In the above 183 shoes examined, it's interesting to notice that before vig (ignored for simplicity) we got 91 winning shoes, 73 losing shoes and 19 shoes were a push.
At the end and by accounting only the + and - impact we collected a small profit but considering that "push" shoes are anyway losing shoes (for the vig), basically everything broke even.
From another point of view, we might consider the most catastrophic W/L shoes succession, that is all losing shoes coming in a row, a thing impossible to happen but that cannot be discarded.
In reality the most long losing shoe sequence was six in a row and two times 4 losing shoes in a row.
On the other end, the longest winning shoe sequence was seven and six in a row.
We know very well that such W/L consecutive streaks do not mean nothing, it's just a permutation issue.
For example, after the first 70 shoes dealt, we got a +78 unit peak that slowly balanced towards the losing side.
That's why we need a quality factor to be utilized tending to give the most limited fluctuations.
More later
as.
At the end and by accounting only the + and - impact we collected a small profit but considering that "push" shoes are anyway losing shoes (for the vig), basically everything broke even.
From another point of view, we might consider the most catastrophic W/L shoes succession, that is all losing shoes coming in a row, a thing impossible to happen but that cannot be discarded.
In reality the most long losing shoe sequence was six in a row and two times 4 losing shoes in a row.
On the other end, the longest winning shoe sequence was seven and six in a row.
We know very well that such W/L consecutive streaks do not mean nothing, it's just a permutation issue.
For example, after the first 70 shoes dealt, we got a +78 unit peak that slowly balanced towards the losing side.
That's why we need a quality factor to be utilized tending to give the most limited fluctuations.
More later
as.