I was wondering, why not just take the ratio of win rate per hand seen to SD per hand seen and then convert this to SD per Hr to WR per hour? Wouldn't that be more meaningful than DI in and of itself?
In BJA3, the author says DI = [win rate per hand seen/SD per hand seen] x 1000. Wouldn't the ratio be more meaningful without multiplying by 1000? For example, if the DI for a game is 5, this does not really tell us anything without us doing some extra work. Just read on.
Lets work backward. Divide 5 by 1000 = .005. Now we know the ratio of WR/Hand to SD/Hand is 1 to 200. Assuming 100 hands dealt per hour, then WR = $100 and SD = $2000. Thus, on an hourly basis, the ratio of SD to WR = $2000/$100 = 20 to 1. The smaller this ratio the stronger the game. This seems like a simple way to compare games with different rules, spreads, etc.
What do you guys think?
On another note, I do realize that DI^2 = SCORE. But why would squaring this number give the hourly WR which is optimized for kelly and a 10k BR?
MJ
