Thread Rating:

Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1353
  • Posts: 22454
October 3rd, 2010 at 10:18:55 AM permalink
Quote: guido111

Nice observation. I had not thought about it in that sense.
Then would 1 billion people using a system for 1 bet also be the same thing?

My point only was that NO single person could ever see 1 billion rounds in a casino in a lifetime.
I would make that a challenge for those that disagree with me.



To avoid derailing this thread, let's table this until your post-football thread.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
October 3rd, 2010 at 10:56:28 AM permalink
Quote: MichaelBluejay


mkl64321, you talk about this alleged burden, but you don't suggest an alternative...even though I asked. I'm giving 98 a way to challenge the results. You think that's burdensome because he's not competent to challenge my code. Okay, so in your universe, how exactly *would* 98 challenge the results?



I must inhabit the same universe as you do; otherwise, we wouldn't be able to have this conversation in the first place.

I didn't suggest an alternative because without radically altering the terms of the contract, there IS no alternative. It's not unlike one person standing up and making a speech in Swahili (however powerfully logical and persuasive), with the correctness of the speech to decide a bet. Of COURSE, I realize the inherent difficulty here, but it's a conflict that is naturally brought about when science confronts belief. This, in turn, is brought about by illogic:

1. 98steps says he has a winning craps system.
2. The posters on this board, the Wizard, 400 years of mathematics, and the bitter experience of millions of gamblers say that no such thing can possibly exist.
3. 98steps then accepts a challenge to prove or disprove the validity of his system--VIA THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

So if he didn't believe the science before, why would he believe it after the challenge showed the science to be correct? After all, strictly speaking, the simulation is unnecessary--the math already proves what we all know to be evident.

In any case, a neutral third party arbitrating this whole mess would certainly ask for an independent evaluation of your source code. Since 98steps will almost certainly challenge your results, you would probably save time--and get your money faster--if someone else verified your code. I don't know if the Wiz is conversant enough to do that, but he would be a logical choice.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
Zcore13
Zcore13
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 3564
October 3rd, 2010 at 10:57:03 AM permalink
Question...

Is someome present when mrbluejay runs his simulation. Is it possible this system, by some miracle of miracles, produces a profit after the first try, but then it gets run again and loses? Then the 2nd run is what is used as proof that it failed? I would think someone from both sides would have to see the running of the similation???
I am an employee of a Casino. Former Table Games Director,, current Pit Supervisor. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
7winner
7winner
Joined: May 31, 2010
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 198
October 3rd, 2010 at 10:59:36 AM permalink
Quote: 98steps

I have developed a craps strategy that utilizes a combination of 0% wagers and systematic betting progressions. Thru fairly extensive testing it is trending at 95% effectiveness, winning between 500-800 (average win 700) on 19 out of 20 sessions, losing +/-4500 on the one session. I have tested my theories at home as well as on live tables.
If a system is proven to be a consistant winner, is there anyone out there that would consider financing its operation?



Quite an interesting thought to open a thread here.

Yes, I would.
I would need to see data that you have gathered first.
Then I need to know your meaning of the phrase "consistent winner" and for how long it could be a winner.
Then I would need to see your system and test it myself so I would be satisfied with it's risks.

But after all that, why would I need you?
I'd be off quietly grinding out a living and making many shake their heads at me at what I'm doing.

I have lived most of my life in casinos, spent most of my life dealing Craps, and I could honestly say I have seen it all. Us dice dealers know what I am talking about.

I will wait to read it in your book.

But as for the Craps challenge, after reading this very long thread, I do not think it will happen, but if it does I already know what the end result will be, as many others know aslo.
7 winner chicken dinner!
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
October 3rd, 2010 at 11:01:40 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

The one guy who accepted my betting system challenge didn't argue when I told him he lost. Not for one second. Here is the whole story.



The first and the final paragraphs of the story imply that the behavior of that person was highly unusual, even unique. You state that every other person you've dealt with in a situation like this has tried to weasel out of it.

98steps has passed through the initial stages of the gauntlet--he has tendered the actual system and has tentatively agreed to the contract--but it's a long way from contemplation to consummation, as I learned on high school dates. I would be gratified to see this challenge actually come to fruition, though.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
October 3rd, 2010 at 11:03:57 AM permalink
Quote: Zcore13

Question...

Is someome present when mrbluejay runs his simulation. Is it possible this system, by some miracle of miracles, produces a profit after the first try, but then it gets run again and loses? Then the 2nd run is what is used as proof that it failed? I would think someone from both sides would have to see the running of the similation???



I would imagine that's the reason for the 1 billion "rounds": to reduce to essentially nil the probability that the simulation will produce an aberrant result.

I think MBJ is willing to lay 1:10 against the possibility of that happening. I certainly would be.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
7winner
7winner
Joined: May 31, 2010
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 198
October 3rd, 2010 at 11:08:48 AM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

Quote: Wizard

The one guy who accepted my betting system challenge didn't argue when I told him he lost. Not for one second. Here is the whole story.



The first and the final paragraphs of the story imply that the behavior of that person was highly unusual, even unique. You state that every other person you've dealt with in a situation like this has tried to weasel out of it.

98steps has passed through the initial stages of the gauntlet--he has tendered the actual system and has tentatively agreed to the contract--but it's a long way from contemplation to consummation, as I learned on high school dates. I would be gratified to see this challenge actually come to fruition, though.



"but it's a long way from contemplation to consummation, as I learned on high school dates."

mlk...you are so good with words and descriptions in your posts.

This old man, me, got a kick out of that.
The best simile or metaphor ever! ( I dont' know which one it is, and too lazy to look it up)

Keep them coming
added: I see you are an English teacher.
I got it now. Never liked my English teachers in school, but back then they could hit you with a stick.
7 winner chicken dinner!
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1353
  • Posts: 22454
October 3rd, 2010 at 11:19:15 AM permalink
Quote: 7winner


"but it's a long way from contemplation to consummation, as I learned on high school dates."



I liked that too. It was a VERY long way in my case.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
7winner
7winner
Joined: May 31, 2010
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 198
October 3rd, 2010 at 12:06:51 PM permalink
Quote: Zcore13

Question...
Is someome present when mrbluejay runs his simulation.


Mr. Bluejay would have to start the simulation.
I think when the Wizard ran his, he offered the challenger to be present and press the button so to speak.

Quote: Zcore13

Is it possible this system, by some miracle of miracles, produces a profit after the first try, but then it gets run again and loses?

Then the 2nd run is what is used as proof that it failed? I would think someone from both sides would have to see the running of the similation???



Yes it is possible, but only by a total failure of the RNG or Mr. Bluejay's computer catching fire..
The probability of the miracle that you described actually happening is 0.

From Mr. Bluejay's own website:
"I realize that we all want to believe that there's a way to beat the casinos, because knowing a guaranteed way to win would be a lot of fun.
But no such way exists, and wanting something else to be true doesn't make it so. "

could it be said any better?
maybe mlk could!
7 winner chicken dinner!
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
October 3rd, 2010 at 1:44:49 PM permalink
Quote: MichaelBluejay

I'm willing to hear what MathExtremist says about my RNG results.

Quote:

Finally, I simulated 100 million dice rolls (10x more than suggested) and here were the results:

1: 1667514
2: 1667513
3: 1667511
4: 1667512
5: 1667515
6: 1667513



First, this only adds up to 10M rolls, not 100.

Second, there are two more tests I'd do prior to kicking off the sim:

1) Game result distribution test. Do a distribution of random(6) + random(6) and test for the appropriate probabilities for each sum [2..12] (1/36, 2/36, etc).
2) Serial correlation test. Do a distribution of (random(6)+random(6), random(6)+random(6)) and test for appropriate probabilities for each sum following each other sum. In plain English, make sure that the chances of rolling a 7 aren't greater after certain numbers than certain others.

I may have a reply from runrev.com by Wednesday or so. I'll post that here.

"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563

  • Jump to: