questions

.docx

School

Georgia Institute Of Technology *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

7646

Subject

Economics

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

1

Uploaded by JusticeElkPerson902

Experiment 1 Results Analysis: Probability of Winning $80 : The probability being 1.0000 suggests that in every simulated episode of 1000 bets, the player always reached the target of $80. This high success rate is likely due to the nature of the betting strategy (Martingale system) and the absence of a betting limit. The strategy involves doubling the bet after each loss, which theoretically ensures eventual recovery of all losses plus the initial bet amount. However, this result might not be realistic in practical scenarios due to table limits and the gambler's finite bankroll. Expected Value : The expected value being exactly $80 indicates that, on average, the player ends up with their target amount in each episode. This aligns with the probability result and reaffirms the effectiveness of the strategy under these idealized conditions. Experiment 2 Results Analysis: Probability of Winning $80 : The probability of 0.7820 (or 78.20%) in Experiment 2 is significantly lower than in Experiment 1. This reduction is due to the introduction of a $256 bankroll limit, which adds a realistic constraint to the betting strategy. It shows that while the player still has a high chance of reaching the $80 target, there are instances where they deplete their bankroll before achieving this goal. Expected Value : The expected value of $6.75 is the average amount the player ends up with after 1000 bets. This lower expected value, as compared to Experiment 1, reflects the impact of the bankroll limit. While the player often reaches the $80 target, the instances of losing the entire $256 bankroll significantly bring down the average winnings. Implications and Real-World Relevance: These results highlight the influence of betting limits and finite resources on gambling strategies. While the Martingale system can be effective in an idealized scenario (unlimited bets, no table limit), its practical application is risky and can lead to substantial losses, as seen in Experiment 2. The high probability of success in Experiment 1 is an artifact of the simulation's assumptions and should be interpreted with caution, especially in real-world gambling scenarios where such conditions are rarely, if ever, met. The findings from Experiment 2 are more aligned with realistic gambling situations, showing a mix of successful and unsuccessful outcomes based on the imposed bankroll limit.
Discover more documents: Sign up today!
Unlock a world of knowledge! Explore tailored content for a richer learning experience. Here's what you'll get:
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help