< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 99 OF 135 ·
|Jan-24-12|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: <Statistic of the Day>|
Two players still remain undefeated after nine rounds of Tata Steel A, and one of them is Van Wely!
|Jan-24-12|| ||technical draw: He should be Van Wily.|
|Jan-25-12|| ||brankat: <I was lucky today... not to lose more than 10K. >|
With ten thousand margin of an advantage it should usually be the other guys' task to try and catch up. A "modest" 1-2 Gs expenditure (2-3 hundred) per a P-3 combination would give You some 3-5 K return, or else (only) 1-2 G loss. Either way, let the opposition sweat it out.
But then, I guess, I should be the last person to give You advice about betting :-)
|Jan-25-12|| ||brankat: What did You think of Carlsen-Karjakin game? |
I thought that although Magnus didn't play his best chess, Karjakin played a very fine game.
|Jan-25-12|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: <brankat> Good even!|
I don't think Karjakin played his very best chess either - but he did play extremely well at certain key moments and seemed to understand the position better than Carlsen just then. Later, he somehow contrived to keep Carlsen alive for long enough that I should win Longest Game :)
|Jan-25-12|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: Interesting factoid: according to the table in <Chnebelgrind>'s profile, yesterday's winning pick three (White-Black-Draw) in fact had negative value. I wonder what made him bet on it :)|
|Jan-25-12|| ||brankat: <..for long enough that I should win Longest Game :)>|
Lady Luck seems to be following You around no matter what You do :-)
|Jan-25-12|| ||dakgootje: had a small bet on it - though in the end it had negative value for me as well.|
Suppose in the last hour or so, around 100-150 was bet on it - thereby greatly decreasing the odds.
|Jan-25-12|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: <dakkie> I think that was <Chnebelgrind> :-)|
|Jan-25-12|| ||brankat: <..yesterday's winning pick three (White-Black-Draw) in fact had negative value. I wonder what made him bet on it :)>|
51-1 was a pretty good incentive, regardless of the likelihood of the outcome. I had a super modest c$5 (entire capital was $57) on W-B-D for c$258 payout.
|Jan-25-12|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: <dak> Funny thing, I always thought your avatar had a white background. Not sure what made me realize the truth just now :)|
|Jan-25-12|| ||dakgootje: <SQ> got an even weirder thing for you:|
the first 1-2 years I've had this avatar, I thought the same :P
<<dakkie> I think that was <Chnebelgrind>> Perhaps. Thought the edge was already very slim when I bet it. Think it was somewhere around 100:1 at the time. I had the likelihood down at around 1.5% [67:1 to be exact] - so only made a small bet not to upset the odds too much.
So I somewhat doubt it was him. With pre-yesterday ratings and unchanged odds - he would get a likelihood of around 1.2%. In which case I don't think he would've had any value.
|Jan-25-12|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: <Memory of the Minute>|
<dakgootje: <I still don't know what year (when the stamps were a nickel-or less!) was hms123 born!>
It is fairly obvious. You know there was postal chess and nickel was already around - therefore it was the post-bronze era.
At the time there were barely any chessboard yet, so generally chess was played on the backs of turtles - these were plentiful as they went all the way down.
The accepted post-bronze method of sending correspondence chess moves is taking a turtle and engraving its shell with the current position, including your move and, if you are feeling particularly creative, a picture of a puppy or fluffy bunny. African players never really got into the game however - it is widely believed they could not find any puppies or fluffy bunnies and felt mocked and left out.
Anyway, so you've got your engraved turtle. Now comes a slightly tricky part as you have to tie the turtle on the back of an emu - luckily turtles are easily stack-able. These emus rotate from user to user so that there will never be an emu-shortage anywhere. To avoid confusion they therefore all have the same name; Arno. Now, you do not want to use a sea-turtle because it will dry out and generally cause a horrible smell. This might have a negative effect on their delicious taste.
Of course, your emu will have to eat - this is where your expenses lie. These emu's are highly trained at balancing nickels on their snout for concentration. WARNING: Don't try those 'this should be good enough'-bronze coins - it will fall off, panic, and you have to find yourself a new turtle. You take Arno's nickel, balance it and send the emu on its way.
The recipient will then get your move, and emu for later use, a nickel to buy the emu food and a turtle to eat all by himself.
In later years pigeons were used, but the general opinion was that they were not as tasty and had a hard time carrying turtles. The Correspondence Chess-heyday was over.>
Funnily enough, some years ago I had the very same idea: playing chess on turtles. Great minds think alike :)
|Jan-25-12|| ||Chnebelgrind: <Interesting factoid: according to the table in <Chnebelgrind>'s profile, yesterday's winning pick three (White-Black-Draw) in fact had negative value. I wonder what made him bet on it :)>|
Aronian-Caruana W 0.45/B 0.05/D 0.50
Carlsen -Karjakin 0.40/0.10/0.50
probability for WBD --> 0.0315 (0.45*0.10*0.70)
When I was betting 15 minutes before closing time there were 150 bucks on it from a total of 19458 what is a quote of 0.0077
With my 225 I brought it only to 0.019.
225 is the maximum I am betting in this situation (see my profile)
But I am glad to see that at least one person is studying my system
|Jan-25-12|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: <Chnebelgrind: 225 is the maximum I am betting in this situation (see my profile)>|
c$225 is already way too much; it ruins your own odds. Some calculations using your estimated 0.0315 probability...
total handle on other outcomes: c$20,025
total handle on other outcomes minus juice: c$19,024
Your expected payout with a bet of:
• c$125 -> (125/275)*19024*0.0315 = 272.39 chessbucks (expected profit of 147.39)
• c$150 -> (150/300)*19024*0.0315 = 299.63 chessbucks (expected profit of 149.63)
• c$200 -> (200/350)*19024*0.0315 = 342.43 chessbucks (expected profit of 142.43)
• c$225 -> (225/375)*19024*0.0315 = 359.55 chessbucks (expected profit of 134.55)
As you can see, any chessbuck you bet after c$150 will actually have negative value (and the ones immediately preceding c$150 barely have any value at all). Your maximum bet under such circumstances should be c$150, not c$225 :)
|Jan-25-12|| ||dakgootje: <SQ> ahhh yes, the turtle story! :D|
Every now and then - I write some good nonsense ^^
|Jan-25-12|| ||Chnebelgrind: betting 150 in this situation I get 62.1 for each buck |
--> 150*62.1= 9315
betting 225 it is 49.9
--> 225 * 49.9 =11227.5
|Jan-25-12|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: <Chnebelgrind> Let's compare those two lines: |
--> 150 * 62.1= 9315
--> 225 * 49.9 =11227.5
The difference here is
--> 75 * 25.5 = 1912.5
...so you're betting the last 75 bucks at 24:1!
|Jan-25-12|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: Ah, found it - the beginning of my own turtle story...|
<Imagine the open sea a couple of miles off the coast of Wick, Caithness, Scotland. Imagine it's a warm, calm, sunny summer day (having accomplished that, the next step should be easy). Imagine, under the exceedingly gentle waves, the pub of the chess-playing giant turtles.
This, probably, is as close as we'll get to a perfect occasion and opportunity to explain a number of things.
First of all, we should introduce the giant boardback turtle of northern Scotland. It would be the most intelligent reptile recorded, and also (with males reaching up to more than six feet long) one of the largest, had anybody actually got around to recording it. There are several reasons why it has been missed by biologists for such a long time: a) it surfaces even less often than other turtles, b) nobody seriously wants to explore the north-eastern coast of Scotland and c) any human who did spot one wouldn't believe his eyes.
The primary reason for this last isn't the fact a hitherto undiscovered species of giant turtle is about the last thing you'd expect to find here, nor is it any general wariness of the time-honoured Scottish tradition for merry pranks involving large and mysterious reptilian beings. No, the primary reason is the distinctive and highly unusual pattern on the carapace, the pattern that has given the species its name. The chessboard pattern.
Any true chess enthusiast would immediately complain, quite rightly, that the carapaces aren't flat or rectangular. The late Bobby Fischer, in all probability, would have refused to play a game on one. But for the purposes of turtles, who aren't born complainers and in any case don't know of anything better, they're quite good enough.
Unusually for turtles, the giant boardbacks of northern Scotland form tightly bonded families. Indeed, their sick and elderly grandparents are never left alone.
|Jan-25-12|| ||dakgootje: We should write a book "On Turtles: the history of Chess".|
|Jan-25-12|| ||Chnebelgrind: I think you are right. At least I have my spirti left. Now I must go and set my bettings - with my proved system :-)|
|Jan-25-12|| ||dakgootje: SQ, I'm not sure <helping> Chn was such a grand idea.|
|Jan-25-12|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: <Weird Science Fact of the Day>|
Santa's quack echoes particularly well... and nobody knows why!
|Jan-25-12|| ||SwitchingQuylthulg: <Everybody> Good duck for round 10!|
|Jan-25-12|| ||technical draw: So what color is the background of <dak>'s avatar? Is it light gray (or grey)...?|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 99 OF 135 ·