Our members are dedicated to PASSION and PURPOSE without drama!

The Negation of Disadvantage by Selective Options

Started by Gizmotron, November 30, 2015, 06:58:55 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Gizmotron

RePosted:
Quote from: Jimske on November 30, 2015, 06:18:46 PM

Nonsense.  Total misread.  I can take what I dish!  Your posts were deleted because they were OFF TOPIC.  You still haven't explained in any satisfactory way why one "negates an edge" by betting every hand.  Neither has Gizmo and neither has asymbacc.  So get off your high horse telling me what "we both know"

Here, they will be on topic.

Everyone knows that card counting 21 players wait for opportunity. It's not a mathematical advantage unless they deliberately target a favored condition.

Look at these spin results for 100 spins and 12 different dozens tracked in groups of threes: notice the red dominations?


.....x....xxxx.xxx...xx..x.x.....x..x.....xx..xxx.....xx..x....x...x.......x.x..xx.x..x...x...xx..x. -- 34
xx.x..xxxx....x...xxx.......x.x....x..xxxx..x....x...x..x..xxx..x.....xx..x.x.xx..x....xxx......x..x -- 38
..x.x..................xx.x..x.xx....x............xxx............xx.xx..xx..........xx.....xxx...x.. -- 24

....xx..x.x.x..x.x.x..x....xx..x.x..xxx...x.x.x..x....xx...x...x...xx.x...x.x...x.x...xx..x......xx. -- 36
..xx.......x.x.........xx.x..xx....x.....x......x.x..x....x.x.....x..x.xx..x..x..x......xx..x....... -- 26
xx....xx.x....x.x.x.xx...x......x......xx..x...x...xx...x....x..xx.......x...x.x...xxx.....x.xxxx..x -- 34

............x..xxx.x...xx...x...xx..x.x..x....x.x.x.x.x.....x..x..xx.x.xx.x.....x...x..x.....x...x.. -- 31
..x..xxx.xx..x....x..xx....x.x.........x..xx...x.......x..x.....x.....x....xxxxx.x.x.xx...x.......xx -- 32
xx.xx...x..x..x.....x....xx...xx...x.x..x...x....x.x.x..x..x.x...x..x....x........x.....xx.xx.xxx... -- 33

...........x..x..x.......xx...xxx.x.xx.......x..x....x..xx...xxx................x...........x.xx.x.. -- 24
..x..xxx.xx..x....x..xx....x.x.........x..xx...x.......x..x.....x.....x....xxxxx.x.x.xx...x.......xx -- 32
xx.xx...x...x..xx..xx..xx...x....x.x..x.xx..x.x..xxxx.x....xx....xxxxx.xxxx.......x.x..xxx.x.x..x... -- 44



You could just bet on positions that look like they are heading into a domination, if you know how. Bet $2 per number in the dozen that might be in a state of domination; bet $1 per number on the other dozen that coincidentally appears not to be asleep.

BTW, Gr8player plays like a genius level professional player too.
"...IT'S AGAINST THE LAW TO BREAK THE LAW OF AVERAGES." 

Gizmotron

Just in case you can't see it, notice these from the beginning of the first set of dozens. There's a shifting dominance of one dozen to another dozen while the last dozen dominates as a sleeper.


.....x....xxxx.xxx...xx..
xx.x..xxxx....x...xxx....
..x.x..................xx



The text of the chart is in proportionally spaced font style that is the same for dots (not hits) and X's (hits). So if you look up the columns perpendicular to their written form you can see which dozen hit in the set for each spin. It's a horizontal chart, the bigger chart being 100 spins. At the end of each row is a number representing how many times in that 100 spins that dozen hit.


"...IT'S AGAINST THE LAW TO BREAK THE LAW OF AVERAGES." 

Jimske

Quote from: Gizmotron on November 30, 2015, 06:58:55 PM
RePosted:
Here, they will be on topic.

Everyone knows that card counting 21 players wait for opportunity. It's not a mathematical advantage unless they deliberately target a favored condition.

Look at these spin results for 100 spins and 12 different dozens tracked in groups of threes: notice the red dominations?


.....x....xxxx.xxx...xx..x.x.....x..x.....xx..xxx.....xx..x....x...x.......x.x..xx.x..x...x...xx..x. -- 34
xx.x..xxxx....x...xxx.......x.x....x..xxxx..x....x...x..x..xxx..x.....xx..x.x.xx..x....xxx......x..x -- 38
..x.x..................xx.x..x.xx....x............xxx............xx.xx..xx..........xx.....xxx...x.. -- 24

....xx..x.x.x..x.x.x..x....xx..x.x..xxx...x.x.x..x....xx...x...x...xx.x...x.x...x.x...xx..x......xx. -- 36
..xx.......x.x.........xx.x..xx....x.....x......x.x..x....x.x.....x..x.xx..x..x..x......xx..x....... -- 26
xx....xx.x....x.x.x.xx...x......x......xx..x...x...xx...x....x..xx.......x...x.x...xxx.....x.xxxx..x -- 34

............x..xxx.x...xx...x...xx..x.x..x....x.x.x.x.x.....x..x..xx.x.xx.x.....x...x..x.....x...x.. -- 31
..x..xxx.xx..x....x..xx....x.x.........x..xx...x.......x..x.....x.....x....xxxxx.x.x.xx...x.......xx -- 32
xx.xx...x..x..x.....x....xx...xx...x.x..x...x....x.x.x..x..x.x...x..x....x........x.....xx.xx.xxx... -- 33

...........x..x..x.......xx...xxx.x.xx.......x..x....x..xx...xxx................x...........x.xx.x.. -- 24
..x..xxx.xx..x....x..xx....x.x.........x..xx...x.......x..x.....x.....x....xxxxx.x.x.xx...x.......xx -- 32
xx.xx...x...x..xx..xx..xx...x....x.x..x.xx..x.x..xxxx.x....xx....xxxxx.xxxx.......x.x..xxx.x.x..x... -- 44



You could just bet on positions that look like they are heading into a domination, if you know how. Bet $2 per number in the dozen that might be in a state of domination; bet $1 per number on the other dozen that coincidentally appears not to be asleep.
So this explains  mathematical edge?  What are the dots for?  Go ahead and explain this  in simpler terms for those of us like me who are intellectually impaired.

QuoteBTW, Gr8player plays like a genius level professional player too.
So you continue reminding us.
[/quote]

Gizmotron

Quote from: Jimske on November 30, 2015, 08:19:54 PM
So this explains  mathematical edge?  What are the dots for?  Go ahead and explain this  in simpler terms for those of us like me who are intellectually impaired.

Why does there have to be a mathematical edge for there to exist an advantage? If there are fluctuation waves that exist in early play, where the waves cycles above and below the base line value of the expected long term distribution of outcomes, commonly known as the house's edge, then for a while, the player has a mathematical short termed possibility of choosing to exit the game while in a positive position, especially if that position is just 1 unit up.

I find it disconcerting, that at a discussion forum about gambling, that my point is anything that excludes unclear. So don't act like I don't make sense. My point is simple. Why do I have to end my sessions on the base line value of the houses advantage or worse? You can't negate the existence of being ahead early on in a session. You can't deny the existence of fluctuating results from a session of betting. You are also clearly oblivious to the knowledge of coincidental circumstances. It is clearly possible to exit a steep downturn whenever you feel like it.

It takes all the spins to create a house's advantage. The casino doesn't make you bet the same amount and every spin too though. You have the control on when to quit, when to increase a bet, and when to pull back your bet amounts.

I can't play more than 300 spins in a session. There are often three or four magnificent opportunities that occur every 300 spins. I don't ignore them, you do. You use arithmetic as an excuse not to discover what I'm trying to show you. I'm glad you do that stubborn thing though. It makes discussions here kind of my advantage. And what's funny about that is you have no idea what you are missing, and that comes through with that stone wall of probability is king thingy you do.

"...IT'S AGAINST THE LAW TO BREAK THE LAW OF AVERAGES." 

AsymBacGuy

Quote from: Gizmotron on December 01, 2015, 07:33:01 PM
I can't play more than 300 spins in a session. There are often three or four magnificent opportunities that occur every 300 spins.

Even though I strongly think that roulette is an unbeatable game, for some reasons I like this statement.


as.   

 



Baccarat is 99% skill and 1% luck

CLEAR EYES, FULL HEARTS. CAN'T LOSE
(Friday Night Lights TV series)

I NEVER LOSE.
I EITHER WIN OR LEARN
(Nelson Mandela)

Winners don't do different things, they do things differently (Albalaha)

Gizmotron

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on December 01, 2015, 09:02:12 PM
Even though I strongly think that roulette is an unbeatable game, for some reasons I like this statement.

The trick to taking advantage of these few opportunities is in positioning yourself first by not getting way behind in the session before reaching these opportunities in the first place. I know how to stay at even real easy. That skill must be learned first. 50/50 bets are great for this purpose. Attacking a sleeping dozen that sleeps from 15 to 30 spins in a row is easier still.

I hope you like these simple aspects of the game even more.
"...IT'S AGAINST THE LAW TO BREAK THE LAW OF AVERAGES." 

AsymBacGuy

Quote from: Gizmotron on December 01, 2015, 09:16:49 PM
The trick to taking advantage of these few opportunities is in positioning yourself first by not getting way behind in the session before reaching these opportunities in the first place. I know how to stay at even real easy. That skill must be learned first. 50/50 bets are great for this purpose. Attacking a sleeping dozen that sleeps from 15 to 30 spins in a row is easier still.

I hope you like these simple aspects of the game even more.

Well, I have to admit that another very serious roulette player I've known keep saying the same things you are writing. So I begin to trust you.

Coincidentally, more or less, it's the same way of thought I apply at baccarat with 1 billion accuracy.

The differences with baccarat is that here we get a lower mathematical negative edge, finite card distributions and an asymmetrical factor.

So if you've found some positive expectation hints at roulette I think that at baccarat your edge should be higher.

as.







Baccarat is 99% skill and 1% luck

CLEAR EYES, FULL HEARTS. CAN'T LOSE
(Friday Night Lights TV series)

I NEVER LOSE.
I EITHER WIN OR LEARN
(Nelson Mandela)

Winners don't do different things, they do things differently (Albalaha)

Gizmotron

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on December 01, 2015, 10:01:17 PM
Well, I have to admit that another very serious roulette player I've known keep saying the same things you are writing. So I begin to trust you.

Coincidentally, more or less, it's the same way of thought I apply at baccarat with 1 billion accuracy.

The differences with baccarat is that here we get a lower mathematical negative edge, finite card distributions and an asymmetrical factor.

So if you've found some positive expectation hints at roulette I think that at baccarat your edge should be higher.

I have not found a positive expectation while treading water in the 50/50 bets, any 18 numbers bet at a time. I get a grinding down that tends to follow the 2.7 / 5.4 percent decline of the house advantage while waiting. None of that bothers me much though. In live play, I'm expected to make minimum level bets by the casinos. What I'm waiting for are the opportunities that allow for huge dominations of 12 numbers at a time. They include many different ways of searching for strong streaks of the same 12 numbers hitting or strong streaks of the same 12 numbers sleeping. Another great thing is dominating singles or dominating series of dozen. One big kill per session is all that is needed to upset any slight mathematical disadvantage. It completely negates the deleterious effect of the slow grind downward.
"...IT'S AGAINST THE LAW TO BREAK THE LAW OF AVERAGES." 

Jimske

It appears you are addressing me.  Making too many assumptions about what I think and do.
Quote from: Gizmotron on December 01, 2015, 07:33:01 PM
Why does there have to be a mathematical edge for there to exist an advantage?
I suppose it has something to do with predictability?
QuoteIf there are fluctuation waves that exist in early play, where the waves cycles above and below the base line value of the expected long term distribution of outcomes, commonly known as the house's edge, then for a while, the player has a mathematical short termed possibility of choosing to exit the game while in a positive position, especially if that position is just 1 unit up.
IMO the only reason there exists a HA is again the inability to predict from random outcomes.  What you are speaking of here seems to me to be a long way round to what I call "bias" and it is something I work with all the time as a trend player.

QuoteI find it disconcerting, that at a discussion forum about gambling, that my point is anything that excludes unclear. So don't act like I don't make sense. My point is simple. Why do I have to end my sessions on the base line value of the houses advantage or worse? You can't negate the existence of being ahead early on in a session. You can't deny the existence of fluctuating results from a session of betting. You are also clearly oblivious to the knowledge of coincidental circumstances. It is clearly possible to exit a steep downturn whenever you feel like it.
:)Am I?

QuoteIt takes all the spins to create a house's advantage. The casino doesn't make you bet the same amount and every spin too though. You have the control on when to quit, when to increase a bet, and when to pull back your bet amounts.
Now you sound like the late Stetson Bailey.  No argument with the obvious.

QuoteI can't play more than 300 spins in a session. There are often three or four magnificent opportunities that occur every 300 spins. I don't ignore them, you do. You use arithmetic as an excuse not to discover what I'm trying to show you. I'm glad you do that stubborn thing though. It makes discussions here kind of my advantage. And what's funny about that is you have no idea what you are missing, and that comes through with that stone wall of probability is king thingy you do.
You sure you speaking to me here?  I do nothing of the kind you suggest. 











Gizmotron

Quote from: Jimske on December 01, 2015, 10:21:57 PM
IMO the only reason there exists a HA is again the inability to predict from random outcomes. 

It is not necessary to predict the results of future events in order to effectively exploit future opportunities: Example the same 30 sleeping dozens in a row. The first two bets makes all the rest of the wins a free ride. For me that would be at least 25 wins in a row before a loss. BTW, a loss is a hint that the trend does not work anymore. Math during these 30 spins is worthless too.

Let's try this backwards. Because the house has two green zeros that don't belong to any of my dozen sets on the table layout, I can't take advantage of 25 singles in a row. The casino runs out and puts me in handcuffs and a giant calculator falls out of the sky and puts super glue all over my chips so that I can't use them. Then the math police come and water board me because it's against the law to break the law of averages.

"...IT'S AGAINST THE LAW TO BREAK THE LAW OF AVERAGES."
"...IT'S AGAINST THE LAW TO BREAK THE LAW OF AVERAGES." 

Jimske

Quote from: Gizmotron on December 01, 2015, 10:41:54 PM
It is not necessary to predict the results of future events in order to effectively exploit future opportunities:
Sounds like semantics and/or double talk to me.  Opportunity abounds at every spin.  To examine PAST events and successfully exploit that OPPORTUNITY can be qualified as either a positive expectation or a negative expectation.


Jimske

Quote from: Gizmotron on November 30, 2015, 08:00:59 PM
Just in case you can't see it, notice these from the beginning of the first set of dozens. There's a shifting dominance of one dozen to another dozen while the last dozen dominates as a sleeper.


.....x....xxxx.xxx...xx..
xx.x..xxxx....x...xxx....
..x.x..................xx



The text of the chart is in proportionally spaced font style that is the same for dots (not hits) and X's (hits). So if you look up the columns perpendicular to their written form you can see which dozen hit in the set for each spin. It's a horizontal chart, the bigger chart being 100 spins. At the end of each row is a number representing how many times in that 100 spins that dozen hit.
I'm still at a loss to read the above.  Perhaps some one else can chime in and enlighten me?  No?  Perhaps nobody gets it?



Jimske