Very good.

Obviously there's no need to thank me for bringing it to your attention.

Using a proxy is OK if you want to appear to be based out of the US.

But there will still be the problem of opening an account out of the US.

There are so-called offshore tax havens where folk open accounts. Maybe the Cayman Islands would suit you? Or...?


I suspect it's going to be easier for you to use someone's existing account,and you and they then work out some sort of sharing arrangement.

As for thoroughbred horse racing, the handicapper decides the weight to be carried by each horse, taking into account its past performance and many other variables.

In a perfect world the handicapper would achieve perfection so all the horses crossed the line together because they all had an equal chance of winning!!

But in our world...

[As an aside:  often the topweight (usually horse number 1) is capable of carrying more weight than the handicapper allocates without its performance suffering to any great extent.]

A quote from your site: "...the penultimate winner number (last number that has just won in the last spin)..."


No. Penultimate does NOT mean 'the last' -- it means THE ONE BEFORE LAST.

This needs correcting on the site.


So which one exactly is Izak's selection?

[mod] Folks, please try to keep politics OFF the forum. It is potentially so divisive, as is already becoming apparent. Ta. [/mod]

Slots? Anyone got a nice big magnet?  (Joke. I know it's all electronic.)


Getting back to Turner's comment:

"(work THAT one out if you are from across the pond)"

Here's something to ponder (yes, a pun for those that can't get it)

I'm afraid, Turner, it was the Boston Tea Party that caused a big split in what was, until then, shared humour!

Thereafter, mutual misunderstanding has become the norm.

(Well, that's my explanation. Probably as good as any...LOLOL)

Time to look at application to betting before everyone falls asleep!


1  Consider this interesting quote:


However quantum physics gives us a strategy that, in a sense, guarantees we will win every single time...If we act based on the outcome of a random quantum event then there is an alternate reality in which we make each possible choice.  The difference between a classical random number generator (e.g., coin-flipping) and a quantum random number generator is that the former is fundamentally deterministic.  I.e., there is no reason to believe that when a coin comes up tails there is an alternate universe in which at the same moment it came up heads.  In contrast, an unbiased quantum flip truly does come up both heads and tails in "alternate realities."
I think the world would be a better place if I had a lot more money under my control.  So I will select 28 random qubits and spend $1 to play PowerBall.  I know that at the end of the game there exists exactly one reality in which I am an instant multimillionaire.  Granted, that is one of only 146MM alternate realities.  But if I don't undertake this exercise I would expect exactly zero realities in which I am much richer next week.
If we incorporated random qubits into our large-scale activity, instead of waiting for the effects of quantum probabilities to ooze up from the atomic level, the "multiverse" would be a much more diverse place!
[http://federalist.wordpress.com/2008/05/11/win-at-gambling-using-quantum-physics/]


And this:

2   http://www.randomnumbers.info/content/Generating.htm


Plus physicists have already built a quantum gambling machine. [An answer to RNG 'fiddling'...perhaps...??]

3  http://phys.org/news128773803.html

". If a graph goes upwards to certain extent, you will see mirror image too. Once you get over this universal truth, you have a grail."

Ah, but to qualify as a grail it has to go up more often than it goes down! Yes? No?

Seeing as the forum is about 'bet selection' you can guess what some will want to ask!!

And I'll bet you'll keep your powder dry.

Do I lose my bet?

In the absence of Archie's reply to my earlier question, let me propose the whole point of this thread...

It's for you all to find Schrödinger's cat so it can work out your bets for you.

That's the purrfect solution.

A catastrophe when it loses.

But you'll be feline good when it wins -- more money in the kitty.

On reflection....

Would they be better accepted if they were:

   
• much smaller (far too intrusive as they are)
• maybe a different colour...white?... something neutral that won't clash with the red?

I was SO tempted to use a proxy, sign up under 50 different names, and each would then vote that THEY SUCK.

[Not sure what they suck...thumbs...mammaries...ice-cubes?]

And the point you're making is....?

Quote from: TwoCatSam on August 09, 2013, 09:02:59 PM
I saw a woman win $35,000 in Tunica, Mississippi.  How did the casino recoup that loss?

Probably with the $38k they took off others! 

And not only that, but don't most (not all -- most) gamblers end up giving back their winnings in undisciplined dribs and drabs?

That statistical edge the casinos have keeps them as happy as an Oklahoma buzzard in a gut truck.

Quote from: Archie on August 10, 2013, 03:09:09 AM
Am I missing something here?  Lol.


A real mathematician who writes odds in terms of single numbers; and says, "Of course you could always play in fun mode, but I suppose it is more exciting playing with real money."  (And BTW, go to this casino here.)

So what?  Why shouldn't he write that?

You probably think he's an affiliate for BF. So what if he is? 

The readers make their OWN decisions as to whether or not they follow up the link for BF.

It's not as if the site is loaded with wall-to-wall affiliate links for just about every casino in existence, which seems to be standard practice amongst the scam sites.

Like I said -- nice site, Dragoner.