You have $100,000...

Nah it's too much of my net worth to risk with a 51% chance that I lose.

10,000, absolutely. Also the amount I put in crypto..

Same desu, I rather just buy a small hoise for myself

see:

So would you continue playing the game if it meant you must bet your entire stack? When do you stop? Why do you stop?

i dont know what desu means but it sounds cute i want to fuck

newfag

>I don't understand risk tolerance
>what is beta

>when you hear smart people talk about EV and want to use it yourself
Who cares about sample size amirite? Might as well leverage your house for a 51% chance to double it

I'd bet it on blackjack instead.

I'd take it with a 30% chance lose instead of 51%.

not even new the board. new to fucking Veeky Forums

If you make 5 million a year, this is an amazing bet.

If you make 500k a year, this is a marginal bet.

If you make 50k a year, this is an atrocious bet

> So would you continue playing the game if it meant you must bet your entire stack?
Yes
> When do you stop?
a) losing bet
b) house goes broke
> Why do you stop?
see b)

oh now i get it, youre a moron

Reverse martingale

Genius!

Ssince each win is 5:1, if you win 4 times, the house has to ante up 100,000 * 5^4 = 62.5 million in order to bet against you, so the odds aren't even that bad to bust them

Whats sample size got to do with it you fucking retard? Sample size would matter if either priors or posteriors are unknown and you are making an estimation. Here the red-not-red prior could be sampled from a slightly unfavorable bernoulli distribution and the posterior is a discrete distribution. Everything is already known. Spread is in your favour and you make the bet, got nothing to do with sample size.

That EV will be positive no matter what as long as theres no upper limit cap, you have enough capital, casino is not run by jews. All of which is neither assumed or stated in any way by the op.

Holy fuck do you want to join my dicing platform? 1BTC entry spin and the smart contract is set up to rebet your winnings each time until you lose.

You're actually retarded.

See: Answer the questions and then we'll diagnose your specific brand of retardedness.

Sure thing. 30:1 payout sound fair to you?

Already answered above. If you still dont fucking get it I cant help you sorry.

>I don't have a comeback so I'm going to explain what EV means and pretend it's the be all and end all of all betting situations

neck yourself kid

Nah, I explained how sample size doesnt mean what you think it means there. Hope you learned something today

Yes I actually have access to enough coins to last until 8 attempts. Now to find a dicing platform to do this on.

>At the end of the day. 20% to lose all is above my threshold in this specific scenario.

It's another episode of "Tyrone didn't learn to read past the first sentence"

Wait, where can you buy a business lot for $100,000?

I have that much in crypto

Alright lets see now, does the EV change after the second roulette spin?

47.4% chance of 500k vs. 100% chance of 100k

Hmm...

you buy the lot, house, licenses, etc and start whatever

>I don't have a comeback so I'm going to explain what EV means and pretend it's the be all and end all of all betting situations

What is variance, what is the martingale method, what is downs syndrome.

If I warned the money, no. If someone just handed it to me, yes

See st Petersburg paradox. EV could be infinite but it's not necessarily a bet you'd want to take.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Petersburg_paradox

> let me throw around some words see what sticks
Tell me in under 5 words why martingale is a losing system and why it has no relation to the above scenario

yes because probability theory

Well I have $600,000 now and I don't bet so I'm going to say no.

martingale has everything to do with the situation retard. If you're already at the endgame of the martingale method (e.g. you're betting your whole fucking stack straight away), you've already fucking lost. Martingale method only works if you walk away from the table after you're up against the house. It does not work if you carry on playing infinitely (which you stated you will simply because >MUH EV)

Take the 100k and go?

this guy understands.
Kek'd at the Samuelson resolution

>Paul will never be willing to give as much as Peter will demand for such a contract; and hence the indicated activity will take place at the equilibrium level of zero intensity.

Thanks you just demonstrated that you are a little brainlet, as suspected. Hint for you, martingale has everything to do with EV. When you win, you are not getting paid enough. When you lose you bet double to break even. Which is obviously not the case here (see 5 to 1 payout).
> you carry on playing infinitely
Ah so the casino has infinite money, got you
> variance
Goes both ways my dude.

>martingale has everything to do with EV. When you win, you are not getting paid enough.

no it's not about not getting paid enough, it's about never having an infinite pool of money you absolute cretin. The martingale method is absolutely fine for someone with infinite money. Same as this hypothetical bet. The problem is that you don't have infinite money, you have 1 stack and you're betting it every single round.

Don't use bungee cord, use steel cord.

> it's not about not getting paid enough
> absolutely fine for someone with infinite money
> needing infinite money to break even
hmm... really makes you think

Yea