Kelly Betting with Sequentially Revealed Card Probabilities
Summary
The document studies a repeated betting game in which cards of two colors are revealed without replacement, so the chance of the next outcome changes with the remaining deck. It presents two approaches to choosing bets. One answer estimates the win probability from cards already seen and applies the Kelly fraction for even odds, while noting that a risk-averse bettor could cap the wager. A second answer sets up a dynamic programming value function over the remaining cards and bankroll, then conjectures a logarithmic-wealth solution that yields a state-dependent allocation.
The material illustrates the gap between using a heuristic probability estimate and solving a sequential optimization problem. The heuristic is explicitly tentative, and the formal derivation is also presented as an attempt rather than a fully verified solution; its recurrence and conjectured value function are not supported by numerical checks. It discusses expected log growth, not a separate method for minimizing variance, despite that being part of the original question.
Key ideas
- With cards drawn without replacement, the next outcome probability depends on the observed sequence.
- For even odds, the Kelly fraction depends on the estimated probability of winning.
- One proposed heuristic estimates that probability from the color imbalance among revealed cards.
- A dynamic programming formulation can represent choices across future draws and bankroll states.
- The proposed formal solution is conjectural and does not establish a variance-minimizing policy.
Tags
Full text
# Kelly Criterion — maximize expected value and minimize the variance in card game with $x$ red and $y$ black cards
# Kelly Criterion — maximize expected value and minimize the variance in card game with $x$ red and $y$ black cards
You have $x$ red cards and $y$ black cards. I flip them over one at a time. The probability of flipping a particular colour is proportional to the amount of those coloured cards left. You start with $1$ and for every flip you can bet some proportion of your money on red or blue. If you win the bet, you gain twice your bet, but if you lose the bet, you gain nothing. What is the strategy that maximizes expectancy and minimizes variance?
I think the correct strategy to use is the Kelly Criterion, but I honestly do not know how to set the formula and how to find the expected value and variance of the game. The fact that the probability is dynamic really confuses me.
## Answer by Bob Jansen (score 2)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/68210
This is what I would do without access to pen and paper. I don't know whether this strategy is optimal but it is easy to execute and I invite others to do better :)
The problem in this setup is that I don't know my probability of winning as $x$ and $y$ are unknown and I can't apply the Kelly criterion. To wit (Wikipedia):
> Where losing the bet involves losing the entire wager, the Kelly bet is: $$f^* = p-\frac{q}{b} = p + \frac{p-1}{b}$$ where: $f^{*}$ is the fraction of the current bankroll to wager. $p$ is the probability of a win. $q$ is the probability of a loss ($ q = 1 - p$). $b$ is the amount gained with a win. E.g. If betting \$10 on a 2-to-1 odds bet, (upon win you are returned \$30, winning you \$20), then $b = 20 / 10 = 2$. As an example, if a gamble has a 60% chance of winning ($p = 0.6, q = 0.4$), and the gambler receives 1-to-1 odds on a winning bet ($b=1$), then the gambler should bet 20% of the bankroll at each opportunity ($f^{*} = 0.6-\frac{0.4}{1} = 0.2$), in order to maximize the long-run growth rate of the bankroll.
I have $b = 1$ and $f^* = 2p - 1 $ but don't know $p$. I can only estimate it from what I have seen. I have seen nothing and therefore in the first round I shouldn't bet at all! After the first round, I have a small bit of information about the distribution which I can use. Assume the first card was red, in that case I set $p = \frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{n}$.
If the second card is blue I set $p = \frac{1}{2}$ and bet nothing. If the second card is red I bet $p = \frac{1}{2} + \frac{2}{n}$. That is, my formula for $p$ when betting on red is $$p = \frac{1}{2} + \frac{r - b}{n}$$ where $r$ is the number of red cards drawn and $b$ the formula for betting on blue is analogous.
If I was risk averse I would limit the fraction regardless of the observed proportion.
## Answer by LeoAdL (score 1)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/76407
Here is my attempt at some formal analysis: Denote by $V(x,n,W)$ the value function where, $n\equiv x+y$ We have:
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned} V\left(x,n,W\right) = \max_{\left\{0\leq \lambda_x, \lambda_y \leq 1\right\}} & \frac{x}{n}V\left(x-1,n-1,W\left(1+\lambda_x-\lambda_y\right)\right) \\ & \quad + \frac{n-x}{n}V\left(x,n-1,W\left(1+\lambda_y-\lambda_x\right)\right) \end{aligned} \end{equation} FOC are given by: \begin{align} \frac{x}{n}V_3\left(x-1,n-1,W\left(1+\lambda_x-\lambda_y\right)\right)-\frac{n-x}{n}V_3\left(x,n-1,W\left(1+\lambda_y-\lambda_x\right)\right)) & = 0 \end{align} So: $$ x V_3\left(x-1,n-1,W\left(1+\lambda_x-\lambda_y\right)\right) = (n-x) V_3\left(x,n-1,W\left(1+\lambda_y-\lambda_x\right)\right)) $$ Conjecture: $V(*,*,W)=A(*,*)+\log W$ Then: $$ \lambda_x-\lambda_y=\frac{2x-n}{n} $$ Verify: \begin{equation} \begin{aligned} n A(x,n) & = xA(x-1,n-1)+x\log\left(x\right) \\ & \quad +(n-x)A(x,n-1) \\ & \quad +(n-x)\log\left(n-x\right) -\log(2n) \end{aligned} \end{equation} Finally, if we can solve that equation, we want to use all our wealth, so that $\lambda_x+\lambda_y=1$, hence: $$ \lambda_x = \frac{1}{2} + \frac{2x-n}{2n} = \frac{x}{n} $$Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)
This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.