Guy claims to have invented a BJ betting system

Quote: darkoz

However, I know for a fact if you are designing a new game, first you do the math, then you run a sim.

Are you telling all the game designers on here that no sims were run on say Poker for Roulette to establish HE?

Are you telling me Charles Mousseau didn't send me sims verifying HE after he did the math on my game?

Just the fact you are veering into the prosecutorial error of blending half-truth with falsity by omission of example to get a conviction shows you really have no case.

No, I only run simulations when the game is of sufficient complexity. I have several games approved where I never ran a simulation, ever. There's a big gulf between the simple yes/no of a roulette wager and the complexity of a game like pai gow poker (7 vs. 7 with a joker and a splitting strategy). My line is typically "if I can do the whole game in a spreadsheet, no sim needed."

Maybe Charles ran a sim on your game -- I don't know what it is -- but I wouldn't have needed to do a sim on PFR to know the edge. I have a slightly more complicated multi-spin roulette game that never had simulations either; I wrote analysis code to verify the spreadsheet but that's different than a monte-carlo (RNG-based) sim. PFR in its current form, if I recall correctly, is only three spins in a row. That's easily doable in a spreadsheet.

Quote: redjohn

And yet Terry Watanabe credits all his sucess at casino gambling to the Martingale. Go figure.

Terry Watanabe lost $127 million. If that means success to you, let's play a coin-flip game where heads I win, tails you lose. It'll be successful for both of us.

AWWW You take all the fun out of things. Nobody has to Google Terry now. SIGH

Quote: MathExtremist

Terry Watanabe lost $127 million. If that means success to you, let's play a coin-flip game where heads I win, tails you lose. It'll be successful for both of us.

http://www.cardplayer.com/poker-news/15243-caesars-fined-225k-over-not-kicking-out-belligerent-high-roller-on-historic-losing-streak

...Watanabe was so absurdly awful at gambling that Caesars agreed to give him a 30-percent rebate on his staggering losses. An employee at the casino told The Wall Street Journal in 2009 that Watanabe “made such bad decisions on the blackjack table.”...

30%!! Don Johnson got screwed!!

With infinite time and infinite trials anything is possible even losing 10k or 10billion hands in a row. We owe our very existence of life on earth to an extremely unlikely set of events but here we are.

Quote: Exoter175

Blah blah blah, blah blah, "get a job in the gaming business" is what I read. So no, there's not a better way to make money INSIDE the casino as a player, than what I do.

I doubt that's true, I have a feeling there are several more-successful APs here than you are. But I've no need to debate whether your particular AP techniques are ideal. I'm not going to tell you how to run your business.

Quote:

I will be honest, I haven't made a million, yet. I'll be there very soon, though. Two years of 100k+, 7 years of 60k+, and at this point with the network I've put together, I don't see a reason that should be going downward anytime soon.

That's not bad, but what's your hourly rate? If you're working for 4000 hours/year to make that 100k, that's only $25/hour with no other comp (like benefits).

Quote: darkoz

RS said:

Simulations are not necessary if you can determine the result using math. For example, there serves no purpose in simulating a roulette game to determine the HE, when I can use simple math to determine the HE [result].

First off, RS, if you want to win your argument so badly, it is in poor taste to tell lies to win your argument.

You don't need to run a sim to determine the HE on Roulette because that is an ALREADY ESTABLISHED HE.

However, I know for a fact if you are designing a new game, first you do the math, then you run a sim.

Are you telling all the game designers on here that no sims were run on say Poker for Roulette to establish HE?

Are you telling me Charles Mousseau didn't send me sims verifying HE after he did the math on my game?

Just the fact you are veering into the prosecutorial error of blending half-truth with falsity by omission of example to get a conviction shows you really have no case.

I'm saying a sim is not necessary.

Please tell us all, is 0.42^10000 greater than 0 or equal to 0? I'm starting to smell that bull crap of yours that you mentioned.

Quote: kewlj

You obviously don't think much of card counters as you constantly put us down. That's fine. That's your right. But just know that SOME of us choose this elementary method of AP.

I appreciate that you are extremely 'gifted' in mathematics. I am not, but I do have the ability to apply some other so called 'more advanced' methods of AP. I choose not to for a variety of reasons. I have turned down offers to participate with some gifted colleagues and teams. Just not my thing. Some of us CHOOSE and enjoy this method of AP. :)

I don't intend any offense, and I don't have any problem with card counters per se. I just think that anyone who's smart and disciplined enough to really be a long-term success at AP generally is wasting their potential. I'm sure I could be a good AP too if I wanted to, but instead I've invested my bankroll in other plays that, when done wisely, have far higher +EVs. I've had a few 10xs and one >100x so far. Plenty of 0s too, but just as in gambling you don't win all your bets.

On the other hand, you don't come across as a typical card counter -- the sort who only knows what he reads in a basic book and wants to squeeze out a few bucks on the weekend. If you've made the conscientious choice to pursue the AP life in lieu of your other, more lucrative opportunities, that's your call. Most people who try their hand at card counting don't even think about that. But the same is true for most people who try their hand at running bars or small restaurants so it's not like wannabe-APs are unique in this way. Lots of people are bad at translating hobbies into profitable businesses, whatever they are.

Quote: RS

Quote: darkoz

RS said:

Simulations are not necessary if you can determine the result using math. For example, there serves no purpose in simulating a roulette game to determine the HE, when I can use simple math to determine the HE [result].

First off, RS, if you want to win your argument so badly, it is in poor taste to tell lies to win your argument.

You don't need to run a sim to determine the HE on Roulette because that is an ALREADY ESTABLISHED HE.

However, I know for a fact if you are designing a new game, first you do the math, then you run a sim.

Are you telling all the game designers on here that no sims were run on say Poker for Roulette to establish HE?

Are you telling me Charles Mousseau didn't send me sims verifying HE after he did the math on my game?

Just the fact you are veering into the prosecutorial error of blending half-truth with falsity by omission of example to get a conviction shows you really have no case.

I'm saying a sim is not necessary.

Please tell us all, is 0.42^10000 greater than 0 or equal to 0? I'm starting to smell that bull crap of yours that you mentioned.

I'm not a mathematician so I don't give a rats ass what it is.

What's the number of frames between key-code in 3-perf 35mm film or 16mm Agfa-gevaert? Motion picture film was my specialty for almost two decades but I don't ask specialty questions like that of someone clearly not in the field.

I rail AGAINST mathematicians and their stupid probability that because something can happen, even with the odds being billion to one, that it definitely will therefore negating everything else.

By your logic, DNA testing is invalid because the chances of any one person matching usually preclude almost everyone on the planet, down to only two people usually.

"But your honor, there is the probability that the other guy did it. Mathematically, it's going to happen someday. All DNA results must considered void based on the billion to one probability. I don't need to run a sim, your honor, trust me on this."

Quote: darkoz

Quote: RS

Quote: darkoz

RS said:

Simulations are not necessary if you can determine the result using math. For example, there serves no purpose in simulating a roulette game to determine the HE, when I can use simple math to determine the HE [result].

First off, RS, if you want to win your argument so badly, it is in poor taste to tell lies to win your argument.

You don't need to run a sim to determine the HE on Roulette because that is an ALREADY ESTABLISHED HE.

However, I know for a fact if you are designing a new game, first you do the math, then you run a sim.

Are you telling all the game designers on here that no sims were run on say Poker for Roulette to establish HE?

Are you telling me Charles Mousseau didn't send me sims verifying HE after he did the math on my game?

Just the fact you are veering into the prosecutorial error of blending half-truth with falsity by omission of example to get a conviction shows you really have no case.

I'm saying a sim is not necessary.

Please tell us all, is 0.42^10000 greater than 0 or equal to 0? I'm starting to smell that bull crap of yours that you mentioned.

I'm not a mathematician so I don't give a rats ass what it is.

What's the number of frames between key-code in 3-perf 35mm film or 16mm Agfa-gevaert? Motion picture film was my specialty for almost two decades but I don't ask specialty questions like that of someone clearly not in the field.

I rail AGAINST mathematicians and their stupid probability that because something can happen, even with the odds being billion to one, that it definitely will therefore negating everything else.

By your logic, DNA testing is invalid because the chances of any one person matching usually preclude almost everyone on the planet, down to only two people usually.

"But your honor, there is the probability that the other guy did it. Mathematically, it's going to happen someday. All DNA results must considered void based on the billion to one probability. I don't need to run a sim, your honor, trust me on this."

I asked if it is equal to 0 or if it is greater than 0.

But it doesn't matter, I see your point....the number is so large (or small) you can't fathom it. I don't think anyone else can, either. Why don't you stick to your film and videos and let the math people stick with the math, so as to not confuse readers, yes?

I’ve read many discussions about theory vs. simulation within this BJ Betting thread. Being a newbie, I know nothing about math theory regarding probability/odds in casino games. As Mark Twain once said, "Figures don’t lie, but liars do figure" and there are "Lies, damned lies, and statistics", my intuition tells me to trust simulation data more than abstract theories or equations. What can go wrong with a simulation representing 1,000,000,000 hands or more?

I have a question about theory vs. simulation and could ask it in a new thread topic, but since so much of the discussions/arguments happen in this BJ Betting thread, I’ve decided to pose my question here:

Have there been studies about the correlation or accuracy of theory vs. simulation data regarding probability/odds in casino games, and which is a more reliable predictor?

Quote: darkoz

I rail AGAINST mathematicians and their stupid probability that because something can happen, even with the odds being billion to one, that it definitely will therefore negating everything else.

Lots of people rail against things they don't understand. Doesn't mean they're accurate. What you're missing is that there's a huge difference between "finite but very large" and "infinite." It's not a minor semantic point, it's a categorical distinction. Comparing what could happen with a "finite but very large" bankroll and an "infinite bankroll" isn't just like comparing an apple to an orange, it's like comparing an apple to the velocity of a sprinting unicorn. Fruits are comparable. A fruit and a velocity aren't comparable at all, and one of the two items doesn't even exist.

Quote: 777

Have there been studies about the correlation or accuracy of theory vs. simulation data regarding probability/odds in casino games, and which is a more reliable predictor?

When both are done properly, the results match. That's true for stochastic processes both in and out of the casino domain.

Quote: MathExtremist

I don't intend any offense, and I don't have any problem with card counters per se. I just think that anyone who's smart and disciplined enough to really be a long-term success at AP generally is wasting their potential.

You didn't offend me. I was just making an observation that based on a number of posts and comments over time, that it appears you don't think too highly of card counters. :)

For what it's worth, I have heard that line of thinking many times, that anyone who is successful at APing is wasting their potential and could be many times more successful in another field or line of work. I think for many this is true. But many of the AP's that I know and network with, are well educated and came from success in other fields and lines of work. Many from the financial/banking field. So they left well paying careers and career opportunities to pursue AP play. It's only natural that they could be more successful if they left APing.

I haven't met many folks like myself that have only a high school education and left a job in the 20K range to pursue a career as an AP (probably because few from that background have the bankroll to get started).

For someone like myself, with high school education and a 20K job in retail industry, where could I expect to be 12 years later? Maybe some sort of store management position making 40K at best? So making upper 5 figures to just touching 6 figures as I do regularly is probably twice as good as I could do in another line of work with my education and qualifications. The fact that I love my career choice and life, is sweat creamy icing on the cake (I must be hungry...lol).

Not meaning to start anything with you, I just find those types of broad brush comments (doing better in another field) interesting.

And I answered your question. I don't give a rats ass what it is, less or more than 0.
Guess what? It affects my life and what I do less or more than 0.

Let's not confuse readers with stuff that's unrealistic like ten thousand straight losses ever happening.

Quote: darkoz

And I answered your question. I don't give a rats ass what it is, less or more than 0.
Guess what? It affects my life and what I do less or more than 0.

Let's not confuse readers with stuff that's unrealistic like ten thousand straight losses ever happening.

Are you trolling?

Quote: kewlj

I haven't met many folks like myself that have only a high school education and left a job in the 20K range to pursue a career as an AP (probably because few from that background have the bankroll to get started).

For someone like myself, with high school education and a 20K job in retail industry, where could I expect to be 12 years later? Maybe some sort of store management position making 40K at best? So making upper 5 figures to just touching 6 figures as I do regularly is probably twice as good as I could do in another line of work with my education and qualifications. The fact that I love my career choice and life, is sweat creamy icing on the cake (I must be hungry...lol).

Not meaning to start anything with you, I just find those types of broad brush comments (doing better in another field) interesting.

There's always an exception to the rule and you sound like you're it (or one of them) in your case. I certainly am in mine; there are many people who labor at game design and invention, but very few who ever realize profit from that labor, and fewer still who parlay that labor into a successful business.

And now I want a cinnamon roll...

Quote: RS

Are you trolling?

Since you and I are going back and forth on this equally, I assumed we were having a conversation.

Clearly you want to keep with the accusations.

Anyone who's read my history of posts on here knows I don't troll. I post vociferously my opinions and usually back them up with real world examples if I can (not theories and then claim proving them is a waste of time.)

You probably are upset because I am speaking truth that you cannot prove false without running a sim (which would probably prove you wrong so go ahead with the "I don't need to since I used a pen, paper and calculator to figure it out.") Very poor excuse if you ask me.

Is it possible to never win a hand of blackjack in 999,999,999,999,999,999... hands? Yes

Is it likely to happen? No

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Is it possible to never win a hand of blackjack in 999,999,999,999,999,999... hands? Yes

Is it likely to happen? No

Wait! Didn't AoS have a streak like that?

Quote: kewlj

Wait! Didn't AoS have a streak like that?

He's probably still in that streak. And Wallace Shawn is his dealer.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Is it possible to never win a hand of blackjack in 999,999,999,999,999,999... hands? Yes

Is it likely to happen? No

Well, this brings up an interesting question.

If anything is infinitesimally possible, what is the possibility that a sim will prove you wrong?

Are you venturing that the possibility of a sim proving you wrong is absolute zero - impossible?

Quote: MathExtremist

When both are done properly, the results match. That's true for stochastic processes both in and out of the casino domain.

Anything can go wrong, and anyone can make mistakes. The following comment has NOTHING to do about you or anyone's credibility regarding casino math odds/theory -- my faith is in the simulation data, and I don't have lots of confident in abstract theory if it is not backed up by simulation data.

Can you recommend books about casino gaming math theory/odds?

Quote: darkoz

Well, this brings up an interesting question.

If anything is infinitesimally possible, what is the possibility that a sim will prove you wrong?

Are you venturing that the possibility of a sim proving you wrong is absolute zero - impossible?

You'd have to let it run forever. Do you have that long?

Sorry darkoz, I thought you were [trolling], given your posts here. My bad.

Again, Darkoz, you're going down the wrong path. 0.42^10000 is greater than 0 (the probability of losing 10K hands in BJ in a row). It does not matter what the probability of getting a blackjack is nor does it matter what the probability of the dealer busting is. The number of losing 10K hands in a row is greater than 0, therefore is possible. Given a large enough sample size (ie: infinity), it WILL happen [unless there is some constraint on the sample/condition making it impossible].

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

You'd have to let it run forever. Do you have that long?

Next, darkoz is going to ask ONE OF US to run it 'forever' so we can prove him wrong!!

Quote: 777

Anything can go wrong, and anyone can make mistakes. The following comment has NOTHING to do about you or anyone's credibility regarding casino math odds/theory -- my faith is in the simulation data, and I don't have lots of confident in abstract theory if it is not backed up by simulation data.

Can you recommend books about casino gaming math theory/odds?

Richard Epstein, "The Theory of Gambling and Statistical Logic" is a good one, but you need to understand probability theory at a more basic level too. Most casino gaming math is a pretty rudimentary application of probability theory. You could always start where I did: learn how to calculate the EV for all the basic casino table games.

I wouldn't put too much faith in simulation data in a vacuum, though. I've seen plenty of busted simulations, including by well-respected (and state-sanctioned) gaming labs. RNGs and unbiased mappings are very easy to do wrong, and it's also non-trivial to perfectly implement complex game rules in code. Especially when an optimal player strategy is involved.

Quote: RS

Sorry darkoz, I thought you were [trolling], given your posts here. My bad.

Again, Darkoz, you're going down the wrong path. 0.42^10000 is greater than 0 (the probability of losing 10K hands in BJ in a row). It does not matter what the probability of getting a blackjack is nor does it matter what the probability of the dealer busting is. The number of losing 10K hands in a row is greater than 0, therefore is possible. Given a large enough sample size (ie: infinity), it WILL happen [unless there is some constraint on the sample/condition making it impossible].



Next, darkoz is going to ask ONE OF US to run it 'forever' so we can prove him wrong!!

I should but then I might be trolling.

However, if it would take forever to prove it, it becomes a chicken little, sky is falling situation. Will the sky fall and the earth be destroyed by a meteor, yes, but the situation is so improbable that you should move forward with your plans anyway.

If one was to use a martingale with 10,000 straight losses allowed (lets put that as the cap so we don't go forever) it will take so long for one to hit that (millions of years) that the person will have won many times over prior to his death.

Quote: darkoz

If one was to use a martingale with 10,000 straight losses allowed (lets put that as the cap so we don't go forever) it will take so long for one to hit that (millions of years) that the person will have won many times over prior to his death.

Or it could hit immediately. that's the thing about possible events - they can happen:-)

Quote: darkoz

Quote: RS

Sorry darkoz, I thought you were [trolling], given your posts here. My bad.

Again, Darkoz, you're going down the wrong path. 0.42^10000 is greater than 0 (the probability of losing 10K hands in BJ in a row). It does not matter what the probability of getting a blackjack is nor does it matter what the probability of the dealer busting is. The number of losing 10K hands in a row is greater than 0, therefore is possible. Given a large enough sample size (ie: infinity), it WILL happen [unless there is some constraint on the sample/condition making it impossible].



Next, darkoz is going to ask ONE OF US to run it 'forever' so we can prove him wrong!!

I should but then I might be trolling.

However, if it would take forever to prove it, it becomes a chicken little, sky is falling situation. Will the sky fall and the earth be destroyed by a meteor, yes, but the situation is so improbable that you should move forward with your plans anyway.

If one was to use a martingale with 10,000 straight losses allowed (lets put that as the cap so we don't go forever) it will take so long for one to hit that (millions of years) that the person will have won many times over prior to his death.

Partially agree and disagree.

#1 The "other stuff" -- meteor destroying earth [BTW, funny story regarding that, see spoiler], doesn't apply. As far as I'm concerned, the only thing that matters with this infinite-system-martingale-Exoter-blackjack-something ordeal is if it'd work, not all the extra stuff like how long you're going to live, meteors, etc. If we want to get into life-span, meteors hitting earth, human extinction, whatever....then we gotta re-do this whole "infinite martingale" experiment.

#2, not necessarily. First of all, not sure what you mean by "will have won many times over". Do you mean the person will have simply won many times? Or do you mean the person will have won many times more than he will lose once he hits the 10K loss streak? If the former, then you are correct, but the person still will have lost (will would have lost? argh I hate grammar sometimes). If the latter, then that is untrue. If that were (was?) true, then the martingale would work on a very small level, like a 5-loss streak max. Start at 1-loss streak and move to 2 losses, then 3 then 4....etc. You'll notice if you run a complete cycle (I don't mean a cycle as in a single win, I mean a cycle where all outcomes have occurred or expected to have occurred....think "royal flush cycle").

"Meteor story in spoiler":

Quote: darkoz

If one was to use a martingale with 10,000 straight losses allowed (lets put that as the cap so we don't go forever) it will take so long for one to hit that (millions of years) that the person will have won many times over prior to his death.

Have you actually considered the bankroll requirement for 10,000 straight losses? Really, it's exponentially larger than the amount of money in the global economy. If you suppose that the entire economy has 10^15 dollars (one quadrillion, which is far more than it actually has), and you actually tried to play a 10,000 step martingale with all of it, you'd have to start with an initial wager with an economic value less than that of a single grain of sand. The final wager of a 10,000 step martingale is over 10^3000. How much is a grain of sand worth? If you played blackjack for your entire life and won 100 grains of sand per hour for 80 years, you'd have about 70M grains of sand. That's about 5 tons and costs $200.

$200.

The moral of the story is that typical numeric intuition breaks down once you start using extremely large or small numbers. You can feel the difference between $100 and $10,000. You can't intuit the difference between $10^1025 and $10^1035.

Actually the most shocking part of the story for me wasn't the ploppy pitboss with bad math or lack of knowledge about proper AP play (I've seen that many times) but that you were so chummy with the pitboss who understood in general terms you were AP'ing the free-play.

Must have been a pretty sweat-free casino comps wise. I've had similar opportunities with ridiculous super-sweat.

Quote: darkoz

Actually the most shocking part of the story for me wasn't the ploppy pitboss with bad math or lack of knowledge about proper AP play (I've seen that many times) but that you were so chummy with the pitboss who understood in general terms you were AP'ing the free-play.

Must have been a pretty sweat-free casino comps wise. I've had similar opportunities with ridiculous super-sweat.

"manager" = leader of AP group.

Quote: rdw4potus

"manager" = leader of AP group.

Oh, lol. That makes more sense. Are you sure? I wouldn't want a ploppy managing my team. I might use one in a smaller role as help but managing?

Anyway, guys. off to AC for a day or two. And refuse to pay $15 for internet access (which narrows down where I'm staying to 4 and 1/2 casinos, if you are familiar with AC, lol.

So leaving this conversation for now. Don't take my silence as a sign of giving up.

Good luck, guys.

And before you ask, Borgata is the 1/2 casino since they offer free internet in the hotel lounge if you really need it and refuse to pay from your room.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

100% false.

Please, explain.

PS this is really getting tiring.

Quote: MathExtremist

Any "theory" that is predicated on a known falsehood isn't worth considering

Interesting, because this statement contradicts your argument entirely.

Your "theory" that counteracts the argument is that "Infinite losses" is a possibility, however it is a known falsehood.

Again, just answer the question MathExtremist. Does the marginale system yield a minimum of +1 betting unit by the time a win is had? Yes or No.

Quit arguing semantics, quit trying to recycle and regurgitate the same argument, quit trying to run this thing in circles. A simple yes, or a simple no will suffice.

Keep in mind, MathExtremist, we both know the answer to that question, the issue is whether or not you're willing to swallow your pride and post it.

Quote: MathExtremist

I doubt that's true, I have a feeling there are several more-successful APs here than you are. But I've no need to debate whether your particular AP techniques are ideal. I'm not going to tell you how to run your business.


That's not bad, but what's your hourly rate? If you're working for 4000 hours/year to make that 100k, that's only $25/hour with no other comp (like benefits).

You doubt that's true? You believe there's a better way to MAKE money in the casino as a player than what I do? Please enlighten us, because I'd love to find a way to make more than 100k/year inside of the casino without the monotony of card counting and machine hustling, while not breaking the law in doing so.

As for my hourly rate, I don't have one. It changes from day to day. I might make $15/hr one day, and $115/hr the next. I've had says where my hourly was in the thousands. I don't consider an hourly rate anything of significance, and now I'm starting to get the idea that you are completely against AP's and have ZERO insight to what we actually do with that remark you just made about benefits.

You know what a nice benefit is, MathExtremist? Making TWICE the money I'd have otherwise made with my degree in the field of my chosen profession, working the same numbers of hours week to week, but being able to take time off whenever I'd like, for what ever reason I'd like, and go in whenever I'd like, and leave whenever I'd like.

My mortgage is paid, my car is paid, my bills are paid, and year after year I'm putting 50-100K in the bank after all of that.

Unlike most AP's, MathExtremist, I consider all of my expenses a business expense. Food, Gas, Rent, Clothing, all of that goes towards the bottom line of my life, and those items come first. So when I say I'm coming up on two consecutive years of 100k+, I don't mean the sum of all total wins-losses, I'm speaking specifically about the amount of money I put away from January 1, 2014 to January 1, 2015.

Quote: MathExtremist

I don't intend any offense, and I don't have any problem with card counters per se. I just think that anyone who's smart and disciplined enough to really be a long-term success at AP generally is wasting their potential. I'm sure I could be a good AP too if I wanted to, but instead I've invested my bankroll in other plays that, when done wisely, have far higher +EVs. I've had a few 10xs and one >100x so far. Plenty of 0s too, but just as in gambling you don't win all your bets.

On the other hand, you don't come across as a typical card counter -- the sort who only knows what he reads in a basic book and wants to squeeze out a few bucks on the weekend. If you've made the conscientious choice to pursue the AP life in lieu of your other, more lucrative opportunities, that's your call. Most people who try their hand at card counting don't even think about that. But the same is true for most people who try their hand at running bars or small restaurants so it's not like wannabe-APs are unique in this way. Lots of people are bad at translating hobbies into profitable businesses, whatever they are.

And there we have it, the anti-Card Counter.

What other "plays" are you referring to, Math Extremist?

Quote: darkoz

Oh, lol. That makes more sense. Are you sure? I wouldn't want a ploppy managing my team. I might use one in a smaller role as help but managing?

It's complicated, but basically he had lots of managerial experience through other businesses. He knew an AP and decided to make an "AP business" with both of them being managers. I mean, the manager wasn't a ploppy (well, before-hand as in playing poker and drinking and whatnot...but once he started CC he wasn't a ploppy). The problem is his experience in other business endeavors didn't translate properly to AP. He was used to running a business or whatever and if something new wasn't working, he'd cut it loose kind of a thing. But he didn't quite realize VP and having a known edge is different than having a business and doing something that's unknown.

Anyway, glad the team is no longer together. We all split off and many are still together and doing quite well, lacking the original manager.

Quote: Exoter175

Please, explain...

It should be easy to figure out. Card counting is the worst (in terms of player advantage) AP blackjack move out there.

Quote: Exoter175

Quote: MathExtremist

Any "theory" that is predicated on a known falsehood isn't worth considering

Interesting, because this statement contradicts your argument entirely.

Your "theory" that counteracts the argument is that "Infinite losses" is a possibility, however it is a known falsehood.

No, that's just your invented strawman, I'm not relying on any infinities at all, and infinity isn't required to disprove the Martingale. Quite the contrary, when you rely upon finite reality, not some imaginary infinite counterfactual, the Martingale is easily examined and demonstrated to not have the 100% success rate you think it does.

You are relying on a fictitious gambler having more than all of the money in existence. "More than all of the money" is clearly not part of reality. A gambler with all of the money in existence wouldn't even have a casino to bet against because the casino would have no money. A gambler with *half* of all the money in existence, with the other half belonging to the casino, still doesn't need to wait for an infinite number of losses. Do you know how many losses a gambler with half of the world's money would be able to sustain before busting out? 45. Not even 100. Just 45.

It's obviously impossible for someone to have more than all of the money in existence, but you're not even stopping there. You think that a gambler could have *infinite* money. The concept of money itself becomes meaningless once infinity is invoked, but you don't seem to even understand why that's the case.

Edit to add: you also don't seem to understand that you can't do math with infinity the same way you can do math with integers. +INF - +INF, where both infinities are countable, is indeterminate. There are actually a countably-infinite number of answers. Here are three:
a) +INF - +INF = 0
b) +INF - +INF = +INF
c) +INF - +INF = 7.
(see http://math.stackexchange.com/q/60783 for the lay examples of how to derive these answers)

Quote:

Again, just answer the question MathExtremist. Does the marginale system yield a minimum of +1 betting unit by the time a win is had? Yes or No.

I told you before, the answer to that question is "not always." If you really mean "Does the martingale always yield at least +1 betting unit by the time a win is had" then the answer is clearly no.

Quote:

You believe there's a better way to MAKE money in the casino as a player than what I do? Please enlighten us, because I'd love to find a way to make more than 100k/year inside of the casino without the monotony of card counting and machine hustling, while not breaking the law in doing so.

Here's a list of gamblers who make more money than you "in the casino as a player" doing something other than what you do:
http://www.pokerupdate.com/news/entertainment/top-10-biggest-all-time-live-poker-and-online-poker-winners-the-ultimate-list/

(insert excuse for why poker "doesn't count" here: _______________)

Quote:

As for my hourly rate, I don't have one. It changes from day to day. I might make $15/hr one day, and $115/hr the next. I've had says where my hourly was in the thousands. I don't consider an hourly rate anything of significance,

You can't divide and you call yourself a math guy? Annual earnings divided by annual hours worked is what? Is it above or below $50? $100? $200?

Quote:

You know what a nice benefit is, MathExtremist? Making TWICE the money I'd have otherwise made with my degree in the field of my chosen profession, working the same numbers of hours week to week, but being able to take time off whenever I'd like, for what ever reason I'd like, and go in whenever I'd like, and leave whenever I'd like.

I'm right there with you. I'm doing at least 2x the average rate for a principle software consultant (a job related to my degree), plus I work from home with no bankroll risk. It's nice being self-employed, no doubt.

Quote:

Unlike most AP's, MathExtremist, I consider all of my expenses a business expense. Food, Gas, Rent, Clothing, all of that goes towards the bottom line of my life, and those items come first. So when I say I'm coming up on two consecutive years of 100k+, I don't mean the sum of all total wins-losses, I'm speaking specifically about the amount of money I put away from January 1, 2014 to January 1, 2015.

Hey look, if you can run lean and save money, great. The AP plays you're relying on now won't always be there so it's good to put money away for the future. Me, I'm investing in bringing that future about. That's a major difference between us. That, and you think "infinite money" is a thing.

p.s. I wouldn't categorize your clothes as a business expense. That'll get you in trouble with the IRS. Even if you're filing as a professional gambler that still doesn't mean everything you spend is deductible. See a competent tax adviser.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

It should be easy to figure out. Card counting is the worst (in terms of player advantage) AP blackjack move out there.

Your comment makes little since, how can card counting be the worst (in terms of player advantage) AP blackjack move out there? Its the "only" move out there for APBJ that can be relied upon with consistency.

Quote: MathExtremist

No, that's just your invented strawman, I'm not relying on any infinities at all, and infinity isn't required to disprove the Martingale. Quite the contrary, when you rely upon finite reality, not some imaginary infinite counterfactual, the Martingale is easily examined and demonstrated to not have the 100% success rate you think it does.

You are relying on a fictitious gambler having more than all of the money in existence. "More than all of the money" is clearly not part of reality. A gambler with all of the money in existence wouldn't even have a casino to bet against because the casino would have no money. A gambler with *half* of all the money in existence, with the other half belonging to the casino, still doesn't need to wait for an infinite number of losses. Do you know how many losses a gambler with half of the world's money would be able to sustain before busting out? 45. Not even 100. Just 45.

It's obviously impossible for someone to have more than all of the money in existence, but you're not even stopping there. You think that a gambler could have *infinite* money. The concept of money itself becomes meaningless once infinity is invoked, but you don't seem to even understand why that's the case.

Edit to add: you also don't seem to understand that you can't do math with infinity the same way you can do math with integers. +INF - +INF, where both infinities are countable, is indeterminate. There are actually a countably-infinite number of answers. Here are three:
a) +INF - +INF = 0
b) +INF - +INF = +INF
c) +INF - +INF = 7.
(see http://math.stackexchange.com/q/60783 for the lay examples of how to derive these answers)


I told you before, the answer to that question is "not always." If you really mean "Does the martingale always yield at least +1 betting unit by the time a win is had" then the answer is clearly no.


Here's a list of gamblers who make more money than you "in the casino as a player" doing something other than what you do:
http://www.pokerupdate.com/news/entertainment/top-10-biggest-all-time-live-poker-and-online-poker-winners-the-ultimate-list/

(insert excuse for why poker "doesn't count" here: _______________)

You can't divide and you call yourself a math guy? Annual earnings divided by annual hours worked is what? Is it above or below $50? $100? $200?


I'm right there with you. I'm doing at least 2x the average rate for a principle software consultant (a job related to my degree), plus I work from home with no bankroll risk. It's nice being self-employed, no doubt.


Hey look, if you can run lean and save money, great. The AP plays you're relying on now won't always be there so it's good to put money away for the future. Me, I'm investing in bringing that future about. That's a major difference between us. That, and you think "infinite money" is a thing.

p.s. I wouldn't categorize your clothes as a business expense. That'll get you in trouble with the IRS. Even if you're filing as a professional gambler that still doesn't mean everything you spend is deductible. See a competent tax adviser.

Inverted strawman? Now I know you're trolling, and considering you're a software consultant and I'm the AP, you're just continuing to lose credibility as you continue this incessant resistance to admit you are wrong.

Further, to say "Not always" or "No" to a design that always yields the minimum result of +1 or better is just being pedantic. You're putting your whole argument on the wings or a purely theoretical possibility, I'm putting mine on the reality of the probabilities involved.

Yet somehow you keep arguing about infinite bankroll. Nobody, literally, gives a s%^& about an infinite bankroll MathExtremist. The wealth of a nation, the earth, isn't tied up in financial currency. Further, are you suggesting that lines of credit cannot be established past the actual sum of all currency? Maybe I need to school you in a little bit of banking once we are done with this? lol.

Just give up your stupid, pointless, counter intuitive argument that relies solely on a theoretical possibility, and admit to the fact that the system is specifically designed to yield +1 or better, after the completion of its cycle. That's all I'm asking of you, because that's all this argument has been about, the design of the system. Not its practical usage or the constraints in the real world which could confine it or render it useless, because I listed those long before you even WROTE a response to this thread.

I'm also going to completely IGNORE the fact that you just posted a link to the top 10 all time highest earners in poker, rather than looking at the median professional poker player working 50-60 hours a week.

And of course I know how to divide MathExtremist, I'm just saying that I don't have an "hourly" rate that is predictable, past a lower level $15/hr on exceptionally slow days. Last year I made $36.31/hr, this year I'm making $33.02/hr. The rest of my team averages between $24-28/hr. And before you get started talking about tax deductions and filing taxes, let me just shut you down right there ME. I don't need your advice, I didn't solicit your advice, and I'm well aware that clothing shouldn't be itemized as a write-off. My point, since your brain clearly doesn't function properly enough to understand it (or you're simply just trolling) was that I factor my PERSONAL profits for the year, after my expenses.

Trust me on this one, please. I do not need financial or tax advice from the likes of you.

Consistency has nothing to do with it.

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Consistency has nothing to do with it.

It has literally everything to do with everything in the AP world.

Quote: Exoter175

Further, to say "Not always" or "No" to a design that always yields the minimum result of +1 or better is just being pedantic.

It doesn't, not "always." The difference between "most of the time" and "all of the time" is not pedantic, it's qualitative. And if that's not enough, you're happy to criticize me for not being realistic while, in the same breath, you invoke lines of credit greater than the global money supply? Yep, that's firmly grounded in reality.

Quote:

Just give up your stupid, pointless, counter intuitive argument that relies solely on a theoretical possibility, and admit to the fact that the system is specifically designed to yield +1 or better, after the completion of its cycle

which doesn't always happen. The "design" doesn't matter, the reality does. Just ask the designers of the original Tacoma Narrows. And the hypocrisy of criticizing me for relying on "a theoretical possibility" when your position is "in theory, the martingale works" is hilarious.

Your long, repetitive screed is equivalent to saying "The martingale always wins one unit when it wins." That's a tautology: all bets always win when they win. Here's a roulette system that always wins one unit when it wins: always bet on red. Just ignore the losses and every system "works."

Quote:

I'm also going to completely IGNORE the fact that you just posted a link to the top 10 all time highest earners in poker, rather than looking at the median professional poker player working 50-60 hours a week.

I'm not the one comparing myself to the greatest possible professional gambler. You didn't say "I'm an average AP" you said "You believe there's a better way to MAKE money in the casino as a player than what I do?" The answer is yeah, there is. There are lots of APs even on this site making plenty of money not counting cards or slot hustling *or* playing poker. They're just not bragging about how great they are because they have better things to do, like make money. You said "please enlighten us, because I'd love to find a way to make more than 100k/year inside of the casino without the monotony of card counting and machine hustling." Consider yourself enlightened. And really, read the archives here. There are lots of discussions of how to AP that aren't card counting.

Quote:

And of course I know how to divide MathExtremist, I'm just saying that I don't have an "hourly" rate that is predictable, past a lower level $15/hr on exceptionally slow days. Last year I made $36.31/hr, this year I'm making $33.02/hr. The rest of my team averages between $24-28/hr.

Again, not a terrible hourly average especially after expenses. If you're taking home $33/hr and a total of 100k, that's over 3000 hours/year of income-generating work. I admire your stamina. I certainly don't work that hard.

Hole-carding, loss rebates, mailers, identifying vulnerable dealers for payout mistakes and if you care to differentiate it, shuffle tracking are some of those techniques that could be more valuable than counting in certain situations. While card counting is the immediately accessible blackjack AP methodology it isn't the only one and it certainly isn't the most lucrative. This is coming from someone who primarily counts cards, so I'm not trying to state this point just to support my own methods.

In psychology using what you immediately think of for a reference as a heuristic rather than considering many options is called the representativeness heuristic. It's a common mistake that can get people into trouble.

Quote: MathExtremist

I'm not the one comparing myself to the greatest possible professional gambler. You didn't say "I'm an average AP" you said "You believe there's a better way to MAKE money in the casino as a player than what I do?" The answer is yeah, there is. There are lots of APs even on this site making plenty of money not counting cards or slot hustling *or* playing poker. They're just not bragging about how great they are because they have better things to do, like make money. You said "please enlighten us, because I'd love to find a way to make more than 100k/year inside of the casino without the monotony of card counting and machine hustling." Consider yourself enlightened. And really, read the archives here. There are lots of discussions of how to AP that aren't card counting.
Again, not a terrible hourly average especially after expenses. If you're taking home $33/hr and a total of 100k, that's over 3000 hours/year of income-generating work. I admire your stamina. I certainly don't work that hard.

Where did I ever compare myself to the greatest possible professional gambler? Please point that out. Further, I'm not an average AP, not even remotely. I've spent the better part of a decade honing my skills as an AP, and unlike most of them (and KewlJ can attest to this) I've learned EVERY facet, and he more than I would know that most APs don't accumulate the entire repertoire of "Advantage Play Abilities". Some stick to Blackjack/VP like KJ does, and he does very well for himself in doing so. Some of us, like myself, have to expand into every possible niche we can find, like loss rebates, multiplier days, APBJ, DI, Machine Hustling, you name it. Its actually more dependent on your geographical area than anything. An "AP" in the heartland will have a different set of skills, than say, an AP on fremont street.

I've learned these things, and short of Wheel Bias, there really isn't much about AP that I don't know or don't act upon, so when I say that there are few AP's out there (by the way, Advantage Player is not synonymous with Poker Player) who can do what I do, and make what I make, I'm being pretty honest about it. I've met a looooooooooot of AP's from every walk of life and with varying skill sets, and very FEW have a large repertoire like I have. Akin to memorizing index plays, an AP's repertoire will help squeeze +EV out of their day.

Beyond that, your response being Poker Players doesn't help me here ME, because you're talking about the "best" in the world to ever have done it, and over 2-3 decades worth they've amassed those fortunes. Again, a really "great" poker player is going to be a byproduct of his or her geographical area. If you have one poker room in a 500 mile radius, you're not bringing home 30 million over 18 years. You're also not likely to bring home 100k/year.

You, said (not I) that there were better ways to make money in the gambling industry as a player. Merely representing the top 10 in lifelong earnings doesn't validate your point. There are AP's out there who have made WAYYYYYYYYYYY more than 30 million over 18 years. S$%^, I know a guy who cleaned out a Caesars property this year for 1.2 million in a single trip. I am by no means "average" but I do not live in Vegas, or AC, or Pennsylvania, or even Tunica/Biloxi, my skills would be better utilized in one of those places, but I am nowhere near them. To make what I make, here, far surpasses what most of the "professional" poker players make in my region. These guys barely clear 50k/yr in a good year, and they are some of the best in the area. Hell, my team made 50k in 13 days on a specific machine before it "went down", two weeks of work for their yearly winnings. Its stuff like this that you personally would never figure out or find, but I would, and a big reason why I have no real "average hourly" because there are going to be weeks, months where I make $30/hr doing what I do after all of my expenses, and then every once in a while I'll make $150-200/hr for a week or two and just clean house.

This is precisely why I have started to travel around the country, to find these opportunities because my skill set and knowledge would allow me to really push the envelope past 100k/yr, which is already more than I need since every single dime I make goes towards my expenses, and then my retirement.

You talk about not working hard and admiring my stamina, perhaps its you who isn't fulfilling their potential, not the other way around to those who AP for a living. At the end of the day though, I'll take what I do and what I make over making half as much for the field in which I would be working with my degree, and I've got to say, not having to answer to anyone is nice.

Still doesn't take away from the fact that you're trolling by arguing semantics, rather than answering the obvious, which is that when the cycle completes on the martingale, it always returns a minimum of +1 unit, and yet you can't swallow your pride to say it, as our argument would be over.

Quote: Minty

Hole-carding, loss rebates, mailers, identifying vulnerable dealers for payout mistakes and if you care to differentiate it, shuffle tracking are some of those techniques that could be more valuable than counting in certain situations. While card counting is the immediately accessible blackjack AP methodology it isn't the only one and it certainly isn't the most lucrative. This is coming from someone who primarily counts cards, so I'm not trying to state this point just to support my own methods.

In psychology using what you immediately think of for a reference as a heuristic rather than considering many options is called the representativeness heuristic. It's a common mistake that can get people into trouble.

All of which I do, and all of that goes towards Card Counting in my book, because no Card Counter that I know of, is going to refuse playing against a dealer who makes payout mistakes, flashes their hole card, exposes cards prior to and after a player cut, etc. Once we pickup on these, we exploit them, its in our nature to do so.

I mention that, because they aren't consistent, aren't repetitive in nature, and its not something you can steadily rely on, like card counting, which is precisely why I attribute those skills towards the card counting tree of APBJ.

Quote: Exoter175

Further, I'm not an average AP, not even remotely. I've spent the better part of a decade honing my skills as an AP, and unlike most of them (and KewlJ can attest to this) I've learned EVERY facet, and he more than I would know that most APs don't accumulate the entire repertoire of "Advantage Play Abilities". Some stick to Blackjack/VP like KJ does, and he does very well for himself in doing so. Some of us, like myself, have to expand into every possible niche we can find, like loss rebates, multiplier days, APBJ, DI, Machine Hustling, you name it.

You've spent nearly a decade honing your skills, you're far better than the average AP, and your average profit is $33/hour. Just a factoid for anyone out there considering the AP lifestyle.

Or maybe you're just blowing smoke and can't make up a consistent story. In another thread, you report preternatural dice throwing profits:

Quote: Exoter175

I would imagine that number would likely be in the realm of ~$1.75 per roll over the span of all of my rolls, in terms of raw profit, though I imagine that if I crunch the numbers, I'll find that the number might actually be considerably higher, perhaps into the ~$3.25/roll territory.

So a guy with the ability to average $3.25/roll when shooting dice would rather make $33/hour hustling slots?

I call B.S. If you could win $3.25/roll as an AP, why on Earth are you playing blackjack or slots? Stand at a dice table for an hour, roll 100 times, make an expected $325/hour. Or double your bet, make an expected $650/hour. But you're busy "expanding into every possible niche that we can find"? Give me a break. That doesn't even have a veneer of credibility.

Quote:

Still doesn't take away from the fact that you're trolling by arguing semantics, rather than answering the obvious, which is that when the cycle completes on the martingale, it always returns a minimum of +1 unit, and yet you can't swallow your pride to say it, as our argument would be over.

Actually, that's the first time you've said it correctly. "When the cycle on the martingale completes, it returns a minimum of +1 unit" is an accurate statement and I agree with it.

Of course, that's the same irrelevant tautology you presented before because you've defined "the martingale cycle" as "when the martingale series of bets wins at least +1 unit." That's fabulously circular logic, arguing that a definition is true by relying on that definition. When you ignore the times the martingale cycle doesn't complete, all that's left are the times it does.

I think we're done here.

Quote: MathExtremist

You've spent nearly a decade honing your skills, you're far better than the average AP, and your average profit is $33/hour. Just a factoid for anyone out there considering the AP lifestyle.

Or maybe you're just blowing smoke and can't make up a consistent story. In another thread, you report preternatural dice throwing profits:

So a guy with the ability to average $3.25/roll when shooting dice would rather make $33/hour hustling slots?

I call B.S. If you could win $3.25/roll as an AP, why on Earth are you playing blackjack or slots? Stand at a dice table for an hour, roll 100 times, make an expected $325/hour. Or double your bet, make an expected $650/hour. But you're busy "expanding into every possible niche that we can find"? Give me a break. That doesn't even have a veneer of credibility.

Actually, that's the first time you've said it correctly. "When the cycle on the martingale completes, it returns a minimum of +1 unit" is an accurate statement and I agree with it.

Of course, that's the same irrelevant tautology you presented before because you've defined "the martingale cycle" as "when the martingale series of bets wins at least +1 unit." That's fabulously circular logic, arguing that a definition is true by relying on that definition. When you ignore the times the martingale cycle doesn't complete, all that's left are the times it does.

I think we're done here.

We're "done" because you have a seriously bad case of misinterpretation, misrepresentation of facts, and a penchant for avoiding answering questions you don't like the answer to.

Also, I f%^&ing "LOL" at your throw the dice 100 times per hour comment, that's how I know you're just trolling your heart out.

Quote: Exoter175

Quote: MathExtremist

You've spent nearly a decade honing your skills, you're far better than the average AP, and your average profit is $33/hour. Just a factoid for anyone out there considering the AP lifestyle.

Or maybe you're just blowing smoke and can't make up a consistent story. In another thread, you report preternatural dice throwing profits:

So a guy with the ability to average $3.25/roll when shooting dice would rather make $33/hour hustling slots?

I call B.S. If you could win $3.25/roll as an AP, why on Earth are you playing blackjack or slots? Stand at a dice table for an hour, roll 100 times, make an expected $325/hour. Or double your bet, make an expected $650/hour. But you're busy "expanding into every possible niche that we can find"? Give me a break. That doesn't even have a veneer of credibility.

Actually, that's the first time you've said it correctly. "When the cycle on the martingale completes, it returns a minimum of +1 unit" is an accurate statement and I agree with it.

Of course, that's the same irrelevant tautology you presented before because you've defined "the martingale cycle" as "when the martingale series of bets wins at least +1 unit." That's fabulously circular logic, arguing that a definition is true by relying on that definition. When you ignore the times the martingale cycle doesn't complete, all that's left are the times it does.

I think we're done here.

We're "done" because you have a seriously bad case of misinterpretation, misrepresentation of facts, and a penchant for avoiding answering questions you don't like the answer to.

Also, I f%^&ing "LOL" at your throw the dice 100 times per hour comment, that's how I know you're just trolling your heart out.

Exoter, I have to ask. "Registering in the top .2% of the world in intelligence quotients" makes you one of the smartest people in the world, past, present or future. As one of the smartest people in the world why do you feel the need to be confrontational, use vulgarity and resort to personal insults to present your arguments? Is it simply because you are being allowed to? Surely one of the smartest people in the world can hold his own with us mere mortals without those tactics.

Quote: 1BB

Quote: Exoter175

Quote: MathExtremist

You've spent nearly a decade honing your skills, you're far better than the average AP, and your average profit is $33/hour. Just a factoid for anyone out there considering the AP lifestyle.

Or maybe you're just blowing smoke and can't make up a consistent story. In another thread, you report preternatural dice throwing profits:

So a guy with the ability to average $3.25/roll when shooting dice would rather make $33/hour hustling slots?

I call B.S. If you could win $3.25/roll as an AP, why on Earth are you playing blackjack or slots? Stand at a dice table for an hour, roll 100 times, make an expected $325/hour. Or double your bet, make an expected $650/hour. But you're busy "expanding into every possible niche that we can find"? Give me a break. That doesn't even have a veneer of credibility.

Actually, that's the first time you've said it correctly. "When the cycle on the martingale completes, it returns a minimum of +1 unit" is an accurate statement and I agree with it.

Of course, that's the same irrelevant tautology you presented before because you've defined "the martingale cycle" as "when the martingale series of bets wins at least +1 unit." That's fabulously circular logic, arguing that a definition is true by relying on that definition. When you ignore the times the martingale cycle doesn't complete, all that's left are the times it does.

I think we're done here.

We're "done" because you have a seriously bad case of misinterpretation, misrepresentation of facts, and a penchant for avoiding answering questions you don't like the answer to.

Also, I fucking "LOL" at your throw the dice 100 times per hour comment, that's how I know you're just trolling your heart out.

Exoter, I have to ask. "Registering in the top .2% of the world in intelligence quotients" makes you one of the smartest people in the world, past, present or future. As one of the smartest people in the world why do you feel the need to be confrontational, use vulgarity and resort to personal insults to present your arguments? Is it simply because you are being allowed to? Surely one of the smartest people in the world can hold his own with us mere mortals without those tactics.

My experience with people on the top is that they are very confrontational, lol.

It's frustrating when people get into these arguments as they tend to become circular. Even I was losing my temper. Everyone has their boiling point and its not always 100 C.

Quote: darkoz

My experience with people on the top is that they are very confrontational, lol.

It's frustrating when people get into these arguments as they tend to become circular. Even I was losing my temper. Everyone has their boiling point and its not always 100 C.

There are two worlds – theoretical/analytical world and real world. Engineers, mathematicians, statisticians, doctors, private institutions, public agencies, etc. often rely on theoretical/analytical data to come up with designs, risk management processes, public/private regulations & policies, and other agendas.

Let’s use the progressive or Martingales betting as an example. Yes, it is possible to lose 10K in a row, and so does the catastrophic meteor event that will wipe out all lives on Earth. But let’s all be realistic, how likely are these two events that will occur in YOUR LIFETIMES? Would you design or establish a policy base on these theoretically possible, but realistically impossible (or extremely highly unlikely) events?

Even though losing 10 billion consecutive hands is possible, IMO the Martingales system works 100% of the time under an absolute non-constraint condition, and majority of the time in a favorable but limited constraint condition. The casino institutions are not stupid to allow policies that could/would erode their profits. So the bigger picture here is the risk/reward benefit when one were to apply Martingales system if a favorable and limited constraint condition is allowed by the casinos.