven R Jacobs)
Subject: Re: Look, Ma , one hand!
In-reply-to: moo@king.eng.umd.edu's message of Tue, 28 Jul 92 16:31:54 GMT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept
	<1992Jul24.141614.23219@wam.umd.edu> <jason.17@dcs.umd.edu>
	<1992Jul27.160748.14090@news.iastate.edu>,<1992Jul28.032851.2774@ultra.com>
	<1992Jul28.163154.13681@eng.umd.edu>
Date: 28 Jul 92 10:50:59

In article <1992Jul28.163154.13681@eng.umd.edu> moo@king.eng.umd.edu (Deac Moo of the UGC) writes:
> In article <1992Jul28.032851.2774@ultra.com>, howard@sinoda.ultra.COM (Howard Simonson) writes:
>>3.  BJ'ers have PRESTO!, what should us craps players adopt to identify
>>    other rec.gamblers at the table?
>
> Obviously, we need something swinging, unlike the terse one-word identifer
> (blackjack players, being too busy counting cards to do something
> complicated, needa keep it simple :). 
>
> Might I suggest "Snake-eyes and a hot babe on the side..."
> or		"Six the hardways, all night long..."
> or		"I can come all night long."

Hey, if the craps players can't handle card counting, I doubt they'd
be able to remember a whole sentence.  Something simple but apropos
like "What HOOTERS!" would be more fitting.  Besides, they are likely
to mumble this phrase between drooling episodes anyway...

(add :-)'s as needed)
--
Steve Jacobs  ({bellcore,hplabs,uunet}!utah-cs!jacobs, jacobs@cs.utah.edu)
"Never try to teach a pig to sing.  It wastes your time and annoys the pig."
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: Samuelson (was Re: Yeah... ANOTHER var
Organization: my opinions only
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 23:49:31 GMT

In article <l6rsfeINNlrp@male.EBay.Sun.COM>
billped@wolverine.EBay.Sun.COM writes:
>In article 19123@fid.morgan.com, sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart) writes:
>>You will bet Kelly.  I will bet Kelly +$.01.  If we win, I'm 1 cent
>>ahead of you; I'll bet Kelly thereafter, and stay ahead of you.  If we
>>lose, I'm 1 cent behind you, so I'll bet Kelly(my bankroll + 1 cent) +
>>2 cents this time.  Again, if we win, I'm 1 cent ahead of you.  If we
>>lose, I'll continue the same strategy.
>>
>>Note that my strategy has a nonzero risk of ruin; however, that risk
>>is quite small, and in all cases where I don't go broke, I outperform
>>you.

>I think Seth is on to something here.  All discussions prior to this have focused
>on continuous betting functions.  Seth is suggesting a discontinuous function
>with the point(s) of discontinuity dependent on the success/failure of the hands.
>Actually, Seth's betting function sounds like "Kelly meets Martingale(sp?)"
>
>How about the point of discontinuity at the breakeven point? at some other point,
>either fixed or variable?  Would the marriage of two betting functions (one of 
>them being Kelly) provide greater returns than Kelly alone while keeping the risk 
>of ruin down to (theoretically) zero?

Yes, but it's the same sort of kluge.  For instance, use the
martingale strategy above until you either win or lose half of your
bankroll, then play Kelly.  You have 0 risk of ruin (from Kelly), and
will probably outperform pure Kelly.  Similarly, you can outperform
Kelly by a large amount with probability >50% by betting half your
bankroll on a single favorable bet, then doing Kelly.

That sort of trick isn't interesting, unless you're trying to outdo
another gambler.  But then, pure Kelly will probably work.

Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com
Newsgroups: rec.gambling,ont.forsale,misc.forsale
From: ricegm@ecf.toronto.edu (George Matthew Rice)
Subject: Re: Lotto 6/49 Analysis - Ontario
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 15:54:45 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.223555.14651@isrc.sandia.gov> smlacke@isrc.sandia.gov (Scott M Lackey) writes:
>  data after the fact.  Example: Take all of the lotteries and 
>  look for significant occurances of any number in any single
>  one of them.  Then determine the odds of that particular
>  number coming up in a single lottery.  The odds will probable
>  be thousands to one at least.  This would sound great to the

Actually the odds of a number a number being chosen in 6/49
is 1 in 49 :-?

My question though is this. If this state run gamblimg machine that
we call the lottery donates all profits (I don't beleive it but...)
charities then does that mean that we can claim these lotto tickets
as charitable contributions when it comes tax time?

Just a thought.

Matthew
From: mannys@thebookstore.Eng.Sun.COM (Manuel 'Manny' Raposa)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: Coupons, Coupons, Coupons...
Date: 21 Jul 1992 21:27:24 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems
Distribution: na
Reply-To: mannys@thebookstore.Eng.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: thebookstore


	I was in Vegas a couple of weekends ago, and stayed at the Stardust.  For
some reason, they gave me a 'bunch' of the "Start with an Ace up on Blackjack"
coupons.  You use these as a guaranteed Ace on your first card.  Bet limit is
$3 min, and $5 max.   Limit is one per day, so I tried to use them on various
shifts, but I ended up with 4 of them left.  It may be quite a while before 	
I get back to LV, so if anybody wants them, let me know and I'll send them to
you.  They must have some sort of positive expectation!

	I also have some discount coupons for the Stardust Buffet.  $2 off 
breakfast, and lunch, and dinner, and Sunday Brunch.  A total of $30 savings
if you really like the Stardust Buffet and stay there long enough to use them
all!

	And, I have three $5 discount coupons for Enter the Night (at the 
Stardust, obviously).  I don't know why I kept all these coupons, I usually
chuck them on my way out of town.

	If anybody would like any of these, let me know.  If you stay at the
Stardust, you will probably get a fist full of them anyway.

	Manny

Disclaimer:  Other than as a semi-satisfied customer, I have no connection, nor
do I want any connection, with the Stardust.  Their Garden rooms are cramped,
small, smelly, etc.  I guess that's why they are so cheap.  Duh?

---
* Manuel J. Raposa         |  I've been to two zoos,                    *
* manuel.raposa@Eng.Sun.Com|                and a county fair,          * 
* Sun Microsystems, Inc.   |  and I ain't NEVER seen nothing like this! * 
=========================================================================

Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: cheese@wam.umd.edu (Fletch F. Fletch)
Subject: Re: AC: Best BJ rules
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 14:05:07 GMT

>??? Claridge has at least 4 tables with these rules going at once.  All are 
>located in the same corner, right next to the Double Exposure tables.  On 
>weekends, the minimums do go up to $15-20, though, with one table higher than
>the three others.

I've been there twice in the past month and both times have only noticed one of
these "Las Vegas Table"s; if I'm incorrect, I apologize...

>Is penetration really that low?  I'm just starting to count and haven't
>noticed that yet.  How do the other AC casinos compare? (Notably Trump Plaza?).

66%-75% is standard in AC.  Trump Plaza plays 6-decks and usually deals 4 of 
them, or 66%.  Most 8-deck games are dealt close to 75%.  Caesars is a nice 
place to play; I've gotten > 75% there a few times.

Jason
cheese@wam.umd.edu
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: weinstoc@sei.cmu.edu (Chuck Weinstock)
Subject: Negative Expectation for Baccarat
Organization: The Software Engineering Institute
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 15:36:03 GMT


Anyone who ever doubted that their expectation for baccarat was negative
should read an article on page B8 of today's Wall Street Journal.  The article
is entitled "Mirage Resorts Had Loss in 2nd Period Against 1991 Profit".
Mirage reported a second-quarter loss of $9.7 million as compared to a $12.6
million profit last year.  They attribute most of the reveral to a falloff in
their baccarat business, largely because of economic weakness in Japan that is
affecting some of its best customers.  The company also had bad luck at the
tables (meaning a lower than usual hold).

I hope that some of you rec.gamblers got your share.



Chuck Weinstock				weinstock@sei.cmu.edu
Software Engineering Institute		(412) 268-7719
Carnegie Mellon University		(412) 268-5758 (Fax)
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield)
Subject: Historical Horse racing results?
Reply-To: lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield)
Organization: "Well, a head on top, an arm on each side, two legs...."
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 04:21:48 GMT

(I know; I'm committing almost all of the cardinal net sins: posting 
without reading the FAQ, posting without lurking for a while, etc.,
etc., etc.  At least I can spell.)

Today's question is:  Does anybody know where I can retreive historical
horse racing results?  The more detailed the better, interesting time
range would be current through minus-ten years, or so.  Any pointers
appreciated, thanks!


-- 
Laird P. Broadfield     lairdb@crash.cts.com    ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb
Hi!  I'm a shareware signature!  Send $5 if you use me, send $10 for manual!
Newsgroups: rec.gambling,rec.games.video
From: bj@presto.com (Doctor FORTRAN)
Subject: Re: Look, Ma , one hand!
Originator: jsvrc@rcmain.rc.rit.edu
Organization: None whatsoever
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 01:35:33 GMT

In article <1992Jul28.180551.20747@odin.corp.sgi.com> kubey@sgi.com (Ken Kubey) writes:

>4. On your first comeout roll, pick up 5 dice and roll them all.

"Okay," sez the stickman, as he returns two dice to you, "seventeen is your
point."   >:-b  >:-b  >:-b  >:-b  >:-b  >:-b

Doctor FORTRAN
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: why@kpc.com (Will Hyde)
Subject: Re: FAQ request denied
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer Inc, Santa Clara, CA
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 07:12:49 GMT

In article <JACOBS.92Jul21122446@cells.cs.utah.edu> jacobs@cs.utah.edu (Steven R Jacobs) writes:
>In article <1992Jul21.174853.6625@athena.cs.uga.edu> tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda) writes:
>> The mail I sent to jacob@cs.utah.edu was returned as unable to send. 
>> Possibly they are experiencing difficulties.  Perhap's someone would like to
>> send me a copy of the FAQ list.  
>
>Hmm... I don't know of any problems with email here, has anybody else
>had trouble getting mail to me?  I've sent the FAQ to Ted.
>--
>Steve Jacobs  ({bellcore,hplabs,uunet}!utah-cs!jacobs, jacobs@cs.utah.edu)
>"Never try to teach a pig to sing.  It wastes your time and annoys the pig."

  'Scuse me, but who the hell is jacob@cs.utah.edu ...

  Hey Steve, you know the dude...? 

  He nearly has your name.

  ...

-- 
________________________________________________________________________
___ why@kpc.com   LADY LUCK IS A FICKLE BITCH, AND HER NAME IS KARMA ___
___ -** --- * ***   -* --- -   *** *- -*--   -* --- - **** ** -* --* ___
___ JUSTINCASE:  Guest acct. This writer does not work/speak for kpc ___
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: mholtz@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Mark A. Holtz)
Subject: Re: "7 Card Stud" Simulator Wanted - Shareware
Organization: Sacramento Public Access Unix
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 05:28:58 GMT

In <zlsiida.1014@fs1.mcc.ac.uk> zlsiida@fs1.mcc.ac.uk (dave budd) writes:

>In article <1992Jul18.055756.13516@sactoh0.sac.ca.us> mholtz@sactoh0.sac.ca.us (Mark A. Holtz) writes:
>>Does anyone know where there is a good 7-card-stud simulator for
>>the IBM-PC computers? I need to sharpen my game.

>>Oh, and by the way, I have absolutely no FTP capacity, so I would
>>certainly be appreciative if someone e-mails me a uuencoded copy.

>Ditto all the above except signatures/paths
>but lets say any poker, not just 7stud

How about a Video Poker Simulator, and a old version of Texas
Hold'Em (1.1...files dated '89)?

Speaking of which, I took a look at my holem, and called the
company....they're sending me a shareware disk of their 7 card stud
disk shortly!
-- 
President: ___ George Bush            <:> UUCP: PacBell.COM! -> mholtz!sactoh0
           ___ Bill Clinton/Al Gore   <:>     ucbvax!csusac! /
                                      <:>
           _X_ None of the Above      <:> Internet: mholtz@sactoh0.sac.ca.us
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: Samuelson (was Re: Yeah... ANOTHER variance vs expectancy posting.)
Organization: my opinions only
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 22:57:03 GMT

In article <1992Jul17.201334.26393@kronos.arc.nasa.gov>
hall@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Michael Hall) writes:

>With probability exactly *1.0*, one will do better with Kelly, for any
>final state utility function that holds that the more money the better,
>assuming one has unlimited time (and a few other less constraining
>assumptions.)  It is not the case that a Kelly bettor would *ever* do
>worse than any other kind of bettor in the limit; at some number of bets
>it *always* surpasses any other betting function and keeps on going.
>Again, the only assumption I need to make about one's utility function
>of money is that it is nondecreasing in the limit; this forces you to
>choose the Kelly criterion.

That isn't true, and I can prove it.

If you specify the *form* of the betting function, you can make it
true.

Otherwise, I can give you a strategy that has a better than 90% chance
of outperforming Kelly (assuming that my strategy and Kelly play the
same hands; let's use an unbalanced roulette wheel, with known
unbalance, as the gamble: that lets us both place the same bet).

Assume infinitely divisible units, to keep Kelly happy.

You will bet Kelly.  I will bet Kelly +$.01.  If we win, I'm 1 cent
ahead of you; I'll bet Kelly thereafter, and stay ahead of you.  If we
lose, I'm 1 cent behind you, so I'll bet Kelly(my bankroll + 1 cent) +
2 cents this time.  Again, if we win, I'm 1 cent ahead of you.  If we
lose, I'll continue the same strategy.

Note that my strategy has a nonzero risk of ruin; however, that risk
is quite small, and in all cases where I don't go broke, I outperform
you.

Now, if the strategy were to be "specify a fraction of your bankroll
as a function of the odds on the bets available" then my strategy
wouldn't be allowed.

Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com
From: jimp@jeeves.ucsd.edu (Jim Piercy)
Newsgroups: rec.gambling
Subject: Re: Fun Books that are worth it ?(the effort that is)
Keywords: Hacienda, Sands
Date: 28 Jul 92 03:59:51 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <27JUL199219382753@misvax.mis.arizona.edu> venkataraman@misvax.mis.arizona.edu (Remesh Venkataraman) writes, in part:
>I am going to be in Vegas for a week beginning the 3rd of August. Are there
>certain funbooks that are worth the effort of going in showing id, etc.  I did
>miss out on Manny's aces up offer. I will be having a car and will be staying
>at the Hacienda. 

The book I got when I checked into the Hacienda last winter was pretty good.
The Las Vegas Advisor regularly lists the Sands funbook as the best.

Hope this helps,
Jim Piercy

Newsgroups: rec.gambling
From: Kenneth Gordon <gordon@aerospace.aero.org>
Subject: Re: Lotto 6/49 Analysis - Ontario
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1b2
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 15:37:59 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.094722.22404@thinkage.on.ca> Ken Dykes,
kgdykes@thinkage.on.ca writes:
>In article <anne.712352043@menaik> anne@cs.UAlberta.CA (Anne J.R. Nield)
writes:
>>ricegm@ecf.toronto.edu (George Matthew Rice) writes:
>>>My question though is this. If this state run gamblimg machine that
>>>we call the lottery donates all profits (I don't beleive it but...)
>>>charities then does that mean that we can claim these lotto tickets
>>>as charitable contributions when it comes tax time?
>>I LIKE this thought!!  Makes sense to me (which absolutely guarantees
>>it won't make sense to the government!!)
>>How can we check up on this??
>
>
>well, i assume if a charity GAVE you money when in need, you have to
>declare that as INCOME.
>so...
> if you want to claim deductions, you would probably have to declare
>income from lotteries too...
>
>i'd rather keep winnings tax-free, thankyou.

I don't know how the laws are in Canada, so this may not apply to your
comments.  In the U.S., lottery and gambling income must be declared as
income anyway, regardless of whether or not you try to deduct
expenditures on lottery tickets which go toward "charity."

Most state lotteries earmark profits toward a "charitable" government 
organization, such as the state education system.  This is not a
tax-deductable charity as far as I can tell, so lottery tickets probably
cannot be deducted anyway.

When declaring gambling winnings, though, from casinos, the losses from
the same year can be used to offset the wins (i.e. income).  Perhaps the
cost of purchasing lottery tickets can be used to offset winnings on the
1040.  That is meaningless if you hit the $5 million lotto, but might be
significant for California scratchers or the Michigan Daily 3, where
winnings are only in the hundreds, and can easily be nullified by
purchasing more lottery tickets during the year.

	Ken Gordon
	gordon@aerospace.aero.org

Disclaimer:	I'm not a lawyer, a tax accountant, or a business school
graduate.
   									I'm just an engineer with an opinion.
Newsgroups: rec.gambling