Buffster

I'm all ears!!

Turner

unless I'm mistaken, that IS the Monty Hall paradox.


Sam

Smurfs

I am going on an extended vacation of about four weeks.  I will spend a lot of time driving the Cat Mobile.

I am going to spend a lot of time thinking about the Monty Hall paradox or whatever you choose to call it.  There seems to be a way to adapt that to roulette dozens or columns.

I'm still thinking on that thing that should happen more often but doesn't.

Naturally, I'll be here some to harass the rank and file.

Sam

Ken

I don't take it in a bad way.  I have stated many times I do this for fun.  I guess I am different; my wife says I'm nuts.  I love to sit and watch three bots run at the same time.  (Beats TV)  It's much better to see chips go down and wait for a win/loss than to watch a bot run for hours on end and never get a bet.

I will say one more thing:  It is very possible to win playing a large-numbers game.

Samster

Since this system came up again..........."A pure extension of Twocat's 5 strikes and out."

I have in my bots systems that play 1 number and systems that play many;  "Five Strikes" starts playing 35.  I think it is just the preference by the individual.  I hate to wait for 100 spins or more to see one number bet.  I'd rather just win or lose and get it over with.

Sam

Let's assume you play 37 spins and each number on the wheel lands just once during those 37 spins.

There are some things one can assume for the sake of argument.  This is not one of them.

Let's assume you are a very good guitarist, but you have never played "Classical Gas".  How long would it take you to learn it?

The assumption you are a very good guitarist is not out of the realm of possibility.  You could be!!  Hitting 37 numbers without a repeat is out of the realm of possibility in the normal sense of the word.  So the argument is moot from the get-go.

But I'm sure someone will point out I'm wrong!  I love it!!

Sam

Esoito

I just posted on that thread.  More later.........

Sam

I have found the flaw in the math.  When I get time and am not so sleepy, I'll write it up.

Thanks, Esoito....

Sam

OK, my friends, buddies, pals.............

I got it. 

There!  That wasn't so bad, was it?  I'll return the favor at the first opportunity!

Sam

10 Days

OK, Smurfs

Let me pose yet another question. 

We have:

a  b  c
a  b  _ <-------here we bet for a "C".

Now what if they were mixed up?

a c b
_a b...........We still need a "C" to fill in, but they are not in the same alphabetical order.  Does that matter?

Sam

EDIT:  I have watched Yanks video four times and I am unclear on the above.

Why does Chris have no "A" in street 1 of his example?

You can not have a _ c

Because "A"= the first landing in the street, so it could  be in ANY of the three columns, then.......
"B"= the second landing in the street, again, could be anywhere except for where "a" is!
and finally, U have "C"= third landing in the street 

Don't they have to go into the columns a b and then c?

Sam

Is this right?

Chris

I don't understand it a bit either.

Let's say you have

a b c  in columns 1 2 and 3.  Number 1 is a, number 2 is b and number 3 is c.

Somewhere else, you get

a  _  c

Do you not bet for b to appear in the second street.  Suppose it was street 1 2 3, would you not bet for the 5?

Sam

Yanks

I have sworn never to ask Dane a question as long as I live, but I'll ask you.

When a street is full, as in

a b c

you wait for for another street to have two out of those three, as in

a  c
a  b


and then you would bet for b in the first line or c in the next.  The A B or C must be in the same column, right?

Is that the gist of it?

Very good video.  You think quickly!

Sam

Sorry, but I got the same results as Bally.  Lost........