Yes, so in the simple case of discussion on an online forums of counting cards in blackjack and the expected value +/- standard deviations I'm quite comfortable using the word "never" or the phrase "mathematical certainty" with regards to a player not being down after X hands. I'm not undervaluing the precision, as I'd still expect it out of any paper/book/etc, but in an online forum with an understood target audience I think a physics level of precision is complete overkill =P.
My point is when the numbers are so minute... as in "history of the universe" status, then yes, mathematically speaking that's the same thing as 0. After 4 decimal places, no one usually worries anymore.Quote: DiscreteMaths2
I just wouldn't use the word *impossible*. Because at some point in the history of our universe those extremely unlucky/lucky events still have to occur.
Oh, I figured I was covered 10 ways from tuesday, though if someone was seriously interested more details would be drawn up and I was planning on actually counting a real shoe game.Quote: QFIT
Ahh, one must be very careful when framing a bet. I could lead you to a table with a CSM. OTOH, you could still easily win that bet. Just bet $1 until the last few hands, and then use a progression. Progressions are not long-term winners. But, with a $25,000 bonus, they can certainly be positive EV.