IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2606.10337.html

Optimal exit strategies of CPT gamblers in unfair gambles

Author

Listed:
  • Sang Hu
  • Xun Yu Zhou

Abstract

In this paper we study optimal exit strategies of gamblers with cumulative prospect theory (CPT) preferences in games where the expected payoff is strictly negative at each play, and formulate the problem as optimal stopping on asymmetric random walks. Applying a geometric transformation of the underlying cumulative gain/loss process, engaging randomized strategies and changing the decision variable from stopping times to probability distribution of the accumulated gain or loss at exit time, we solve the problem via the Skorokhod embedding. Drastically different from the fair gamble problem studied by He et al. (2019a), we show that the unfair problem in the infinite time horizon has finite values for a wide range of CPT parameter specifications. We then present the analytical solutions in the case of piece-wise power utility and power probability distortion functions. Compared to the strategies used in fair gambling, the CPT gamblers in unfair gambles are less loss-tolerant and choose not to gamble at all when the games are sufficiently unfavorable.

Suggested Citation

  • Sang Hu & Xun Yu Zhou, 2026. "Optimal exit strategies of CPT gamblers in unfair gambles," Papers 2606.10337, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2026.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2606.10337
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2606.10337
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicholas Barberis, 2012. "A Model of Casino Gambling," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 35-51, January.
    2. Drazen Prelec, 1998. "The Probability Weighting Function," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 497-528, May.
    3. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    4. Sang Hu & Jan Obłój & Xun Yu Zhou, 2023. "A Casino Gambling Model Under Cumulative Prospect Theory: Analysis and Algorithm," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 2474-2496, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. He, Xuedong & Hu, Sang, 2024. "Never stop or never start? Optimal stopping under a mixture of CPT and EUT preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    2. Xue Dong He & Sang Hu & Jan Obłój & Xun Yu Zhou, 2017. "Technical Note—Path-Dependent and Randomized Strategies in Barberis’ Casino Gambling Model," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(1), pages 97-103, February.
    3. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    4. Xue Dong He & Sang Hu & Jan Obłój & Xun Yu Zhou, 2017. "Technical Note—Path-Dependent and Randomized Strategies in Barberis’ Casino Gambling Model," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(1), pages 97-103, February.
    5. Henderson, Vicky & Hobson, David & Tse, Alex S.L., 2018. "Probability weighting, stop-loss and the disposition effect," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 360-397.
    6. Anna Conte & Werner Güth & Paul Pezanis-Christou, 2023. "Strategic ambiguity and risk in alternating pie-sharing experiments," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 66(3), pages 233-260, June.
    7. Stomper, Alex & VierAy, Marie-Louise, 2015. "Iterated Expectations under Rank-Dependent Expected Utility and Model Consistency," Queen's Economics Department Working Papers 273724, Queen's University - Department of Economics.
    8. Alex Imas, 2016. "The Realization Effect: Risk-Taking after Realized versus Paper Losses," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(8), pages 2086-2109, August.
    9. Konstantinos Georgalos, 2019. "An experimental test of the predictive power of dynamic ambiguity models," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 59(1), pages 51-83, August.
    10. Cappelen, Alexander W. & Sørensen, Erik Ø. & Tungodden, Bertil & Xu, Xiaogeng, 2025. "Risk taking on behalf of others: Does the timing of uncertainty revelation matter?," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 13/2025, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    11. Shi, Yun & Cui, Xiangyu & Zhou, Xunyu, 2020. "Beta and Coskewness Pricing: Perspective from Probability Weighting," SocArXiv 5rqhv, Center for Open Science.
    12. Alex Stomper & Marie-Louise Vierø, 2015. "Iterated Expectations Under Rank-dependent Expected Utility And Model Consistency," Working Paper 1228, Economics Department, Queen's University.
    13. Filiz-Ozbay, Emel & Guryan, Jonathan & Hyndman, Kyle & Kearney, Melissa & Ozbay, Erkut Y., 2015. "Do lottery payments induce savings behavior? Evidence from the lab," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 1-24.
    14. Jin Ma & Ting-Kam Leonard Wong & Jianfeng Zhang, 2021. "Time-Consistent Conditional Expectation Under Probability Distortion," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 46(3), pages 1149-1180, August.
    15. Yves Alarie & Georges Dionne, 2005. "Testing explanations of preference reversal: A model," Working Papers 05-2, HEC Montreal, Canada Research Chair in Risk Management.
    16. Foster, Gigi & Frijters, Paul & Schaffner, Markus & Torgler, Benno, 2018. "Expectation formation in an evolving game of uncertainty: New experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 379-405.
    17. Che-Yuan Liang, 2017. "Optimal inequality behind the veil of ignorance," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 83(3), pages 431-455, October.
    18. Kerim Keskin, 2016. "Inverse S-shaped probability weighting functions in first-price sealed-bid auctions," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 20(1), pages 57-67, March.
    19. Ariane Charpin, 2018. "Tests des modèles de décision en situation de risque. Le cas des parieurs hippiques en France," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 69(5), pages 779-803.
    20. Bocqueho, Geraldine & Jacquet, Florence & Reynaud, Arnaud, 2011. "Expected Utility or Prospect Theory Maximizers? Results from a Structural Model based on Field-experiment Data," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114257, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2606.10337. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.