Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T17:14:31.771Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

On Nonoptimality of Bold Play for Subfair Red-And-Black with a Rational-Valued House Limit

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 July 2016

May-Ru Chen*
Affiliation:
Academia Sinica
Pei-Shou Chung*
Affiliation:
National Hsinchu Girls' Senior High School
Shoou-Ren Hsiau*
Affiliation:
National Changhua University of Education
Yi-Ching Yao*
Affiliation:
Academia Sinica and National Chengchi University
*
Current address: Department of Applied Mathematics, National Sun Yat-sen University, 70 Lien-hai Road, Kaohsiung 804, Taiwan, R.O.C. Email address: [email protected]
∗∗Postal address: c/o Prof. S.-R. Hsiau, Department of Mathematics, National Changhua University of Education, Jin-De Campus, Chang-Hua 500, Taiwan, R.O.C. Email address: [email protected]
∗∗∗Postal address: Department of Mathematics, National Changhua University of Education, Jin-De Campus, Chang-Hua 500, Taiwan, R.O.C. Email address: [email protected]
∗∗∗∗Postal address: Institute of Statistical Science, Academia Sinica, Taipei 115, Taiwan, R.O.C. Email address: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In the subfair red-and-black gambling problem, a gambler can stake any amount in his possession, winning an amount equal to the stake with probability w and losing the stake with probability 1 − w, where 0 < w < ½. The gambler seeks to maximize the probability of reaching a fixed fortune (to be normalized to unity) by gambling repeatedly with suitably chosen stakes. In their classic work, Dubins and Savage (1965), (1976) showed that it is optimal to play boldly. When there is a house limit of l (0 < l < ½), so that the gambler can stake no more than l, Wilkins (1972) showed that bold play remains optimal provided that 1 / l is an integer. On the other hand, building on an earlier surprising result of Heath, Pruitt and Sudderth (1972), Schweinsberg (2005) recently showed that, for all irrational 0 < l < ½ and all 0 < w < ½, bold play is not optimal for some initial fortune. The purpose of the present paper is to present several results supporting the conjecture that, for all rational l with 1 / l not an integer and all 0 < w < ½, bold play is not optimal for some initial fortune. While most of these results are based on Schweinsberg's method, in a special case where his method is shown to be inapplicable, we argue that the conjecture can be verified with the help of symbolic-computation software.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Applied Probability Trust 2008 

References

[1] Baker, A. (1984). A Concise Introduction to the Theory of Numbers. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
[2] Dubins, L. E. and Savage, L. J. (1965). How to Gamble if You Must. Inequalities for Stochastic Processes. McGraw-Hill, New York Google Scholar
[3] Dubins, L. E. and Savage, L. J. (1976). Inequalities for Stochastic Processes. How to Gamble if You Must. Corrected republication of the 1965 edition. Dover, New York.Google Scholar
[4] Heath, D. C., Pruitt, W. E. and Sudderth, W. D. (1972). Subfair red-and-black with a limit. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 35, 555560.Google Scholar
[5] Schweinsberg, J. (2005). Improving on bold play when the gambler is restricted. J. Appl. Prob. 42, 321333.Google Scholar
[6] Wilkins, J. E. (1972). The bold strategy in presence of house limit. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 32, 567570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7] {Yao, Y.-C.} (2007). On optimality of bold play for discounted Dubins–Savage gambling problems with limited playing times. J. Appl. Prob. 44, 212225.Google Scholar