Winning with Target Betting
Thread Rating:
First question is if somebody know this system..:
No books, no money, all free, but....it works better really than flat bet ?
Second Question :
some years ago I met this extraodinary webpage (wizard of odds ), it help me in understand math, wizard, odds, and play at good level BJ, and card counting.
But with reference at the first question, there is even a dubt : we know that cards, or roulette, have no memory, so the probability that an event happen again or not, it's not connected with previous results.
But...if is true that long run exist, and if what math says is true and demonstrable with pc simulations (I'm sure about that), why I can't used previous results if I know it's difficult that a consecutive results of 20 reds happens (at roulette for example) ?
Variance exists, and if is true that more variance we have, and less likely happen again , why we can't use this information ?
Confused..
Thanks to al lin advance
Quote: zeus71it's difficult that a consecutive results of 20 reds happens
the reason it is difficult is connected to the memory-less odds of it happening one time. It is all connected. The ball does not get anxiety about past results, but just does its thing. Because it is just doing its thing, the streak is unusual looking back at it
Quote: zeus71we know that cards, or roulette, have no memory, so the probability that an event happen again or not, it's not connected with previous results.
But...if is true that long run exist,
As a side note - a pile of cards does have "memory". Once a card is drawn from a pile, that specific card cannot be drawn again.
Other than that: The existance of the "long run" and the memoryless of, say, dices are no contradiction at all. All throws of the dices are random and independent. If you are curious how any non-random property such as the "law of large numbers" can form out of these random events: It's the dice itself. During the course of all throws, the dice itself will always have 6 sides, all being equal in shape and area.
It is crucial to understand: Not the individual throws form the "law of large numbers". It is the physical properties of the dice (meaning its number of sides and shapes) that form the law of large numbers. And the property that the dice will be exactly the same after each throw (implying, there is no hidden "memory of the past" which will make the dice behave somehow differently).
Quote: odiousgambitthe reason it is difficult is connected to the memory-less odds of it happening one time. It is all connected. The ball does not get anxiety about past results, but just does its thing. Because it is just doing its thing, the streak is unusual looking back at it
Ok, I'm agree, and overall, math say that :-)
But my conceptual approach is conversaly : if in a casino game of 1-1 or 50%-50%, let say black or red in roulette (forget for a while the house adge of 5% more or less..) if we have the information that a certain result ( say series...and say RED) is coming out consecutively a lot of times, this is in constrast with the long run simulation % result of 50% and 50%. So..."to compensate" that series or strikes, the next results should be in favour of black...
I have no doubts, that is true what math says, but I like and need to understand it...in my mind.
In real life we are playing short run, not long run. And pcsimulation like real life play, show big difference results from short run to long run.
Quote: zeus71But my conceptual approach is conversaly : if in a casino game of 1-1 or 50%-50%, let say black or red in roulette (forget for a while the house adge of 5% more or less..) if we have the information that a certain result ( say series...and say RED) is coming out consecutively a lot of times, this is in constrast with the long run simulation % result of 50% and 50%. So..."to compensate" that series or strikes, the next results should be in favour of black...
I have no doubts, that is true what math says, but I like and need to understand it...in my mind.
If you happen to observe 100 reds in a row, you (rightfully) think red is "up" by 100.
But you apply the law of large numbers wrongly. The law does *not* say "eventually, red will be the same as black, so black has to come more often from now on".
The law of large numbers just say, that the 100 difference will be basically meaningless after a million (or billion or whatever) of rolls, because then the fraction of 49.99%:50.01% will be close to 50%:50%.
You are still expected to be 100 up in reds after a billion of rolls (which gives you the right interpretation, that black is in fact not "due"). The law of large numnbers just say that the distribution of rolls approachet 50%-50% in the infinite limit. Not because black came up more often, but because the initial 100 difference becomes insignificant to the overall ratio.
still Hand #168621 , the "system" was with an edge. And we are speaking about years of play, not a single session or weekend...
let say 100 hands for hour * 4 hours for day * 20 days month * 12 month = 96000 hands (years...)
So the system ( this system) say that you can playing 5 days for week for more than 1 year and WIN.
Or playing ALL weekends , and WIN for more than 4 years...
..and if we add to this results, bankroll managing..., maybe....we have a surprise.
ZCore13
Quote: Zcore13In this one instance of using the system it was up at that point. The next time it might be down at that point and only up at the 1 hour point or maybe never. Being up in the short term does not take a system. It happens all the time with good old fashioned luck. But, in the long run, the luck and the system will run out and the odds take over.
I'm not agree, It happens in hours of play, may be days..., but here we are speaking of years of play...
For example a strike or series of 10 consecutives lose happens ( math says...) every 1500 hands...more or less...
And "this" system was with an edge still 169.000 hands...
Quote: zeus71And "this" system was with an edge still 169.000 hands...
First, the system was not never be with an edge. Otherwise he would be positive in the long run.
Second, as had been told before, the short run is dominated by "luck". Anything can happen there. Only the long run is dominated by house (or player) edge.
Third, there is no way to judge anything from the first 100k hands. Variance in Blackjack is HUGE, especially if you don't know much about his bet spread. If you max bet at the beginning and win a few hands, then play on with min bet, eventually you can survive much more than 100k hands.
Quote: Zcore13In this one instance of using the system it was up at that point. The next time it might be down at that point and only up at the 1 hour point or maybe never. Being up in the short term does not take a system. It happens all the time with good old fashioned luck. But, in the long run, the luck and the system will run out and the odds take over.
ZCore13
What you says generally is right for a 10.000 hands simulation or less..Here we have 169.000 hands and a profit.
ZCore13
Quote: MangoJFirst, the system was not never be with an edge. Otherwise he would be positive in the long run.
Second, as had been told before, the short run is dominated by "luck". Anything can happen there. Only the long run is dominated by house (or player) edge.
Third, there is no way to judge anything from the first 100k hands. Variance in Blackjack is HUGE, especially if you don't know much about his bet spread. If you max bet at the beginning and win a few hands, then play on with min bet, eventually you can survive much more than 100k hands.
Sure. But luck, or standard deviation that may be positive or negative, exist also for a card counting player, where we have a supposed edge.(depending from rules, card counting system used,penetration,spreads, etc...)
So why we speak in a way where we are speaking about positive advantage, and in other way when is negative the expetation ?
Do you mean that also a card counter can be a loser in his play life, becouse is SHORT run ???
Quote: zeus71Sure. But luck, or standard deviation that may be positive or negative, exist also for a card counting player, where we have a supposed edge.(depending from rules, card counting system used,penetration,spreads, etc...)
So why we speak in a way where we are speaking about positive advantage, and in other way when is negative the expetation ?
Do you mean that also a card counter can be a loser in his play life, becouse is SHORT run ???
That's the point of my discussion or doubts... short run vs long run, no matter is with an adge or not...
Or we can say standard deviation vs long run.
Sometimes we can identify standard deviation situation that maybe, can cut a negative expetation with bet schemes.
I said..."maybe".
Quote: zeus71Sure. But luck, or standard deviation that may be positive or negative, exist also for a card counting player, where we have a supposed edge.(depending from rules, card counting system used,penetration,spreads, etc...)
So why we speak in a way where we are speaking about positive advantage, and in other way when is negative the expetation ?
Do you mean that also a card counter can be a loser in his play life, becouse is SHORT run ???
Yes, yes, and yes.
In the short run all results are determined by luck, even that of the card counter. In the short run there is not much difference to a positive or negative edge play. That is not something the card counter likes, but this is the reality. But the solution to that problem is simple: play as much as you can, and wait for the long run to take over.
And yes, even a card counter can lose his lifetime play. And this risk is very real. You can lower it by proper bankroll management and game selection.
Many times people ask if betting systems can win in the long run in a game with disadvantage, and the answer is NO.
But if we ask if betting system can do better than flat betting, it's different.
In my opinion systems like Oscar, Blundell, can do better.
