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.