Vic, can we have a section for 'Voo-Doo', 'Magical Wishes', 'Karma' and 'Luck' statistical analysis???

Quote from: VLS on November 14, 2014, 11:05:26 PM
wowowow

Thank you!!!!

This also sponsors a fresh forum re-install for us to enjoy clean sources and get rid of bugs in this forum too.

Bright news guys. You're awesome!

I'm not awesome, I am just an unintelligent, karma wishing-rabbit's foot-voodoo preaching, uninformed and overpopulated gambler on the board, just ask Bayes!  He is the awesome Mathematician that the board needs more of! 

I am sending you $50.00 to cover it, you will have it this weekend.  Alrelax.

Quote from: Albalaha on November 12, 2014, 05:44:38 AM
All progressions are proportionally good and bad in all probabilities taken together. None is, conclusively the best. Be it flat bet or martingale or parlay or anything else that you can devise or read anywhere. All presuppose a particular situation to work best. In not so favorable cases, they go ridiculous. This is true about all of them.
                             If you are looking for the best progression, for all probabilities, I am afraid, you won't find any.

Spot on.  If you are winning they are the best and only reasonable thing to factor in.  If you are losing, they can and usually do compound your losses, more so than not. >>>>My experiences and also IMHO.

Go play it in a casino, I would love to see the real truthful answer as to what happened after a reasonable session of say, 25 to 30 spins or so.

Classically, the way the popular articles read in magazines when they discussed this were:

1)  Play only those casino games that have the absolute lowest house advantage;

2)  Create a Money Management system that you will abide by, and;

3)  Leave when and if you win.


The problem with that is the casino gamblers keep playing until they win and some never do, others keep playing to continue winning.  It becomes a viscous circle that leads to destruction many times.  No, in fact, many many many times. 

Make a living the hard way, poo-poo even Frank Sinatra gambled, but he also made a real living to put food on the table.

Robert Di Nero as the Tangiers casino president in the 1995 movie Casino, said it very well in the beginning of the movie.  You guys know what he said, I don't have to repeat it. 

Quote from: Slacker on September 19, 2014, 12:44:05 PM
Agreed. It's very annoying, and should take priority.

I second and/or third this, it is annoying!

The numbers if played that way will generally (generally) get a 2 or 3 hit success.  Play $25 chips each, lose $1.750.00 and win either $1,750.00 or $2,625.00.  The odds of winning more than 3 drastically are against you.  If you win some 2's and then a 3 or so and an occasional 4---out of the sets of 5 of the same numbers played, you will probably break even or lose a little.

Nice try thou.

There is NOTHING 'very safe to play' in the casino.

Quote from: deepspace on November 02, 2014, 09:30:58 PM


, and  0 loses



Cheers!

My English is poor too, I was raised in the Bronx.  But 0 loses mean, you never lost.

Another system with zero losses!!!  I am on the wrong side of 'living life'!

I will pay for this guy to go back to prison, I will send a guard a cell phone with a baccarat app preloaded, I will juice the guard, I will provide a full commissary account and the guy will retire nicely when he teaches me zero losses when he gets out.

My phone number is 1-800-Live-Easy.

Deviation that works into balance, but subjective and unpredictable in short term casino play.

One of the smartest things I ever read on here.  I Said (1) of, not the only.