BetSelection.cc

Einstein never said it.


"No One Can Win at Roulette Unless He Steals Money from the Table While the Croupier Isn't Looking."



https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/09/09/einstein-roulette/


Is that true? The mathBoyz, over the past decades, all insist that you must have an edge in order to win at Roulette. They require a mathematical advantage, where it is clear that the game has a negative expectation from one spin to infinity.


But is it true? Can the "statistical absolutists" prove that you must have an advantage in order to win? Where is the equation that proves it? Math equations can't predict when a win streak will occur, how long it will last, or when it will end. They can't tell a player when to stop. They don't advise when to bet big or when to bet small. They don't do much of anything for that matter. In fact I don't think that they exist. Where is the proof from the crowd that always demands proof?


This is where silence will probably be the answer. The mathBoyz always go silent when actually confronted with their own logic. So let's see if anyone of them can make a coherent argument without casting dispersion or disparaging remarks on the messenger. Let's see if they can keep it out of the gutter or above the level of crotch jokes.


Prove it.

Keep t clean and respectful.  Joking is permitted but do it from the stand point of a late night TV monologue of sorts, as Gizmo said--'hold the crotch level jokes and the insults', etc. 

In other words, don't trash the board or any of its members (a joke between member-friends or Q&A type of back and forth is another story) you guys know what that all means.

Go for it. 

Quote from: alrelax on June 01, 2018, 01:22:32 PM
Keep t clean and respectful.  Joking is permitted but do it from the stand point of a late night TV monologue of sorts, as Gizmo said--'hold the crotch level jokes and the insults', etc. 

In other words, don't trash the board or any of its members (a joke between member-friends or Q&A type of back and forth is another story) you guys know what that all means.

Go for it.

I thought you left forum for good, how come still here?

Quote from: Blue_Angel on June 01, 2018, 01:42:16 PM

I thought you left forum for good, how come still here?

Why do you twist the words around?  What is your problem?

I am involved with the Admin as well as the ownership.

By the way, this is not democracy here, it is a forum with ownership and rules and regulations. 

If you do not like that, sorry, leave.  If you do, stay and enjoy.  Lots of good stuff to come.

I made a statement about writing regarding B&M results and baccarat, etc.

There seems to be no real interest and interaction except for drama like you are bringing about, chastising and humiliation or belittling regarding beliefs. I specifically said: "After numerous sessions the past few months and actual data and results from H-Money, etc., my close friend and someone that lost close to $100,000.00 attempting to make money at Bac, being lambasted and chastised for my postings (all with no concern or care whatsoever from H-Money as he watched me post) as well as my own plays with the pictures of the results the best I could take at the casinos as well as the profit of the plays with detailed descriptions of my MMS, emotional-psych-frame of mind and all the other necessities I found positive that has allowed me to transform my game to a very profitable game the clearest and highest majority of the times, coupled with my buy-in and bank roll beliefs, I will refrain from posting pretty much.  Since there is none or hardly any support, interest and interaction with my casino results from you guys, I will save you the hassle of your 'forced readership' and 'negative continued commenting' as to what I found that has been so good for my game and actual real results!

I see no clear interest or belief and all I see is the derogatory, the negative and the resentment from members such as Xander, Mike, Blue Angel, etc., of course Green Guy can't say anything as he would lead the pack but he is muted, etc.  I really wanted to throw SoxFan into that group also, just have never really got a handle on his 'real thoughts or plays' as he offers next to nothing in the way of 'real play' except use huge bank rolls and make money everyday type of statements, etc."

Seriously, what is your problem?  You are negative, you belittle, you chastise and humiliate those that do not agree with you and you bring negativity to other sides and real gamblers and players that come on the board to learn, read, research and explore.  In other words, I have had complaints about you and Xander and Mike and another one or two, I brushed them off.  You actually do stop people from posting and it is not right.  You would not last a day or two on most other boards, IMO.  I will not put up with your continued negativity, attempt to control and the aura you present. 

I have done very well gambling at Baccarat and attempted to disclose, discuss and interact with people here.  Worked for the most part, and a few like yourself, repeatedly and continuously throw that unintelligent-butt monkey wrench in the arena every single chance you get.  If you don't agree with me, skip anything and everything I write or block me, my God! 

I have proof as to what I've done gambling and I have found many ways to improve my game of baccarat that allows myself to win numerous times far in excess of my buy-in's, consistently and repetitively by large and far.  Sorry you do not agree.  I will tell you one last time as I have by PM, etc.  Stop your negativity and chastising of other members, every single one, period end of story.  One last final warning, past the previous one. 

You and Xander need to stop twisting and assuming things.  If you don't have real good grasp of the English language take a course at your local secondary school.  Xander claims my ego is hurt and I can't take opposing views, which is totally not why I am cutting down on writing, it is lack of interaction and lack of comments.  Fine, no one wants reality, they want holy-grails and systems that are based on math and stats that will smack the casino with guaranteed winnings on a pre-scheduled thought out protocol that does not and will never exist, I won't comment further---but I wrote about real life USA bac experiences for 35 years or so and countless things that helped me define the game and how to profit and how to handle winning and losing.  As far as my ego goes, I deal with the state police, the department of transportation officials and the US EPA and I have been shoved in a corner, yelled at and screamed at by supervisors and district managers and then complimented and praised by case agents and regional supervisors for the same jobs or similar matters.  Stuff like this no problem, everyone is self serving to a point in life, here is no different, except we have to get along and reside on the same board.  You and Xander and Mike do not make the rules or set the tone or have the right to chastise, belittle, control or humiliate anyone, period.  Never did and never will.  Back to the matter at hand.  I cut down on writing about baccarat, etc., because  I feel it is a waste of my time, self serving (LOL) but when there is no interaction, that convinces myself I am wasting my time writing about actual live baccarat in USA casinos, etc.  There is a lot to learn about casinos and winning and losing, past thinking of applying math or stats at the live table to win money. 

Here it is in plain English.  If you cannot be respectful, non offending, refrain from below the crotch joking and insults (unless it is in a sportsmanship like manner with a buddy/member friend of yours on here, etc.), etc., you will be moderated and eventually banned if you persist.  If you do not agree with someone, me or anyone else, state it respectful and state your case with your technical terms and beliefs and then stop.  Don't chase members around on this board.  Skip their posts or block them, everyone has a right to a neutral, clean and comfortable atmosphere here, everyone.  Again, if you do not agree or can not abide by that, leave.  If you do not like or can not accept what I say, take it up with my partner Vic.  Thank you, stay and enjoy, but be 100% respectful and stop the negativity.

I have played the game of baccarat since you were approx. 1 year old or so.  You know, I have numerous people in the haz-mat spill clean up business as well as the heavy wrecker and recovery industry that I didn't see eye-to-eye with or like the way they looked, their nationalities, their other personal ways, etc., but I sure learned a hell of a lot of great things from them in numerous ways.  Countless times, I was at an industry function, course, seminar,. workshop, trade show, etc., etc., and picked up one or two things from someone on a message board I despised at the times, and when I realized what just happened, I did that '3-Stoogies' slap in my face and wondered why I disliked or despised that guy in the first place.  He was the same as myself expect he didn't use the right deodorant or enough of it, or pull that 'gross and laughable' looking hair growing out of his nose and ears, or he didn't drink the same drink I did or he was not Italian or he was from LaLa Land in Southern California and I was from New York/New Jersey, etc., etc., and so on and so forth, et al.  The End.

Quote from: Blue_Angel on June 01, 2018, 01:42:16 PM

I thought you left forum for good, how come still here?

LMAO.  You really expected him to just moderate?

Glen has finally wiggled his way into being the decider, ruler of the roost, king of the castle, . . . Very "Trumpian."  Notice how EVERY post must be about him in some way - even in his reply to the above!!!!!  So now we have a moderator who is a control freak, narcissistic bully.

At the same time Glen has no problem making condescending and/or sarcastic remarks about how others perceive and play the game.

Jimske

Quote from: Jimske on June 01, 2018, 02:53:51 PM
LMAO.  You really expected him to just moderate?

Glen has finally wiggled his way into being the decider, ruler of the roost, king of the castle, . . . Very "Trumpian."  Notice how EVERY post must be about him in some way - even in his reply to the above!!!!!  So now we have a moderator who is a control freak, narcissistic bully.

At the same time Glen has no problem making condescending and/or sarcastic remarks about how others perceive and play the game.

Jimske

I used to watch the Apprentice with endorsement of Donald!  The show was not about him, was it?

Actually my cousin worked for Donald for 20 years at the Taj or so and when he cleaned out his desk a little bit ago (a couple of years back now) he gave me the original and one of 3 copies of the book that built the Taj.  I also have a Silver & Gold belt buckle Donald gave me by in the early 90's at a baccarat tournament (those great old bac tournaments in AC and Vegas that went by the way side). 

It is not about me!  It is about sharing, something you seem to forget about also.

Here, I will share:  https://betselection.cc/alrelax's-blog/trump-taj-atlantic-city-and-donald-trump/msg57352/#msg57352

What's wrong with Trump? 

I'm also moderator of this thread. I don't mind people disagreeing and even embarrassingly taking turns to defensive expressions if they lose it. I like watching people losing their cool. It means that they have lost their capacity to back up a position. Like it or not they are taking a position. I don't have a problem with Trump either. He, just like Capitalism, has raised more people out of poverty than all the well-intention socialistic programs that has plagued our country. The opposition in this case have completely lost it. The people that hate Trump, just like the loyal opposition on these forums regarding probability and advantage, go bat guano crazy when they get honestly challenged for their opinions. People like to make their stands on flimsy facts. There is nothing wrong with their conclusions. They are just misled conclusions that would make perfect sense if the facts were true. But people like where they are getting their facts from. They like the groups that are giving them these facts.


That is why I started this thread. Jimske asked if I was getting tired of these same old arguments. So I found a way to take it to the next level. Why is there an assumption that you must have an edge in order to win? Who is feeding these facts to the world? Are they right?

Quote from: Gizmotron on June 01, 2018, 03:54:18 PM

That is why I started this thread. Jimske asked if I was getting tired of these same old arguments. So I found a way to take it to the next level. Why is there an assumption that you must have an edge in order to win? Who is feeding these facts to the world? Are they right?

To answer your question, I have no edge over the casino that I can identify, likewise the casino has a 'mountain' (rather than an edge)  over myself, a real player with real cash.  That mountain that they have is 'Time' and 'Unlimited Chip Inventory' as well as the emotional and psychological problems/confusion and slip from reality that I inflict upon myself at certain times while gambling. 

However, I found a way to turn the tables slightly on the casinos and it has nothing to do with systems and math and statistical results in the classical sense, etc.

Quote from: alrelax on June 01, 2018, 04:01:36 PM
To answer your question, I have no edge over the casino that I can identify, likewise the casino has a 'mountain' (rather than an edge)  over myself, a real player with real cash.  That mountain that they have is 'Time' and 'Unlimited Chip Inventory' as well as the emotional and psychological problems/confusion and slip from reality that I inflict upon myself at certain times while gambling. 

However, I found a way to turn the tables slightly on the casinos and it has nothing to do with systems and math and statistical results in the classical sense, etc.

You made those methods, beliefs, practices, and experience clear to me the first day that I read your posts. I knew that you could win, and do it because of your intellect and experience. We are very few in the gambling world, I guess. People are now using hot numbers to expose conditional randomness to detection. These same people used to oppose me. Now they have found their own way to "read the random," to quote Spike. They have moved on from systems and math to situational awareness. And the best of us have also added the human nature factor to improve that skill. That is you too. I have watched you try to share experience. I think it can't be done. People do not have the ability to assimilate 1000's of lost sessions. They don't have skills at watching changes occur in the variance. They can't even relate to standing back or outside the data and seeing its real over all significance. I tried to teach that. I've tried to share it here. It's sort of like pushing a large boulder up a hill with your nose.


They all want a simple, step by step, set of rules that will make gambling like taking money out of an ATM machine. If it takes work and a lot of experience then they don't want it. Who's fault is that?


This entire subject, gambling to win, is another extreme mountain top that I give to myself. I like to summit and then ski off the most difficult, able to be skied route. I'm killer diller at that. I want to be that good at this. It looks like I'm there too. I've beaten the monkey on my back.

Quote from: alrelax on June 01, 2018, 02:13:01 PM
What is your problem?


I've none, but you seem to have for reasons you understand better.

In other words, I have had complaints about you and Xander and Mike and another one or two, I brushed them off.  You actually do stop people from posting and it is not right.


First, it's inaccurate to place me on the same fate as Xander, Mike and GreenGuy because we are different persons with different views which might or might not happen to agree.
By whom you had complaints?
A true man must keep his word, support it with actions and speak directly straightforward rather than hiding behind others and creating gossips and rumors.
Some of the fair sex are more "man" than men who were born man but their mentality is not so masculine.
Even if I wanted to stop people from posting I couldn't stop them because this decision depends completely from themselves.
It is healthy to have polyphony and different views, it's impossible for everyone to agree, for those who have fragile egos and they are acting like prima-donas who are seeking attention they are very sensitive on criticism, thus for them there are better places to be, please feel free to buy a "parrot" in order to listen your "echo".
My purpose, I'm speaking for me and nobody else, was never to satisfy your ears, or should I say eyes, by confirming whatever someone might claim whether I agree or not.


You and Xander need to stop twisting and assuming things.  If you don't have real good grasp of the English language take a course at your local secondary school. Xander claims my ego is hurt and I can't take opposing views, which is totally not why I am cutting down on writing, it is lack of interaction and lack of comments.


Oh really?!
What have I twisted and assumed??
I believe Xander was spot on but I might be wrong, who knows.
Strange, after all these I've found something I agree with you, the lack of comments/feedback/interaction is something which troubles me too and for some time makes me to consider seriously retiring from the forums.


I cut down on writing about baccarat, etc., because  I feel it is a waste of my time, self serving (LOL) but when there is no interaction, that convinces myself I am wasting my time writing about actual live baccarat in USA casinos, etc.



Strange, after all these I've found something I agree with you, the lack of comments/feedback/interaction is something which troubles me too and for some time makes me to consider seriously retiring from the forums.

Here it is in plain English.  If you cannot be respectful, non offending, refrain from below the crotch joking and insults (unless it is in a sportsmanship like manner with a buddy/member friend of yours on here, etc.), etc., you will be moderated and eventually banned if you persist.  If you do not agree with someone, me or anyone else, state it respectful and state your case with your technical terms and beliefs and then stop.  Don't chase members around on this board.  Skip their posts or block them, everyone has a right to a neutral, clean and comfortable atmosphere here, everyone.  Again, if you do not agree or can not abide by that, leave.  If you do not like or can not accept what I say, take it up with my partner Vic.  Thank you, stay and enjoy, but be 100% respectful and stop the negativity.

By expressing what I really think it doesn't make it offending and non respectful, if everyone were to follow what you suggest then we would witness almost everyone to interact with him/herself since everybody else would just pass it.
It is because of those persons with fragile egos and intolerance on criticism who have disintegrated, fragmented and divided the forums!
It seems that reality equals negativity for you, I'm sorry but I'm not the one who is selling the "pink glasses"!

From Gizmo:  "They all want a simple, step by step, set of rules that will make gambling like taking money out of an ATM machine. If it takes work and a lot of experience then they don't want it. Who's fault is that?"

Ref Hard Work, Etc.:

You know, I came in at 4:15AM this morning to catch up on all my company invoicing and clear up a huge problem with a national department store closing 130 or so of its mall based department stores with auto centers.  We are doing about 2 dozen of the auto centers, their environmental waste and handling of the products, lift oil draining and battery shelf acid and clean up, etc.  Their disposal bills are astronomical and the corporate big-wigs had a complete fit yesterday.  Over $200,000.00 for less than 15 stores I am handling, just the disposal fees, not our fees which are equal or greater than those fees.  Thank the EPA for the disposal fees and the left-side the past few years on that one.  Anyway, I got side tracked with your post but it was a good time to set straight everything anyway.

My primary (unofficial field manager) guy walks in this morning at 6:30AM.  He is supposed to be hear at 7AM.  I knew something was brewing on that one.  Employees don't come early around here any longer.  His paycheck last week for right at $3,800.00.  40 hours at $42.00 hour, raised from $35.00 last year and that was raised from $28.50 the year before I think it was and I think 25 hours overtime at double time.  Anyway, he gets a tons of benefits from a small company such as ours.  Health policy that was co-paid at 50% up to last year and he demanded full 100% company paid health which my partner gave him 6 months ago, and matching 401K contributions, etc.  This morning he says, "Listen, I want a company Apple phone at no charge as well as a company car and I will put my own gas in it or I will resign".  I said, I will call and recommend to my partner, but up to him, I turned in my resignation my partner already but he did not accept yet and I am finishing up my jobs and the summer. 

He is worth it, he has a clean CDL license, he drug and alcohol test free every time, he is certified in large excavators/track hoes, skid steers, side dumps and dump trucks, vac trucks and he can do soil and water testing for the laboratory procedures we do.  He has shoring and trenching certification and Haz-whopper also, etc.  The guy is pulling down with benefits about $250k a year, he did not grad college.  He is smart, works hard and never complains at a job site, even 20 hours straight out there on the interstate, he gets the job done, when the others are crying and threatening to quit.  It would take 3 regular employees to replace him alone and he knows it. 

There are not many of these types going around, he out works most small business owners I see every day.  The guy lives in a neighborhood with doctors and lawyers and business owners and he works for us operating heavy equipment and driving a truck.

The kicker is, all his peers, co workers here and everywhere else, has about 20%, of what this guy has and makes, if that! 

Quote from: Blue_Angel on June 01, 2018, 04:57:43 PM

By whom you had complaints?
A true man must keep his word, support it with actions and speak directly straightforward rather than hiding behind others and creating gossips and rumors.

The only thing worth answering, IMO--is the statement you made:  "By whom you had complaints?
A true man must keep his word, support it with actions and speak directly straightforward rather than hiding behind others and creating gossips and rumors", as I want the record straight here.

Yes, I did receive several complaints and statements as to why active posters that were extremely well liked and thought of, IMO and the opinion of many others here-was you and a few others in your responses and constant degradation and belittling and everything else about others opinions/findings and statements, etc., cause them frustration and aggravation of sorts--so that is why they cease post any longer or cut down about 99% of what they used to.  I forwarded these in part, after getting permission from the original PM'er to myself as the privacy act and protocol that goes with PM's that you guys do not think exist, and Vic has some of them. 

Vic, care to comment??  Did I or did I not send you several/numerous complaints, concerns and reason why many members here stop posting and became extremely less active over the past year or longer??  Vic, confirm or deny, for the benefit of the record please. 

That is all I have to say about this subject matter.  My decision to cut way down and/or not post regarding the way I used to was based upon the people I named, as well as the lack of response/interaction and concern.  Why waste my time?  Same as my little 5 year old, if I do not sit down and color with him, play with his matchbox and hot wheels, ride bikes with him, swim with him, watch TV with him, play with play-dough with him, etc., etc., he will not either.  He might as well stand in the corner after school until bed time.  Since I have other things to do, I will do those things instead of spending time on the board.  I gave my reasoning and it is the 100% truth, reality and factual thought process, but a few select guys here turn it around as to the made up fragile ego and other untrue and assumed BullS**t you and Xander and another one or two will state. 

For the record, the brutal and honest truth.  Forward now with positive and board concerns and my visions as approved, endorsed and desired by Vic, etc.  News Desk, Live Skype or similar, practice tables, competition, studio type broadcast (not defined yet), maybe even an elite group of professional full time baccarat gamblers and charge them $1.49 monthly subscription fee just to say it is a premium exclusive club or something like that, LOL. Whatever. 

Quote from: alrelax on June 01, 2018, 05:36:19 PM
The only thing worth answering, IMO--is the statement you made:  "By whom you had complaints?
A true man must keep his word, support it with actions and speak directly straightforward rather than hiding behind others and creating gossips and rumors", as I want the record straight here.

Yes, I did receive several complaints and statements as to why active posters that were extremely well liked and thought of, IMO and the opinion of many others here-was you and a few others in your responses and constant degradation and belittling and everything else about others opinions/findings and statements, etc., cause them frustration and aggravation of sorts--so that is why they cease post any longer or cut down about 99% of what they used to.  I forwarded these in part, after getting permission from the original PM'er to myself as the privacy act and protocol that goes with PM's that you guys do not think exist, and Vic has some of them. 

Vic, care to comment??  Did I or did I not send you several/numerous complaints, concerns and reason why many members here stop posting and became extremely less active over the past year or longer??  Vic, confirm or deny, for the benefit of the record please. 

That is all I have to say about this subject matter.  My decision to cut way down and/or not post regarding the way I used to was based upon the people I named, as well as the lack of response/interaction and concern.  Why waste my time?  Same as my little 5 year old, if I do not sit down and color with him, play with his matchbox and hot wheels, ride bikes with him, swim with him, watch TV with him, play with play-dough with him, etc., etc., he will not either.  He might as well stand in the corner after school until bed time.  Since I have other things to do, I will do those things instead of spending time on the board.  I gave my reasoning and it is the 100% truth, reality and factual thought process, but a few select guys here turn it around as to the made up fragile ego and other untrue and assumed BullS**t you and Xander and another one or two will state. 

For the record, the brutal and honest truth.  Forward now with positive and board concerns and my visions as approved, endorsed and desired by Vic, etc.  News Desk, Live Skype or similar, practice tables, competition, studio type broadcast (not defined yet), maybe even an elite group of professional full time baccarat gamblers and charge them $1.49 monthly subscription fee just to say it is a premium exclusive club or something like that, LOL. Whatever.

Why those people you are talking about don't step forward to prove what you are claiming?
How do we know if you are talking about a small minority or the vast majority??
All we have are your claims, nothing more.
If you want to buy the forum and make it the way you consider proper it's all fine with me since I'm not planing to stay around much longer.
Last but not least, I don't give a stuff about your personal life because you are not my friend or relative.
Do you get it?!

Quote from: Blue_Angel on June 01, 2018, 06:20:03 PM

Why those people you are talking about don't step forward to prove what you are claiming?
How do we know if you are talking about a small minority or the vast majority??
All we have are your claims, nothing more.
If you want to buy the forum and make it the way you consider proper it's all fine with me since I'm not planing to stay around much longer.
Last but not least, I don't give a stuff about your personal life because you are not my friend or relative.
Do you get it?!

Excellent, the end, over.  We see eye-to-eye perfectly.  We are past the planning stages as you suggest thou.  But do appreciate your thoughts and comments and wishes.

Ok, I get it.  Some of you aren't "mathboyz.". Going out on a limb though, I'm going to assume that at least some of you that aren't "mathboyz" are hopefully at least "literate boyz.". If you are, then why do you assume that all of the experts and mathematicians are wrong, based on what they've written?  After all, they comprehend the math and basic probability, but you guys don't since you're not one of the "mathboyz!"  ::)

If I were you, I think I'd make an effort to learn the math and basic probability, rather than trying to make it cool to be ignorant.   ::)

Gizmo,

Either you have the edge or you don't.  You can't beat a negative expectation game in the long run for the same reason that you can't multiply a negative number times a positive number and produce a positive outcome.  Money management, gaming discipline don't make a dent in the long run expectation.

Sorry, just the facts

-Xander
Literate and I don't suck at math!

This made my day at 2:04PM, a huge cup of coffee and 2 after lunch donuts for this one!

From Gizmo:  "I don't mind people disagreeing and even embarrassingly taking turns to defensive expressions if they lose it. I like watching people losing their cool. It means that they have lost their capacity to back up a position. Like it or not they are taking a position."

Which just happened within this thread, 110%!

Okay, I am leaving anyway.   :whistle:

Quote from: Xander on June 01, 2018, 06:42:06 PM
Ok, I get it.  Some of you aren't "mathboyz.". Going out on a limb though, I'm going to assume that at least some of you that aren't "mathboyz" are hopefully at least "literate boyz.". If you are, then why do you assume that all of the experts and mathematicians are wrong, based on what they've written?  After all, they comprehend the math and basic probability, but you guys don't since you're not one of the "mathboyz!"  ::)

If I were you, I think I'd make an effort to learn the math and basic probability, rather than trying to make it cool to be ignorant.   ::)

Gizmo,

Either you have the edge or you don't.  You can't beat a negative expectation game in the long run for the same reason that you can't multiply a negative number times a positive number and produce a positive outcome.  Money management, gaming discipline don't make a dent in the long run expectation.

Sorry, just the facts

-Xander
Literate and I don't suck at math!

you're actually quite correct. The problem is the people who are winning, like me, I'm not winning because I have an edge that cannot be discerned by mathematics. We are guessing. But we are guessing based on signatures AND property betting techniques.  MM is part of that.  At least that's how I do it.

Today I only won 44 hands out of 92- 47.8% but still had a pretty good profitable day.  I was explaining the way I bet and where I bet to a guy sitting next to me. I was telling him that what I look for is consistency.  They were difficult to choose because the consistency didn't last that long and when that happens you got to change and be careful how you bet because the change may just end up going south. But generally we get enough consistency to make a profit if we're betting properly.

I know there's people in here that talk about triggers. In my mind a trigger is something that precipitates a future outcome. If you can do that and have a trigger then it's up to you to show it and prove it. If you can't then of course it's nonsense and just guessing. Gizmo said one time what's wrong with guessing? Well, nothing.

Quote from: alrelax on June 01, 2018, 03:01:56 PM
I used to watch the Apprentice with endorsement of Donald!  The show was not about him, was it?

Actually my cousin worked for Donald for 20 years at the Taj or so and when he cleaned out his desk a little bit ago (a couple of years back now) he gave me the original and one of 3 copies of the book that built the Taj.  I also have a Silver & Gold belt buckle Donald gave me by in the early 90's at a baccarat tournament (those great old bac tournaments in AC and Vegas that went by the way side). 

It is not about me!  It is about sharing, something you seem to forget about also.

Here, I will share:  https://betselection.cc/alrelax's-blog/trump-taj-atlantic-city-and-donald-trump/msg57352/#msg57352

What's wrong with Trump?

where to begin? First of all I think you have to be pretty obtuse not to realize that the show Apprentice was not about Donald Trump. The master deal maker lording over all these little apprentices trying to be like him and he having the ultimate "you're fired" authority sounds to me that it's all about him. LOL. 

Trump is an authoritarian who leans toward fascism.  Sure a lot of people agree with that kind of authoritarianism.

On a personal level there is really no argument that he is a consummate liar, a bully, a misogynist and has a high degree of narcissism.

You have a lot in common with him I'm sure. You're like a little Trump wanna be always talking about yourself, bragging, trying to control the narrative.  Think about it.  How many gambling sites have you left or been asked to leave because people can't stand your rhetoric and your BS.  You should really look in the mirror and ask yourself why people don't like you.

(The above is from Jimske)
*******************************************************************************************************
This is my response:

Sure there are some people that don't like me, I am outspoken, been there and done most of that type of guy, so what.  I have plenty that do like me, we are not in a friendship contest or popularity contest here as far as I know.  We discuss gambling and casinos, shoot--most husbands and wives cannot even have a decent conversation about money. 

You are pretty much exactly right.  I was joking about the show, you took the line  throw out there, hook--line and sinker 1,000%.

As far as the other sites, Sonya is a huge pig and it got very personal with her after I fueled war chests and done numerous other tasks and extra curricular activities with and for her.  She is a pig and nothing but.  She gave me a settlement to go away and part friends.  I went away but she is a pig--did I say that already?  I have my reasons.  IMO and my experience, nothing to do with BetSelection, etc.  As far as Andrew, AKA Shifter, I gambled with him and knew him from Sonya's board along with Rich from California.  Andrew is young and there are lots of personal and business problems on his end during this time we knew each other and meet a couple of times in Vegas with or without Rich (VegasBJ), about the time he started his own board that he shut down, etc.  As far as WoV, I am not even going to get into it, purely consumer'ish, non technical, chit chit pass the breeze stuff,  but Axelwolf and The Wizard, etc.  It is okay, no problem.  I was recently invited to go on BeatTheCasino and copied and pasted some articles from here around the time Vic was bringing this board down.  One of Keven's close members squared off on me and the others joined, but anyone that doesn't immediately join their $50.00 a month exclusive club is pushed into the corner and ridden.  I demanded with 3 maybe four cell phone texts to Kevin to remove my 5 postings on his site and he attempted to have his local police department issue a warrant fro my arrest for threats, harassment and other criminal charges, etc.  Anyone with any knoweldge of the game of baccarat that goes on that site and does not subscribe will not last.  But I found one his members that colludes with him was previously colluding with another person and another board and that other person now has in excess of $500,000.00 of casino markers unpaid in Vegas as several properties.  Great, what's the problem?  Oh, let's teach you how to run with the real professionals, pay us only $50.00 a month and we will fuel you up, etc.  But if you know whom the people are and some of their past, someone with the knoweldge is very dangerous to them.  What else?  You have any other problem yourself? 

And in reality, I do nothing different than you and Mike and Blue Angel do to people in a way.  I just do it to their face and do it while the lights are on and they are awake.  Not, when the lights are off, in the back door, PM's and Emails, rumors and acting like the almighty intellect that is a master of mathematics and other subjects with years and years of study, research and sworn to secrecy with holy grails, that can never be divulged but are known to a certain few, etc., etc.   And yet, even when you guys do not agree or enjoy the member or poster, you still read all of his posts and chase him around to get in every belittling, chastising, humiliating and degrading comment, statement or innuendo you can--then flip the tables and say, hey it is you and no one likes you, etc.  Why do you even read my stuff or respond?  You would not pick up a book you dislike the author, keep reading and waste your time--would you? 

Quote from: Xander on June 01, 2018, 06:42:06 PM
... If you are, then why do you assume that all of the experts and mathematicians are wrong, based on what they've written?  After all, they comprehend the math and basic probability, but you guys don't since you're not one of the "mathboyz!"  ::)

If I were you, I think I'd make an effort to learn the math and basic probability, rather than trying to make it cool to be ignorant.   ::)

Gizmo,

Are you really going to pass this off as proof of ignorance? Xanadu?  Although we are having a proper and lively discussion, you have not proved anything. Why, mathematically, must anyone have an edge in order to win? The question still stands. It didn't go away because you sweep up the dust in front of some math wiz's chalkboard. You should know that I wrote the first Blowfish encryption algorithm for the Transcript programming language. It's a 32 bit block cipher that uses bit wise operations with a very unique cipher block chaining front end that utilizes the mod function of the language. It's still illegal for an American to export it. I had to figure out the math. Funny how the dweebs that can predict the future with probability use that grand achievement to impress little minded groupies like you. Are you getting the trend yet? I think you are faking it.


So please prove that I haven't confounded your excuse for not actually addressing the issue. Is that literate enough for you? Prove it.

Xander is absolutey right, but I'd change his words in "nobody CAN'T DEMONSTRATE to win itlr without an edge".

If anybody can demonstrate to win at games without a mathematical edge he would be millionaire without placing a dime on the felt.
The problem is to present a valid scientific evidence of such claim.

Every other attempt to say "hey, I'm consistently winning" without scientifically proving it is a total mere bighornshit. No matter how good or smart will appear the author or the hypothesis involved at the start. 
Especially whether such winning players are placing red or, rarely, green chips.

A final world: Glen hadn't written worse ideas than anybody else and, hey, he's not wagering red or green chips at the table. So i would use more respect for him.

as.

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on June 01, 2018, 09:11:36 PM
Xander is absolutey right, but I'd change his words in "nobody CAN'T DEMONSTRATE to win itlr without an edge".

If anybody can demonstrate to win at games without a mathematical edge he would be millionaire without placing a dime on the felt.
The problem is to present a valid scientific evidence of such claim.

Every other attempt to say "hey, I'm consistently winning" without scientifically proving it is a total mere bighornshit. No matter how good or smart will appear the author or the hypothesis involved at the start. 
Especially whether such winning players are placing red or, rarely, green chips.

A final world: Glen hadn't written worse ideas than anybody else and, hey, he's not wagering red or green chips at the table. So i would use more respect for him.

as.

And you are 'almost' exactly correct, I can't agree 100%, lets just say 99.75% (LOL). 

I wager red chips for the dealers, LOL.  I wager stacks of green at a min., the ajority fo the times.  Anyways, I win a heck of a lot greater than I lose and when I lose it is always replaced with wins and I have all kinds of funds that are from my tangible reward from the risk.  I am writing a piece on that as a final thought on it since some people here cloud the air with their twisting and turning of words written or expressed.

Quote from: Jimske on June 01, 2018, 08:27:27 PM
where to begin? First of all I think you have to be pretty obtuse not to realize that the show Apprentice was not about Donald Trump. The master deal maker lording over all these little apprentices trying to be like him and he having the ultimate "you're fired" authority sounds to me that it's all about him. LOL. 

Trump is an authoritarian who leans toward fascism.  Sure a lot of people agree with that kind of authoritarianism.

On a personal level there is really no argument that he is a consummate liar, a bully, a misogynist and has a high degree of narcissism.

That's a very good description of a selfish, self serving personality. Like I just said a while ago, people like the facts that they get and from whom that they get them. From those kind of facts comes conclusions that make perfect sense too.


But what I want to know is, have you ever started a business or run your own business before? Have you ever been responsible for making payroll to a lot of employees every week? Have you had to jump through bureaucratic hoops in order just to stay in business or operate a business? My guess is that you never had that responsibility or expense before. I would be surprised if you did have that experience. Have you ever read 'Atlas Shrugged?' There are a lot of us that know what Trump has done is to turn the tables on the government looters and takers. This is not about degrading people. What you are seeing is the forgotten people fighting back while they still can. Trump stands up to City Hall. It just so happens to be his trademark. Trump haters are just people that think they know the truth. But to me they couldn't run a lemonade stand. Just remember this. It's people like Trump that make out the paychecks. You can only beg for more and hope that you get it. Only a loser settles for mediocrity and then demands crumbs. You will never know how pathetic the demand's of employees tug at the hearts of risk takers. You are expendable and always will be if all that you can aspire to is being an employee. Group think -- blah! It's just a bunch of wishful thinking nags. Without powerful looters some of you are going to be fired. Drain the swamp.

Ok Al, a 0.25% mistake is quite acceptable :-))

as.

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on June 01, 2018, 09:24:40 PM
Ok Al, a 0.25% mistake is quite acceptable :-))

as.

Only because  my great grandmother comes from that town in between Naples and Sorrento, Torre Annunziata where they used to have like 100+ pasta factories before the war and now there is like only 2 left.  I forgive you.

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on June 01, 2018, 09:11:36 PM
Xander is absolutey right, but I'd change his words in "nobody CAN'T DEMONSTRATE to win itlr without an edge".

If anybody can demonstrate to win at games without a mathematical edge he would be millionaire without placing a dime on the felt.
The problem is to present a valid scientific evidence of such claim.

I already did that. I wrote the foundation for an artificial intelligence algorithm that makes (big bet / small bet) bet selections for the software's perception of best risk and reward results. It even makes difficulty of session adjustments. So where is the million? An algorithm just happens to be a mathematical proof. But the real issue is that I wrote it from guessing and never from probability projections. And no, I don't want that level of proof to just drop into your hands. I don't care about a prize from people that are wrong. And I think of people like you the least. So you are going to be the last to see it. I just want to see your proof that you can't use guessing to win in the long run.

Quote from: Gizmotron on June 01, 2018, 09:37:32 PM

I already did that. I wrote the foundation for an artificial intelligence algorithm that makes (big bet / small bet) bet selections for the software's perception of best risk and reward results. It even makes difficulty of session adjustments. So where is the million? An algorithm just happens to be a mathematical proof. But the real issue is that I wrote it from guessing and never from probability projections. And no, I don't want that level of proof to just drop into your hands. I don't care about a prize from people that are wrong. And I think of people like you the least. So you are going to be the last to see it. I just want to see your proof that you can't use guessing to win in the long run.

You are taking the wrong side of what I've written. I've always liked your writings. But I fear you are crossing the line a bit.

Anyway, if you think that "guessing" would be a decisive tool to control the random world,
I'd suggest to present your algoriythm at MIT (my cousin works there, so I can easily accommodate your lecture as soon as you wish). Can't guarantee millions for your effort, but you will be the most notable gambling person the world had ever known in case you are right.
Think about how your "guessing" implications will be considered by NASA, for example.

as.

     

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on June 01, 2018, 10:05:15 PM
You are taking the wrong side of what I've written. I've always liked your writings. But I fear you are crossing the line a bit.

Anyway, if you think that "guessing" would be a decisive tool to control the random world,
I'd suggest to present your algoriythm at MIT (my cousin works there, so I can easily accommodate your lecture as soon as you wish). Can't guarantee millions for your effort, but you will be the most notable gambling person the world had ever known in case you are right.
Think about how your "guessing" implications will be considered by NASA, for example.

as.

First this: "Think about how your "guessing" implications will be considered by NASA, for example. "


I'm sure that they would want to first fly up Uranus. --- Sorry, couldn't resist.


My cousin got an undergraduate degree on a full boat ride and then went back for his Masters there too. I was at his graduation. Nice place.


Now please think about this for a moment. This is the place where the MIT gambling teams ran their operation from. Don't you think that some enterprising professor might want the scoop a little less exposed?


It's one thing to make an algorithm and another to execute the method in a real casino, you know, all that human nature stuff. Once I'm 100% sure, only then will I consider your perception of achievement. Truly it would be tempting.

Look, Giz, IMO you devised a brilliant idea to wisely consider outcomes by asymmetrical terms (dozens, etc). After all my nickname speaks for it.
Itlr 1-2 vs 3 or 1-3 vs 2 or 2-3 vs 1 equals to zero (adding the negative tax) but we have to expect some natural deviations that soon or later will show up. That is trying to take advantage of such fluctuations in a way or another.

And you are totally right about the difficulty to put in action those findings on real casinos.

Actually and I'm sure I'm not wrong, if your algorithm works (or my methods work) is because you have found out a possible defect of randomness of roulette results or that in some instances baccarat asymmetrical force will shift the results toward an univocal direction.

I mean that you can't be certain that your roulette samples are perfect random, if they were no one system in the world can beat them.

as.

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on June 01, 2018, 09:11:36 PM
Xander is absolutey right, but I'd change his words in "nobody CAN'T DEMONSTRATE to win itlr without an edge".

If anybody can demonstrate to win at games without a mathematical edge he would be millionaire without placing a dime on the felt.
The problem is to present a valid scientific evidence of such claim.

Every other attempt to say "hey, I'm consistently winning" without scientifically proving it is a total mere bighornshit. No matter how good or smart will appear the author or the hypothesis involved at the start. 
Especially whether such winning players are placing red or, rarely, green chips.

A final world: Glen hadn't written worse ideas than anybody else and, hey, he's not wagering red or green chips at the table. So i would use more respect for him.

as.

This is how you evaluate what someone is doing?
This alone tells a lot about you mister somebody in the middle of the desert!


Have you ever heard the term "more money than brain/sense"??
According to your reasoning every "whale" around the glob who wastes fortunes on the felts is smart professional gambler, just because is betting with black or pink chips doesn't make someone smart gambling-wise, that person has the money from other activities, not from winning on gambling!

That's why for the casinos great time suckers like these are the best clients!

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on June 01, 2018, 09:11:36 PM
Xander is absolutey right, but I'd change his words in "nobody CAN'T DEMONSTRATE to win itlr without an edge".

If anybody can demonstrate to win at games without a mathematical edge he would be millionaire without placing a dime on the felt.
The problem is to present a valid scientific evidence of such claim.

Every other attempt to say "hey, I'm consistently winning" without scientifically proving it is a total mere bighornshit. No matter how good or smart will appear the author or the hypothesis involved at the start. 
Especially whether such winning players are placing red or, rarely, green chips.

A final world: Glen hadn't written worse ideas than anybody else and, hey, he's not wagering red or green chips at the table. So i would use more respect for him.

as.

You are speaking like the respect is product to be bought, "look and admire me, I'm betting with black chips but you don't..."
Bad news for you mister asymetrical, you cannot, I repeat, you cannot by the respect of others by flashing your money, by having a cheesy attitude, by bragging as long as your luck lasts, you cannot!
Such poor and childish mentality! ts, ts, ts  :no:

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on June 01, 2018, 11:14:58 PM
Look, Giz, IMO you devised a brilliant idea to wisely consider outcomes by asymmetrical terms (dozens, etc). After all my nickname speaks for it.
Itlr 1-2 vs 3 or 1-3 vs 2 or 2-3 vs 1 equals to zero (adding the negative tax) but we have to expect some natural deviations that soon or later will show up. That is trying to take advantage of such fluctuations in a way or another.

I dropped the 24 numbers method. I'm working this out in even chance numbers of 18 to 20. I did this because I only need 2 net wins to win a session. This is the rabbit and the hare race. This is not that difficult to accomplish. I know that it only takes a small win streak to recover and go up net 2.

Quote
Actually and I'm sure I'm not wrong, if your algorithm works (or my methods work) is because you have found out a possible defect of randomness of roulette results or that in some instances baccarat asymmetrical force will shift the results toward an univocal direction.

There is no flaw in randomness. There are micro swings as the general expectation works it's house advantage downward. Along the way are opportunities that are good enough to grind your way up to a net 2 win. People that bet the same amount on every bet will get ground down, as expected. People that target the micro upticks will prevail if they also minimize the damage from the micro downticks. That takes making a decision based on a situational awareness, a task easily programmable.

You dropped 24 numbers method? You sayed it was the best method until now.

Anyway 20 vs 18 is still an asymmetrical proposition or I'm missing something?

No flaw in randomness? That's ok. I can't dispute this.

BA: didn't mean that huge bettors are winning players, just that people claiming to possess fool proof strategies are supposed to bet more than red/green chips.

Childish? In my country we never ever asked for money to stay alive.

as. 










   

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on June 02, 2018, 12:40:13 AM
You dropped 24 numbers method? You sayed it was the best method until now.

Anyway 20 vs 18 is still an asymmetrical proposition or I'm missing something?

No flaw in randomness? That's ok. I can't dispute this.

BA: didn't mean that huge bettors are winning players, just that people claiming to possess fool proof strategies are supposed to bet more than red/green chips.

Childish? In my country we never ever asked for money to stay alive.

as. 

1) I'm not responsible for my country's debt, corruption is, since the Olympics of 2004 many perceived it as opportunity to snatch many millions and disappear while living the debt as heritage for the generations to come...


2) We are talking about attitude and mentality, not the national treasury, banks, politics and corruption.


When Gizmo told me at Gambling forums: "...at the shithole of a country you are living in..." I've not get insulted because you see I'm one of those people who perceives reality for what it really is, even if this means unpleasant.
Don't get me wrong, it's wonderful to have holidays here, but awful to live under such conditions...!

Quote from: AsymBacGuy on June 02, 2018, 12:40:13 AM
You dropped 24 numbers method? You sayed it was the best method until now.

The best method for me is to get 3 net units up. To get that at $100 units is easier with Even Chance bets like betting on the reds or the odds. So I bet a 2 unit bet on the first net win, and 1 unit on the second net win. I use two net wins to get 3 net units up. It sort of comes from John Patrick's "up and pull" technique. I just play until I win those steps.


I changed tactics 6 months ago. I used to play for 20 to 40 net wins up from very long sessions. I always counted on hitting at least one super trend. Now I swing trade the micro ticks in a candlestick type chart of any day trading technique on the stock market. If you know how to see micro swings in Roulette trends then you can see that they are similar. It's all based on actual results.

Quote
Anyway 20 vs 18 is still an asymmetrical proposition or I'm missing something?

I'm not sure what you mean by asymmetrical. There is a balance to even chance bets. It pays off at 1 to 1 odds. It covers almost half the wheel. Randomness characteristics are still observable with Even Chance bets.

Quote from: Gizmotron on June 01, 2018, 09:18:09 PM

That's a very good description of a selfish, self serving personality. Like I just said a while ago, people like the facts that they get and from whom that they get them. From those kind of facts comes conclusions that make perfect sense too.


But what I want to know is, have you ever started a business or run your own business before? Have you ever been responsible for making payroll to a lot of employees every week? Have you had to jump through bureaucratic hoops in order just to stay in business or operate a business? My guess is that you never had that responsibility or expense before. I would be surprised if you did have that experience. Have you ever read 'Atlas Shrugged?' There are a lot of us that know what Trump has done is to turn the tables on the government looters and takers. This is not about degrading people. What you are seeing is the forgotten people fighting back while they still can. Trump stands up to City Hall. It just so happens to be his trademark. Trump haters are just people that think they know the truth. But to me they couldn't run a lemonade stand. Just remember this. It's people like Trump that make out the paychecks. You can only beg for more and hope that you get it. Only a loser settles for mediocrity and then demands crumbs. You will never know how pathetic the demand's of employees tug at the hearts of risk takers. You are expendable and always will be if all that you can aspire to is being an employee. Group think -- blah! It's just a bunch of wishful thinking nags. Without powerful looters some of you are going to be fired. Drain the swamp.

Hehehe.  No there's nothing wrong with guessing but apparently you're not very good at it!  Not that it's any of your business but I've been self-employed my entire life except for about 3 years.  Again not that it's any of your business but I don't work.

As far as Ayn Rand is concerned she was just another fascist as far as I'm concerned.  Too many people confuse capitalism with free enterprise. Just because you're self-employed doesn't mean that you are a capitalist. Capitalism relies on creating an underclass for success. The capitalists are people like Trump and his financiers and the oligarchs.  Now that doesn't mean that all capitalists are bad people because in reality there is no capitalism nor is there fascism or even socialism in today's world.  One could argue that capitalism did bring millions of people out of poverty though I argue it was tempered by social programs such as collective bargaining where to buy the workers made inroads into acquiring some of the means to production which, is the definition of socialism.

A real problem in our society today is racism, materialism and militarism as MLK so succinctly elaborated on way back during his speeches about Vietnam. As Noam Chomsky has pointed out our society can boost the economy through defense spending as it does. But that boost generally goes to the top tiers.  The same economic boost can be done through domestic spending such as infrastructure, Healthcare and education subsidies. But those expenditures tend to whittle away at the power brokers profits.  The swamp is comprised of just those power brokers.

So from my viewpoint Donald Trump, the epitome of a demagogue, is populating the swamp with real capitalists and their far-right minions such as Miller.

I presume your fancy yourself an intellectual. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. Anyway thanks for the discussion I enjoyed it. You can have the last word.

Quote from: alrelax on June 01, 2018, 05:36:19 PM
Vic, care to comment??  Did I or did I not send you several/numerous complaints, concerns and reason why many members here stop posting and became extremely less active over the past year or longer??  Vic, confirm or deny, for the benefit of the record please.

Confirmed. Glen has shown he's caring for our board actively long before he's been appointed as a mod :nod:

(That's a powerful reason why fellow mods accepted his nomination at the moderators' lounge)

Quote from: Gizmotron on June 01, 2018, 08:44:09 PM

Why, mathematically, must anyone have an edge in order to win?

Gizmo,

You really don't need math to understand why an edge is needed, simple logic in plain English is enough. First, what is an edge? It's the difference between what you SHOULD get paid in order to break even, and what you ACTUALLY get paid. If the payments on winning bets are short, the edge lies with the house, if they are long, you have the edge. eg. if the payout is 35 chips on a single number and the probability of a hit is 1/37, you will lose, if it's 1/36 you will break even, and if it's 1/35 you will win (long term). The edge is defined by the relationship between the payout and the probability of a win. The simple math which encapsulates this is well known. Here is the forumula for expectation in even money bets on a double zero wheel:

EV = (18/38 x 1) + (20/38 x -1) = 18/38 - 20/38 = -2/38 = -5.26%

So ON AVERAGE, you lose.

Gamblers often think they can win because the house edge very rarely manifests over a session or even a number of sessions. They win because of the variance, which in the SHORT term can often put them way ahead of what the expectation (long term average) dictates. But as the number of bets increases, the house edge dominates. It's the short term behaviour of variance (standard deviation) which fools players into thinking that they can win long term. The expected loss is proportional to the number of bets made, but the standard deviation is proportional to the square root of the number of bets made.

The blue line (standard deviation) initially increases at a faster rate than the expected loss (red line), but there will come a time (when the lines intersect) after which you will be in the red, never to recover.

Quote from: Jimske on June 02, 2018, 04:14:57 AM
I presume your fancy yourself an intellectual. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. Anyway thanks for the discussion I enjoyed it. You can have the last word.

Disagreeing with me, the two of us discussing our differing opinions on the best direction for our country, won't solve anything. You like centralized power where a Keynesian Economics model is the best way to establish a fair minded culture. I can suggest that the ubiquitous unintended consequences from liberal centralized planning always tends to undermine that actuality. Show me the culture that has not eventually turned to tyranny as it always runs out of other people's money. I would suggest that freedom is the enemy of socialism. But that does not matter much. We like the people that have given each of us our facts. There is no point in discussing the differences. Please admit it that you favor a communistic model. That's becoming fashionable again. I suppose you think that the forgotten man in America is just going to lay down their guns so that a Saul Alinsky styled game plan can be carried out? You will not believe the unintended consequences if that scheme where ever tried. I know that the liberals will never give up and that they will always keep coming. I know that it looks just like rules for radicals is working. I would say that the "Red Pill" movement has effectively dislodged the possibility of a landslide landing on your favorite leaders heads. It's fun to watch the pendulum swing back. ... back to Roulette.

Quote from: Mike on June 02, 2018, 07:58:27 AM
Gizmo,

You really don't need math to understand why an edge is needed, simple logic in plain English is enough. First, what is an edge? It's the difference between what you SHOULD get paid in order to break even, and what you ACTUALLY get paid. If the payments on winning bets are short, the edge lies with the house, if they are long, you have the edge. eg. if the payout is 35 chips on a single number and the probability of a hit is 1/37, you will lose, if it's 1/36 you will break even, and if it's 1/35 you will win (long term). The edge is defined by the relationship between the payout and the probability of a win. The simple math which encapsulates this is well known. Here is the forumula for expectation in even money bets on a double zero wheel:

EV = (18/38 x 1) + (20/38 x -1) = 18/38 - 20/38 = -2/38 = -5.26%

So ON AVERAGE, you lose.

Gamblers often think they can win because the house edge very rarely manifests over a session or even a number of sessions. They win because of the variance, which in the SHORT term can often put them way ahead of what the expectation (long term average) dictates. But as the number of bets increases, the house edge dominates. It's the short term behaviour of variance (standard deviation) which fools players into thinking that they can win long term. The expected loss is proportional to the number of bets made, but the standard deviation is proportional to the square root of the number of bets made.

The blue line (standard deviation) initially increases at a faster rate than the expected loss (red line), but there will come a time (when the lines intersect) after which you will be in the red, never to recover.

That's it? Look at that last paragraph. It confirms the existence of an opportunity with regards to time. Time implies more than one spin. I'm still waiting for the proof. Perhaps you could demonstrate the non existence of uptick swings. That would be convincing.

Mike,

Gizmo doesn't comprehend the math.  He really sucks at it.  He's a "literate boy," but not one of the "mathboyz."

Quote from: Xander on June 02, 2018, 06:18:26 PMMike,Gizmo doesn't comprehend the math.  He really sucks at it.  He's a "literate boy," but not one of the "mathboyz."

More "we" tactics. Ha ha...Enjoy this: I wrote it from scratch 14 years ago.

   repeat while pp < 18
    put 1 into ep
    repeat for each element ep in rkoR
      put ((xL bitAnd 4278190080) / 16777216)  bitAnd 255 into a
      put ((xL bitAnd 16711680) / 65536) into b
      put ((xL bitAnd 65280) / 256) into c
      put (xL bitAnd 255) into d
      put (((  ((S1[a + 1] + S2[b + 1]) mod 4294967296) bitXor S3[c + 1]  ) + S4[d + 1] ) mod 4294967296) bitXor xR into xR
      put xL into temp
      put xR into xL
      put temp into xR
    end repeat
[/b]You've got to love X-Code and the best version LiveCode.

Quote from: Xander on June 02, 2018, 06:18:26 PM
Mike,

Gizmo doesn't comprehend the math.  He really sucks at it.  He's a "literate boy," but not one of the "mathboyz."

Give it a break please.  Let others enjoy and be involved without the negativity you are starting to bring on.  Please.  Thank you.

Quote from: Xander on June 02, 2018, 06:18:26 PM
Mike,

Gizmo doesn't comprehend the math.  He really sucks at it.  He's a "literate boy," but not one of the "mathboyz."

I know, but my replies aren't really for Gizmo. And besides, he's admitted he has a "problem" with gambling. I'm proud to be one of the "mathboyz".  :P

Quote from: Mike on June 03, 2018, 07:24:28 AM
I know, but my replies aren't really for Gizmo. And besides, he's admitted he has a "problem" with gambling. I'm proud to be one of the "mathboyz".  :P

I'm proud that you are a "mathBoyz" too. I hope that you get time to pick up a few recipes from the Food Channel on how to saveur Crow.


I'm currently proving to myself that you have to be wrong and that I am right, an extra good bonus, - that. Once this becomes factual you will still be able to rely on your standards, until it becomes untenable.  It's all here at these forums how the greatest minds in math & gambling where seen as nothing more than practitioners in an idiom liken to a meeting of the flat earth society.


Here are the actual criteria for classifying problems with gambling:

QuoteDSM­5 Diagnostic Criteria: Gambling Disorder


* For informational and discussion purposes only *


A. Persistent and recurrent problematic gambling behavior leading to clinically significant impairment or
distress, as indicated by the individual exhibiting four (or more) of the following in a 12 ­month period:


a. Needs to gamble with increasing amounts of money in order to achieve the desired excitement.


b. Is restless or irritable when attempting to cut down or stop gambling.


c. Has made repeated unsuccessful efforts to control, cut back, or stop gambling.


d. Is often preoccupied with gambling (e.g., having persistent thoughts of reliving past gambling
experiences, handicapping or planning the next venture, thinking of ways to get money with
which to gamble).


e. Often gambles when feeling distressed (e.g., helpless, guilty, anxious, depressed).


f. After losing money gambling, often returns another day to get even ("chasing" one's losses).


g. Lies to conceal the extent of involvement with gambling.


h. Has jeopardized or lost a significant relationship, job, or educational or career opportunity
because of gambling.


i. Relies on others to provide money to relieve desperate financial situations caused by gambling.


B. The gambling behavior is not better explained by a manic episode.


Specify if:


Episodic: Meeting diagnostic criteria at more than one time point, with symptoms subsiding
between periods of gambling disorder for at least several months.
Persistent: Experiencing continuous symptoms, to meet diagnostic criteria for multiple years.


Specify if:


In early remission: After full criteria for gambling disorder were previously met, none of the criteria
for gambling disorder have been met for at least 3 months but for less than 12 months.


In sustained remission: After full criteria for gambling disorder were previously met, none of the
criteria for gambling disorder have been met during a period of 12 months or longer.


Specify current severity:


Mild: 4–5 criteria met.
Moderate: 6–7 criteria met.
Severe: 8–9 criteria met.


From the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (section 312.31).

I'm just (D) from the above list. That's 1 characteristic of problem gambling and does not register as problematic by the standards set here.

Good criteria about problem gambling!  Thanks.  How about including not following a preset plan?  Include making bets higher than the method requires (I am guilty of that on occasion).  I call that plunging or tilting.  Included would be staying longer than expected.  Stuff like that.  Disicpline.

Quote from: Jimske on June 03, 2018, 02:29:08 PM
Good criteria about problem gambling!  Thanks.  How about including not following a preset plan?  Include making bets higher than the method requires (I am guilty of that on occasion).  I call that plunging or tilting.  Included would be staying longer than expected.  Stuff like that.  Disicpline.

I never said that the people that came up with this actual diagnoses tool ever really understood any type of gambling strategies. In fact they know about as much as an excited newbie that just discovered the power of the Martingale. They deal with people that are crashing or about to crash. What's the funniest about this is not in recognizing that a person has problems but that the only advice that they ever give is that "you can't win." They pull some kind of statistical house's advantage spiel. Then assume that this was so convincing that any further discussion is moot. That doesn't cure anything. It hasn't helped us wackos for decades, yet I doubt that there are that many problem gamblers here as classified by the DSM-5. Your suggestions about actual causes for failure, or problem gambling's causes is a great point. I have failed to influence the mental health industry in getting therapists to actually make a more convincing argument concerning expectations. I fear that all they end up doing is degrading the client and angering them. That's a bad way to start and a great way to get the client to stop listening.

Quote from: Mike on June 03, 2018, 07:24:28 AM
I know, but my replies aren't really for Gizmo. And besides, he's admitted he has a "problem" with gambling. I'm proud to be one of the "mathboyz".  :P

;D

"I know you are but what am I." -- that's it? Yikes. Are you enjoying the implication of the other thread? They completely impeach decades of accepted thought in that discussion. Your edge argument just dried up and died on the vine. It's fun to see a good logical argument refute past dogma. You can no longer demagogue your saintly position. Your tower is crumbling. nanner nanner nanner  :no:

Quote from: Gizmotron on June 04, 2018, 12:50:47 PM
"I know you are but what am I." -- that's it? Yikes. Are you enjoying the implication of the other thread? They completely impeach decades of accepted thought in that discussion. Your edge argument just dried up and died on the vine. It's fun to see a good logical argument refute past dogma. You can no longer demagogue your saintly position. Your tower is crumbling. nanner nanner nanner  :no:

I remember several downfalls and negative "such and such's" someone named Mark admitted and faced and it was on this board, no?  Which to me, for whatever it is worth to anyone else, awards huge credibility, credence and experience(s) of great value from the Yale or Harvard equivalent of the 'University of Hard Knocks & Value'.  Double period.

Quote from: alrelax on June 04, 2018, 12:54:55 PM
I remember several downfalls and negative "such and such's" someone named Mark admitted and faced and it was on this board, no?  Which to me, for whatever it is worth to anyone else, awards huge credibility, credence and experience(s) of great value from the Yale or Harvard equivalent of the 'University of Hard Knocks & Value'.  Double period.

I've not forgetting my failures. I remember almost all of them. I've moved away from needing 20 to 40 big wins in order to have a winning session or day gambling. I know that just 2 net wins resulting in 3 units won is enough for me now. So far it works. Still waiting for that eventual crash that makes the (must have an edge group) so stalwart. Added to my technique was the realization that I should try these micro movement tactics on even chance bets and no longer chart the dozens anymore. You know that quote "Good judgment comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgment." I have had a problem with self control that I now self regulate thru discipline. Many here would relate to it as MM. It could be that alone but it is massively improved by situational awareness and improved bet selection.


You know that the human factor is the real culprit in gambling issues. It's all throughout your writings. I have played a strategy that descending does not matter because the upward kill sequence will disintegrate the draw down. It's a bad tactic for me. I know others on this forum use it, even now. Perhaps they just do it better than me? I don't care. I was a mediocre top level rock climber for my period in that sport. I was one of the very best extreme skiers in the world. I just never put any of it on film. To get good at just those two things I had to fail a lot. And I did. That is why I'm not afraid to admit that I failed at my previous strategy and was very close to quitting gambling. But to have an obnoxious participant here thrive on punkish remarks by attempting to throw this back at me only demonstrates his obvious blind spot. I like seeing this guy in his regimented world of limited introspect. He has boxed himself in and controls all that is in his self made safe zone. He reminds me of Snowman from GG.

You know Mark, I have done a lot of varied things in my 40 years as an adult, or so.  You read lots of my writings, here and elsewhere, I would only assume.  Reading what you just wrote, over a cup of fresh coffee---my buddy from New York City is here with me right now as well.  The one I occasional gamble with, whom is a 30 year +retired Vet of law enforcement.  We were both young Metro Dade Police Officers in the early Miami Vice days in South Florida.  We both went to the police academy together and we were both high school friends.  Both of us resigned from Metro-Dade the sign day and we both moved to New York City from there.  He stayed into law enforcement with the NYPD and I went off into other things.

He was ultimately the Arnold Schwarzenegger of the NYPD along with a handful of others, no doubt.  But being on Truck 1 in Manhattan, ESU (Emergency Service Unit, SWAT and more) he retired with a chest full of medals, in fact he has so many--there is no way could wear them all on his full dress blues at one time, seriously.  I admire him in many ways, but when we both wound up in a rural part of the Midwest within 30 miles of each other a few years ago, without any communication or knowledge of each other's relocation to the present locale we are residing in, it blew our minds.  He told me a while back, about his transformation, realization and love of having a 10+ acres hobby horse farm, ATV's, motorcycles, dune buggies, horses and the ability to ride down a dirt road, no helmet, no cars, a beer in hand, doing twice the speed limit posted somewhere, and if he just happens to spot one of the 5 Sheriif's on patrol in the county, he waves to them and they salute him.  This is a guy that loved to propel off buildings, cut through traffic in Manhattan, side swipe a vehicle while proceeding to a '10-13' (officer shot or down or hostage situation, etc.) and work 48 hours without going home or sleeping, etc., etc.  A guy that would grab a soda and a slice of pizza on a busy intersection corner, telling his dispatcher he is caught in traffic before proceeding to the next call because he was having stomach cramps from not eating for 15 hours or so.  Playing baccarat with him is another experience and experience beyond the 14 player tables I played on in Atlantic City for decades.

Like wise, I done many things of varied nature since leaving partnership with him at Metro-Dade back in the extreme late 70's and early 80's.  At times I do kind of wish I did not do some of them and other times, I love everything I did, experienced and was involved in.  When I actually do deduce down and really give thought to it, I do not actually regret anything I did or did not do (to the point of resentment and dwelling or throwing up road blocks, etc.)--because  I simply do not think my life could have been more exciting, valuable or memorable than what I actually lived and experienced.   I am whom I am and I usually do not get involved with what most say, "I wish I never did that", or "My life sucked and I wish I could have had the chance to do 'so and so' or 'such and such' or something along those lines", etc. 

The 'human factor'......................Yes Sir, not just gambling, but in everything.  Like that little 5 year old carbon copy of myself in the posting I wrote the other day, my little boy.  How I channel the tangibles to him and giving him every single thing I never ever had or was not available when I/we were kids.  Seeing that smile, getting that hug, having him wrap those arms around me and say, "Daddy, you are the greatest and I am not just kidding you", stuff like that is a terrific way to continue in my upcoming 60's.  Especially after that little kid saying a couple of months ago, "Daddy, no more birthdays for you"!  I asked him why?  He says, "Because with every birthday you get older and then one day in 20 or 30 years you have to die and I never want you to do that, Okay--so no more birthdays for you from now on".  That's myself right there and my fuel for most everything I do, playing baccarat or otherwise. 

The 'failures'....................Yeah, we all had them, just some of us (a whole lot) will not say what they were or recognize them or in fact, use them for their own benefit.  Because, I do something and profit from it in whatever way, shape or form, does not mean it is worthless, senseless, does not really exist, etc., or exclusive or mine only.  But for others to come in and say, 'That does not exist, wrong or you are lying' usually means, jealousy, failure, etc., of their own mind and protocols/believes, or just plain resentment of someone doing something 'successfully or profitably' that they tried and failed at for whatever real reasoning.  Such as, someone that tried what I am successful at or enjoy and they are not and hate or causes them grief.  I do the same thing but with refinement to make it work for myself, that they fail to notice, see, observe or explore, touch and witness for themselves before making their statements, that they declare facts back up by 'such and such', etc.  Gambling related and/or otherwise.