Forcing the casino to play Martingale against you?
Thread Rating:
The casino would win one unit every failed sequence by the player (same as the martingale). But when the table max is hit, it's disaster for the casino (not really but you get the idea) .
I'm curious what the computer 100,000 hands simulator would discover if someone sat with a 50,000 buy in (closer to the casinos unlimited bankroll) and bet in $25 increments double up to the table max of say $1000 after any win, and repeating that bet until any loss, where they would start back over at $25. Set a $5,000 win goal or go broke first and see who would be ahead.
$25, $50, $100, $200, $400, $800, $1000, $1000, $1000....
What if the table max was $6000 as many $50 tables are?
$50, $100, $200, $400, $800, $1600, $3200, $6000, $6000, $6000 etc...
Roulette, blackjack, baccarat
Quote: OmahaIn theory, if the martingale system is so bad, so if you double your bet after every win up to the table max, are you not forcing the casino into playing the martingale system against you? As they are forced to double their bet (take action on your bet) after every loss the casino incurs, up to inevitable disaster (for the casino) ?
The casino would win one unit every failed sequence by the player (same as the martingale). But when the table max is hit, it's disaster for the casino (not really but you get the idea) .
I'm curious what the computer 100,000 hands simulator would discover if someone sat with a 50,000 buy in (closer to the casinos unlimited bankroll) and bet in $25 increments double up to the table max of say $1000 after any win, and repeating that bet until any loss, where they would start back over at $25. Set a $5,000 win goal or go broke first and see who would be ahead.
$25, $50, $100, $200, $400, $800, $1000, $1000, $1000....
What if the table max was $6000 as many $50 tables are?
$50, $100, $200, $400, $800, $1600, $3200, $6000, $6000, $6000 etc...
Roulette, blackjack, baccarat
You are not doing anything except forcing them into positive expectation bets. They will do that all day. And then when you finally do lose a string up through table max, the party is over.
ZCore13
Simply put, you're referring to the Reverse Martingale which is where you let your bet ride to Table Max and then stop. Again, the casino is still the entity making positive expectation bets, so they're not going to sweat your Reverse Martingale any more than they'd sweat you playing the Martingale which is not at all.
The Martingale fails because of the inevitability of losing 7 or 8 bets in a row. But if the what if the casino loses 6 bets in a row? What if they lose 10? This is the downfall of the martingale so why not force it on the casino?
I am well aware of the reverse martingale or paroli system which calls for pressing 3 or 4 bets then starting over at original wager.
Simulator in my brain said you're dreaming and should wake up.Quote: OmahaCurious if someone can run this through a simulator to see what would happen if someone with a 50k bankroll was looking for a 5k win, how many sessions would he be successful and how often would he go broke?
Quote: onenickelmiracleCasinos don't like big bets and winning streaks. They say they would welcome a crazy nut, but limit their exposure quite a bit. 120 times minimum bet table max doesn't sound like they're as fearless as they claim. Still you're probably better off just starting at max making only one bet then telling them to kiss your ass after you win.
No I don't think they do at all. The Pit bosses quickly change demeanor when you continue to press to max after a winning streak.
Quote: onenickelmiracleSimulator in my brain said you're dreaming and should wake up.
Maybe I'm dreaming. Maybe my good friend just won $100k at harrahs ac with a similar strategy last week.
Quote: OmahaNo I don't think they do at all. The Pit bosses quickly change demeanor when you continue to press to max after a winning streak.
You could take what you have already won, in this event, and continue your Progression at a different casino. The table you are at does nothing to alter the Odds, provided the Rules/Pays/Mechanisms are the same for the game in question.
Quote: OmahaNot trying to convince anyone of anything. Where can I find a bet strategy simulator?
Search WinCraps & or CVCX.
First off that's not even close to 10k let alone 100k.Quote: Omaha
When I think of system bettors, thees two _______s are exactly what I imagine, we are only missing a cat in the picture.
Yep, but it sure looks like a SWELLE system and begs for the MAX bet, if you get my drift. Not to mix metaphors, but I'm surprised Axel didn't cream this before the ink was dry on the first post :)Quote: Beethoven9thYou gotta love these guys like Omaha. He can either use his (alleged) surefire system to make a ton of money, yet he chooses to spend hours of his time "challenging" us to debunk his system. lol...
+1Quote: chickenmanYep, but it sure looks like a SWELLE system and begs for the MAX bet, if you get my drift. Not to mix metaphors, but I'm surprised Axel didn't cream this before the ink was dry on the first post :)
Quote: chickenmanYep, but it sure looks like a SWELLE system and begs for the MAX bet, if you get my drift. Not to mix metaphors, but I'm surprised Axel didn't cream this before the ink was dry on the first post :)
You sure sock it to him. What a puppet show.
Say you're lucky enough to find a brand new game whose creator or casino did the math wrong. The game actually has a player advantage. Since the house is now on the disadvantaged side, does this whole Reverse Martingale idea hold any water?
Sure you could just as easily flat bet table max or Kelly in an advantage situation, but would this Reverse Martingale lessen your exposure since A) you're the one with the advantage, and B) you're the one losing only one unit on a big bet loss?
then,Quote: OmahaIn theory, if the martingale system is so bad,
with unlimited casino credit and no table limit, the Marty is infallible, so says the greatest gaming math guys of all time.
I would just calculate it and maybe run a sim, but a sim is not really needed as I say it is more impressive to show the results from doing the math correctly than from doing just a simQuote: OmahaI'm curious
what the computer 100,000 hands simulator would discover if someone sat with a 50,000 buy in (closer to the casinos unlimited bankroll) and bet in $25 increments double up to the table max of say $1000 after any win, and repeating that bet until any loss, where they would start back over at $25.
Set a $5,000 win goal or go broke first and see who would be ahead.
$25, $50, $100, $200, $400, $800, $1000, $1000, $1000....
Oh, btw,
how much would you pay me to satisfy your curiosity? (I am on vacation)
in US dollars that is
Sally is nice
Quote: OmahaIWell not stop... You keep placing the table max bet until you lose a hand, like someone who maxes out playing the martingale and is trying to chase they're money repeating the max bet. Even when they eventually win, they are still a huge loser.
The Martingale fails because of the inevitability of losing 7 or 8 bets in a row. But if the what if the casino loses 6 bets in a row? What if they lose 10? This is the downfall of the martingale so why not force it on the casino?
It's a downfall when the player does it because of the probabilities involved.
Let's assume you're playing a normal Martingale and betting black on a single-zero wheel with a minimum bet of 1 and a maximum bet of 1024. You win 18/37 of the time and lose 19/37 of the time.
The probability of losing 11 in a row before winning is (19/37)11 = about 1/1527; you lose 2047.
The probability of winning before losing 11 in a row is 1 - 1/1527 = 1526/1527; you win 1.
The ER is 1526/1527 x (+1) + 1/1527 x (-2047) = -0.3412.
Now, try a reverse martingale.
The probability of winning 11 in a row before losing is (18/37)11 = about 1/2768; you win 2047.
The probability of losing before winning 11 in a row is 1 - 1/2768 = 2767/2768; you lose 1.
The ER is 1/2768 x (+2047) + 2767/2768 x (-1) = -0.2601.
When the probability of winning < 1/2, each bet that would double your winnings has a negative value; when it is > 1/2, each bet that would double the house's winnings has a positive value. This is why Reverse Martingale does not work.
Quote: ThatDonGuyIt's a downfall when the player does it because of the probabilities involved.
Let's assume you're playing a normal Martingale and betting black on a single-zero wheel with a minimum bet of 1 and a maximum bet of 1024. You win 18/37 of the time and lose 19/37 of the time.
The probability of losing 11 in a row before winning is (19/37)11 = about 1/1527; you lose 2047.
The probability of winning before losing 11 in a row is 1 - 1/1527 = 1526/1527; you win 1.
The ER is 1526/1527 x (+1) + 1/1527 x (-2047) = -0.3412.
Now, try a reverse martingale.
The probability of winning 11 in a row before losing is (18/37)11 = about 1/2768; you win 2047.
The probability of losing before winning 11 in a row is 1 - 1/2768 = 2767/2768; you lose 1.
The ER is 1/2768 x (+2047) + 2767/2768 x (-1) = -0.2601.
When the probability of winning < 1/2, each bet that would double your winnings has a negative value; when it is > 1/2, each bet that would double the house's winnings has a positive value. This is why Reverse Martingale does not work.
Thank you for this detailed explanation. So I am understanding that it is not the martingale system that is flawed specifically, it all comes down to the house edge being insurmountable regardless of betting strategy.. But to take it a step further... If when the 1024 max bet is reached in the reverse martingale it is indefinitely Repeated until a loss, does the negative EV change at all, and if so how so?
Yes you are nice.When I read your posts, I cant help but to think of 7craps (BTW what happened to him after 4 yrs. to the day of posting? Oops I already said this in another thread). I dont always understand the math behind your posts and 7craps but it seems I always learn something. Keep on keeping on. Wait a minute your not his wife are you? Jk.Quote: mustangsallythen,
with unlimited casino credit and no table limit, the Marty is infallible, so says the greatest gaming math guys of all time.I would just calculate it and maybe run a sim, but a sim is not really needed as I say it is more impressive to show the results from doing the math correctly than from doing just a simQuote: OmahaI'm curious
what the computer 100,000 hands simulator would discover if someone sat with a 50,000 buy in (closer to the casinos unlimited bankroll) and bet in $25 increments double up to the table max of say $1000 after any win, and repeating that bet until any loss, where they would start back over at $25.
Set a $5,000 win goal or go broke first and see who would be ahead.
$25, $50, $100, $200, $400, $800, $1000, $1000, $1000....
Oh, btw,
how much would you pay me to satisfy your curiosity? (I am on vacation)
in US dollars that is
Sally is nice
As mustangsally has pointed out previously on these forums.
Martingale actually increases your odds of coming out ahead in a short gambling session because it increases the variance (standard deviation away from the mathematically defined chance of you winning).
That doesn't mean you still have +expectation value of winning.
However, personally, I find talk about +EV and -EV a little ridiculous and math trickery.
The lottery OFTEN goes into a +EV game, yet MY CHANCE of winning doesn't change a bit. So who cares what the EV is. It doesn't mean anything (to me).
There is a electronic roulette game on Fremont street - I think it is the 4 Queens, and minimum bet is $0.05. I play martingale on that - and have done so MANY MANY times, and have NEVER lost money. The only time I get close to loosing money is when I get bored and start throwing nickels all over the place. for $50, you can go to 11 or 12 blacks in a row (when the bet becomes, 1.60, I just double to $3 to make it easier). To make it more interesting, I will martingale a color, odd/even, and also martingale one of the 1/3 row bets. That is hard to keep track of sometimes but makes it a lot easier to sit there then just playing a nickel on black every time.
I also placed a spread sheet on here one time showing that with a huge bank roll, it is nearly impossible to loose with a martingale system - but many people then want to say exactly what they have to you - that is...."well just go win tons of money and leave us alone then!" - which was never my point and probably not yours either.
Quote: OmahaSo I am understanding that it is not the martingale system that is flawed specifically, it all comes down to the house edge being insurmountable regardless of betting strategy.. But to take it a step further... If when the 1024 max bet is reached in the reverse martingale it is indefinitely Repeated until a loss, does the negative EV change at all, and if so how so?
If you mean, "keep betting 1024 until you win", then yes, the EV does change - for the worse.
In addition to the EV of -0.3412:
(a) The next spin will win with probability 19/39; it is worth +1024
(b) You will win after one losing spin with probability 20/39 x 19/39; it is worth zero
(c) You will win after N losing spins with probability (20/39)N x 19/39; it is worth -1024 x (N-1)
The sum is 1024 x 19/39 x ((+1) + 20/39 x 0 + (20/39)2 x (-1) + (20/39)3 x (-2) + ...)
= 1024 x 19/39 x ((2-1) + 20/39 x (2-2) + (20/39)2 x (2-3) + (20/39)3 x (2-4) + ...)
= 1024 x 19/39 x (2 x (1 + 20/39 + (20/39)2 + (20/39)3 + ...) - (1 + 2 x 20/39 + 3 x (20/39)2 + 4 x (20/39)3 + ...)
= 1024 x 19/39 x (2 x (1 + 20/39 + (20/39)2 + (20/39)3 + ...) - (1 + 20/39 + (20/39)2 + (20/39)3 + ...)2)
= 1024 x 19/39 x (2 x (1 / (1 - 20/39)) - (1 / (1 - 20/39))2)
= 1024 x 19/39 x (78/19 - (39/19)2)
= 1024 x 19/39 x (78 x 19 - 39 x 39)/(19 x 19)
= 1024 x 19/39 x (-39) / (19 x 19)
= 1024 x (-1) / 19
= -53.8947, or -54.2359 overall, when the -0.3412 is added to it.
General version: if you bet B on something with probability P and keep betting B until you win, then you are expected to lose a total of correction: B x (1 - 2P) / P for each win.
Quote: ThatDonGuyIf you mean, "keep betting 1024 until you win", then yes, the EV does change - for the worse.
In addition to the EV of -0.3412:
(a) The next spin will win with probability 19/39; it is worth +1024
(b) You will win after one losing spin with probability 20/39 x 19/39; it is worth zero
(c) You will win after N losing spins with probability (20/39)N x 19/39; it is worth -1024 x (N-1)
The sum is 1024 x 19/39 x ((+1) + 20/39 x 0 + (20/39)2 x (-1) + (20/39)3 x (-2) + ...)
= 1024 x 19/39 x ((2-1) + 20/39 x (2-2) + (20/39)2 x (2-3) + (20/39)3 x (2-4) + ...)
= 1024 x 19/39 x (2 x (1 + 20/39 + (20/39)2 + (20/39)3 + ...) - (1 + 2 x 20/39 + 3 x (20/39)2 + 4 x (20/39)3 + ...)
= 1024 x 19/39 x (2 x (1 + 20/39 + (20/39)2 + (20/39)3 + ...) - (1 + 20/39 + (20/39)2 + (20/39)3 + ...)2)
= 1024 x 19/39 x (2 x (1 / (1 - 20/39)) - (1 / (1 - 20/39))2)
= 1024 x 19/39 x (78/19 - (39/19)2)
= 1024 x 19/39 x (78 x 19 - 39 x 39)/(19 x 19)
= 1024 x 19/39 x (-39) / (19 x 19)
= 1024 x (-1) / 19
= -53.8947, or -54.2359 overall, when the -0.3412 is added to it.
General version: if you bet B on something with probability P and keep betting B until you win, then you are expected to lose a total of (B x P) for each win.
No. I mean keep betting 1024 until you lose.
Quote: slackyhacky
There is a electronic roulette game on Fremont street - I think it is the 4 Queens, and minimum bet is $0.05. I play martingale on that - and have done so MANY MANY times, and have NEVER lost money. The only time I get close to loosing money is when I get bored and start throwing nickels all over the place. for $50, you can go to 11 or 12 blacks in a row (when the bet becomes, 1.60, I just double to $3 to make it easier). To make it more interesting, I will martingale a color, odd/even, and also martingale one of the 1/3 row bets. That is hard to keep track of sometimes but makes it a lot easier to sit there then just playing a nickel on black every time.
It is the Four Queens, near the cage. Had to have at least $0.25 in action, per spin, to get free drinks, or so that particular cocktail waitress told me. Hedge and slow play, baby, hedge and slow play, keep those Tequila Sunrises coming!
Quote: OmahaNo. I mean keep betting 1024 until you lose.
The formula still applies (and note I made a mistake in the general solution earlier; it has been corrected), but this time the house is playing until it wins, with B = 1024 and P = 20/39; it will lose 1024 x (2 x 20/39 - 1) / (20/39) = 1024 x (-1/20), or win 51.2, with each win. Your overall EV is now -51.2 - 0.3412 = -51.5412.
Roulette any even money bet red black odd even hi lol doesn't matter even if you change it up every spin.
Start with one unit and double the bet after every win, up to 1024 and stay at that bet until a loss. So here are things that could happen on any sequence.
Lose on first spin -1 unit
Lose on second spin -1 unit
Lose on third spin -1 unit
Lose on fourth spin -1 unit
Lose on fifth spin -1 unit
Lose on sixth spin -1 unit
Lose on seventh spin -1 unit
Lose on eighth spin -1 unit
Lose on ninth spin -1 unit
Lose on tenth spin -1 unit
Lose on eleventh spin +1023 units
Lose on twelfth spin +2047 units
Lose on thirteenth spin +3071 units
Lose on fourteenth spin +4095 units
Lose on fifteenth spins +5119 units
Lose on sixteenth spin +6143 units
lose on seventeenth spin +7167 units
Lose on eighteenth spin +8191 units
Lose on nineteenth spin +9215 units
And exponentially infinite...
This is roulette. Same theory in blackjack, with no doubling or splitting, 3:2 blackjack payouts along the way would change things much more
Quote: OmahaSo now does the negative EV not affect the house in the same way it would affect the player?
Doubling the bet on a win doesn't change the EV for either party. The house still has the edge.
Bet $100 and double on every win up to $2500
If lose after first hand -$100
If lose after second hand -$100
If lose after third hand -$100
If lose after fourth hand -$100
If lose after fifth hand -$100
If lose after sixth hand +$800
If lose after seventh hand +$3300
If lose after eighth hand +$5800
If lose after ninth hand +$8300
If lose on tenth hand +$10800
And infinitely exponential
Also Any blackjack on the second hand or further in the series would result in a win for the series, no matter when the loss comes
still confused why you even replied to any roulette exampleQuote: OmahaReal world...
roulette sucks for even money bets
see
math behind values (p = 18/37)
prob loss on spin X = p^(spin X-1)*q
goes up to winning 199 time in a row
eye say no one will win 200 times in a row
ev at the end
still, with BJ you may not get a BJ or even a chance to double while winning 15 hands in a row
so this table could also be used for those poor BJ session wins too
| spin X | prob loss on spin X | result | return |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.513513514 | -100 | -51.35135135 |
| 2 | 0.249817385 | -100 | -24.9817385 |
| 3 | 0.121532782 | -100 | -12.15327819 |
| 4 | 0.059124056 | -100 | -5.912405604 |
| 5 | 0.028763054 | -100 | -2.876305429 |
| 6 | 0.013992837 | 800 | 11.19426978 |
| 7 | 0.006807326 | 3300 | 22.46417651 |
| 8 | 0.003311672 | 5800 | 19.20769884 |
| 9 | 0.001611084 | 8300 | 13.37199537 |
| 10 | 0.00078377 | 10800 | 8.464721263 |
| 11 | 0.000381294 | 13300 | 5.071206883 |
| 12 | 0.000185494 | 15800 | 2.930809261 |
| 13 | 9.02404E-05 | 18300 | 1.651400224 |
| 14 | 4.39008E-05 | 20800 | 0.91313579 |
| 15 | 2.13571E-05 | 23300 | 0.497621038 |
| 16 | 1.039E-05 | 25800 | 0.268060793 |
| 17 | 5.05457E-06 | 28300 | 0.143044383 |
| 18 | 2.45898E-06 | 30800 | 0.075736612 |
| 19 | 1.19626E-06 | 33300 | 0.03983549 |
| 20 | 5.81965E-07 | 35800 | 0.02083434 |
| 21 | 2.83118E-07 | 38300 | 0.01084342 |
| 22 | 1.37733E-07 | 40800 | 0.00561951 |
| 23 | 6.70053E-08 | 43300 | 0.002901329 |
| 24 | 3.25972E-08 | 45800 | 0.00149295 |
| 25 | 1.58581E-08 | 48300 | 0.000765945 |
| 26 | 7.71474E-09 | 50800 | 0.000391909 |
| 27 | 3.75312E-09 | 53300 | 0.000200041 |
| 28 | 1.82584E-09 | 55800 | 0.000101882 |
| 29 | 8.88247E-10 | 58300 | 5.17848E-05 |
| 30 | 4.3212E-10 | 60800 | 2.62729E-05 |
| 31 | 2.10221E-10 | 63300 | 1.3307E-05 |
| 32 | 1.02269E-10 | 65800 | 6.72933E-06 |
| 33 | 4.97527E-11 | 68300 | 3.39811E-06 |
| 34 | 2.4204E-11 | 70800 | 1.71365E-06 |
| 35 | 1.17749E-11 | 73300 | 8.63103E-07 |
| 36 | 5.72835E-12 | 75800 | 4.34209E-07 |
| 37 | 2.78676E-12 | 78300 | 2.18204E-07 |
| 38 | 1.35572E-12 | 80800 | 1.09542E-07 |
| 39 | 6.59541E-13 | 83300 | 5.49397E-08 |
| 40 | 3.20858E-13 | 85800 | 2.75296E-08 |
| 41 | 1.56093E-13 | 88300 | 1.3783E-08 |
| 42 | 7.59371E-14 | 90800 | 6.89509E-09 |
| 43 | 3.69424E-14 | 93300 | 3.44672E-09 |
| 44 | 1.7972E-14 | 95800 | 1.72171E-09 |
| 45 | 8.74312E-15 | 98300 | 8.59448E-10 |
| 46 | 4.25341E-15 | 100800 | 4.28744E-10 |
| 47 | 2.06923E-15 | 103300 | 2.13751E-10 |
| 48 | 1.00665E-15 | 105800 | 1.06504E-10 |
| 49 | 4.89722E-16 | 108300 | 5.30369E-11 |
| 50 | 2.38243E-16 | 110800 | 2.63973E-11 |
| 51 | 1.15902E-16 | 113300 | 1.31317E-11 |
| 52 | 5.63848E-17 | 115800 | 6.52935E-12 |
| 53 | 2.74304E-17 | 118300 | 3.24502E-12 |
| 54 | 1.33445E-17 | 120800 | 1.61202E-12 |
| 55 | 6.49193E-18 | 123300 | 8.00455E-13 |
| 56 | 3.15824E-18 | 125800 | 3.97306E-13 |
| 57 | 1.53644E-18 | 128300 | 1.97125E-13 |
| 58 | 7.47457E-19 | 130800 | 9.77674E-14 |
| 59 | 3.63628E-19 | 133300 | 4.84716E-14 |
| 60 | 1.769E-19 | 135800 | 2.4023E-14 |
| 61 | 8.60595E-20 | 138300 | 1.1902E-14 |
| 62 | 4.18668E-20 | 140800 | 5.89484E-15 |
| 63 | 2.03676E-20 | 143300 | 2.91868E-15 |
| 64 | 9.90857E-21 | 145800 | 1.44467E-15 |
| 65 | 4.82039E-21 | 148300 | 7.14863E-16 |
| 66 | 2.34505E-21 | 150800 | 3.53634E-16 |
| 67 | 1.14084E-21 | 153300 | 1.7489E-16 |
| 68 | 5.55002E-22 | 155800 | 8.64692E-17 |
| 69 | 2.70001E-22 | 158300 | 4.27411E-17 |
| 70 | 1.31352E-22 | 160800 | 2.11214E-17 |
| 71 | 6.39008E-23 | 163300 | 1.0435E-17 |
| 72 | 3.10869E-23 | 165800 | 5.15421E-18 |
| 73 | 1.51234E-23 | 168300 | 2.54526E-18 |
| 74 | 7.35731E-24 | 170800 | 1.25663E-18 |
| 75 | 3.57923E-24 | 173300 | 6.20281E-19 |
| 76 | 1.74125E-24 | 175800 | 3.06111E-19 |
| 77 | 8.47093E-25 | 178300 | 1.51037E-19 |
| 78 | 4.12099E-25 | 180800 | 7.45076E-20 |
| 79 | 2.00481E-25 | 183300 | 3.67481E-20 |
| 80 | 9.75312E-26 | 185800 | 1.81213E-20 |
| 81 | 4.74476E-26 | 188300 | 8.93439E-21 |
| 82 | 2.30826E-26 | 190800 | 4.40416E-21 |
| 83 | 1.12294E-26 | 193300 | 2.17064E-21 |
| 84 | 5.46294E-27 | 195800 | 1.06964E-21 |
| 85 | 2.65765E-27 | 198300 | 5.27012E-22 |
| 86 | 1.29291E-27 | 200800 | 2.59616E-22 |
| 87 | 6.28983E-28 | 203300 | 1.27872E-22 |
| 88 | 3.05992E-28 | 205800 | 6.29731E-23 |
| 89 | 1.48861E-28 | 208300 | 3.10077E-23 |
| 90 | 7.24188E-29 | 210800 | 1.52659E-23 |
| 91 | 3.52308E-29 | 213300 | 7.51472E-24 |
| 92 | 1.71393E-29 | 215800 | 3.69866E-24 |
| 93 | 8.33804E-30 | 218300 | 1.82019E-24 |
| 94 | 4.05634E-30 | 220800 | 8.9564E-25 |
| 95 | 1.97336E-30 | 223300 | 4.4065E-25 |
| 96 | 9.60011E-31 | 225800 | 2.1677E-25 |
| 97 | 4.67032E-31 | 228300 | 1.06623E-25 |
| 98 | 2.27205E-31 | 230800 | 5.24389E-26 |
| 99 | 1.10532E-31 | 233300 | 2.57871E-26 |
| 100 | 5.37724E-32 | 235800 | 1.26795E-26 |
| 101 | 2.61595E-32 | 238300 | 6.23382E-27 |
| 102 | 1.27263E-32 | 240800 | 3.06448E-27 |
| 103 | 6.19115E-33 | 243300 | 1.50631E-27 |
| 104 | 3.01191E-33 | 245800 | 7.40328E-28 |
| 105 | 1.46525E-33 | 248300 | 3.63823E-28 |
| 106 | 7.12827E-34 | 250800 | 1.78777E-28 |
| 107 | 3.4678E-34 | 253300 | 8.78395E-29 |
| 108 | 1.68704E-34 | 255800 | 4.31545E-29 |
| 109 | 8.20722E-35 | 258300 | 2.11993E-29 |
| 110 | 3.9927E-35 | 260800 | 1.0413E-29 |
| 111 | 1.9424E-35 | 263300 | 5.11433E-30 |
| 112 | 9.44949E-36 | 265800 | 2.51168E-30 |
| 113 | 4.59705E-36 | 268300 | 1.23339E-30 |
| 114 | 2.2364E-36 | 270800 | 6.05618E-31 |
| 115 | 1.08798E-36 | 273300 | 2.97345E-31 |
| 116 | 5.29288E-37 | 275800 | 1.45978E-31 |
| 117 | 2.57491E-37 | 278300 | 7.16598E-32 |
| 118 | 1.25266E-37 | 280800 | 3.51747E-32 |
| 119 | 6.09402E-38 | 283300 | 1.72644E-32 |
| 120 | 2.96466E-38 | 285800 | 8.473E-33 |
| 121 | 1.44227E-38 | 288300 | 4.15806E-33 |
| 122 | 7.01643E-39 | 290800 | 2.04038E-33 |
| 123 | 3.4134E-39 | 293300 | 1.00115E-33 |
| 124 | 1.66057E-39 | 295800 | 4.91197E-34 |
| 125 | 8.07846E-40 | 298300 | 2.40981E-34 |
| 126 | 3.93006E-40 | 300800 | 1.18216E-34 |
| 127 | 1.91192E-40 | 303300 | 5.79886E-35 |
| 128 | 9.30124E-41 | 305800 | 2.84432E-35 |
| 129 | 4.52493E-41 | 308300 | 1.39504E-35 |
| 130 | 2.20132E-41 | 310800 | 6.84169E-36 |
| 131 | 1.07091E-41 | 313300 | 3.35516E-36 |
| 132 | 5.20984E-42 | 315800 | 1.64527E-36 |
| 133 | 2.53452E-42 | 318300 | 8.06736E-37 |
| 134 | 1.23301E-42 | 320800 | 3.95549E-37 |
| 135 | 5.99842E-43 | 323300 | 1.93929E-37 |
| 136 | 2.91815E-43 | 325800 | 9.50733E-38 |
| 137 | 1.41964E-43 | 328300 | 4.66068E-38 |
| 138 | 6.90635E-44 | 330800 | 2.28462E-38 |
| 139 | 3.35985E-44 | 333300 | 1.11984E-38 |
| 140 | 1.63452E-44 | 335800 | 5.48872E-39 |
| 141 | 7.95172E-45 | 338300 | 2.69007E-39 |
| 142 | 3.86841E-45 | 340800 | 1.31835E-39 |
| 143 | 1.88193E-45 | 343300 | 6.46066E-40 |
| 144 | 9.15532E-46 | 345800 | 3.16591E-40 |
| 145 | 4.45394E-46 | 348300 | 1.55131E-40 |
| 146 | 2.16678E-46 | 350800 | 7.60107E-41 |
| 147 | 1.05411E-46 | 353300 | 3.72417E-41 |
| 148 | 5.1281E-47 | 355800 | 1.82458E-41 |
| 149 | 2.49475E-47 | 358300 | 8.9387E-42 |
| 150 | 1.21366E-47 | 360800 | 4.3789E-42 |
| 151 | 5.90431E-48 | 363300 | 2.14504E-42 |
| 152 | 2.87237E-48 | 365800 | 1.05071E-42 |
| 153 | 1.39737E-48 | 368300 | 5.1465E-43 |
| 154 | 6.798E-49 | 370800 | 2.5207E-43 |
| 155 | 3.30714E-49 | 373300 | 1.23455E-43 |
| 156 | 1.60888E-49 | 375800 | 6.04616E-44 |
| 157 | 7.82697E-50 | 378300 | 2.96094E-44 |
| 158 | 3.80772E-50 | 380800 | 1.44998E-44 |
| 159 | 1.8524E-50 | 383300 | 7.10026E-45 |
| 160 | 9.01169E-51 | 385800 | 3.47671E-45 |
| 161 | 4.38406E-51 | 388300 | 1.70233E-45 |
| 162 | 2.13279E-51 | 390800 | 8.33493E-46 |
| 163 | 1.03757E-51 | 393300 | 4.08077E-46 |
| 164 | 5.04765E-52 | 395800 | 1.99786E-46 |
| 165 | 2.45561E-52 | 398300 | 9.78071E-47 |
| 166 | 1.19462E-52 | 400800 | 4.78805E-47 |
| 167 | 5.81168E-53 | 403300 | 2.34385E-47 |
| 168 | 2.8273E-53 | 405800 | 1.14732E-47 |
| 169 | 1.37544E-53 | 408300 | 5.61594E-48 |
| 170 | 6.69135E-54 | 410800 | 2.74881E-48 |
| 171 | 3.25525E-54 | 413300 | 1.3454E-48 |
| 172 | 1.58364E-54 | 415800 | 6.58476E-49 |
| 173 | 7.70418E-55 | 418300 | 3.22266E-49 |
| 174 | 3.74798E-55 | 420800 | 1.57715E-49 |
| 175 | 1.82334E-55 | 423300 | 7.7182E-50 |
| 176 | 8.87031E-56 | 425800 | 3.77698E-50 |
| 177 | 4.31528E-56 | 428300 | 1.84824E-50 |
| 178 | 2.09933E-56 | 430800 | 9.0439E-51 |
| 179 | 1.02129E-56 | 433300 | 4.42527E-51 |
| 180 | 4.96846E-57 | 435800 | 2.16525E-51 |
| 181 | 2.41709E-57 | 438300 | 1.05941E-51 |
| 182 | 1.17588E-57 | 440800 | 5.18328E-52 |
| 183 | 5.7205E-58 | 443300 | 2.5359E-52 |
| 184 | 2.78295E-58 | 445800 | 1.24064E-52 |
| 185 | 1.35387E-58 | 448300 | 6.06938E-53 |
| 186 | 6.58637E-59 | 450800 | 2.96914E-53 |
| 187 | 3.20418E-59 | 453300 | 1.45246E-53 |
| 188 | 1.55879E-59 | 455800 | 7.10497E-54 |
| 189 | 7.58331E-60 | 458300 | 3.47543E-54 |
| 190 | 3.68918E-60 | 460800 | 1.69997E-54 |
| 191 | 1.79473E-60 | 463300 | 8.31501E-55 |
| 192 | 8.73114E-61 | 465800 | 4.06697E-55 |
| 193 | 4.24758E-61 | 468300 | 1.98914E-55 |
| 194 | 2.06639E-61 | 470800 | 9.72857E-56 |
| 195 | 1.00527E-61 | 473300 | 4.75795E-56 |
| 196 | 4.89051E-62 | 475800 | 2.3269E-56 |
| 197 | 2.37917E-62 | 478300 | 1.13796E-56 |
| 198 | 1.15743E-62 | 480800 | 5.56494E-57 |
| 199 | 5.63075E-63 | 483300 | 2.72134E-57 |
| 200 | 2.73929E-63 | 485800 | 1.33074E-57 |
| . | . | total | -10.93811056 |
Sally ready for dinner and dancing again and again and again and again
