MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
• Posts: 6526
October 13th, 2010 at 12:05:04 PM permalink
Quote: 98steps

The complete bankroll necessary to run my system effectively is \$5000. To date I have contracted \$3500 with my Investors.

Yes, the sum of the investments provide a liquid bankroll for for me to operation of my system with very specific constraints.

You've gotten several people to invest in you playing a system at the dice table. What terms are you offering them? Suppose you raised the rest of the \$5000, then went to Vegas and won \$1000 for a total of \$6000? How much of that \$6000 goes back to your investors and how much goes to you?
"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
98steps
Joined: Sep 14, 2010
• Posts: 119
October 13th, 2010 at 12:08:24 PM permalink
Quote: goatcabin

Suppose your system generates 90% winning sessions, with the 10% losing sessions over-balancing those so that you expected to lose 1% of your total bet handle. Let's take a simple example:

.9 probability of winning 400 units = 360
.1 probability of losing 4000 units = -400
expected net loss of 40 units
If you play ten sessions, you have to win them all to be ahead; the probability of winning 10 sessions is about .34.
If you play 100 sessions, you have to win 91 to be ahead; the probability of winning 91 or more sessions is about .45.
Of course, the probability of losing the very first session is .1, not really a long shot.

Your equation is accurate. But if I am able to change just one of those variables, then I have a positive expectation.

.9 probability of winning 800 units = 720
.1 probability of losing 4000 units = -400
expected net profit of 320 units

You are correct also in stating that the chance of losing the very first session is concern. I have discussed that possible outcome in great depth with all of my investors.
98steps
Joined: Sep 14, 2010
• Posts: 119
October 13th, 2010 at 12:13:49 PM permalink
Quote: goatcabin

You haven't learned about squeezing the balloon, I guess.

98steps
Joined: Sep 14, 2010
• Posts: 119
October 13th, 2010 at 12:17:38 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

You've gotten several people to invest in you playing a system at the dice table. What terms are you offering them? Suppose you raised the rest of the \$5000, then went to Vegas and won \$1000 for a total of \$6000? How much of that \$6000 goes back to your investors and how much goes to you?

Per my agreements with my Investors, as a group they receive 25% of my system's gross earnings for a 6 month period. I receive 25%, and 50% is allocated to additional bankroll.
goatcabin
Joined: Feb 13, 2010
• Posts: 664
October 13th, 2010 at 12:44:52 PM permalink
Quote: 98steps

Your equation is accurate. But if I am able to change just one of those variables, then I have a positive expectation.

.9 probability of winning 800 units = 720
.1 probability of losing 4000 units = -400
expected net profit of 320 units

As I said before, you haven't learned about squeezing the balloon. No matter what you do, the peak of the graph is always going to be on the negative side of the breakeven point. The higher the winning in the winning sessions, the lower the probability. The lower the probability of the loss, the greater the magnitude thereof.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Cheers, Alan Shank "How's that for a squabble, Pugh?" Peter Boyle as Mister Moon in "Yellowbeard"
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
• Posts: 7224
October 13th, 2010 at 12:49:32 PM permalink
Quote: 98steps

Your equation is accurate. But if I am able to change just one of those variables, then I have a positive expectation.

.9 probability of winning 800 units = 720
.1 probability of losing 4000 units = -400
expected net profit of 320 units

You are correct also in stating that the chance of losing the very first session is concern. I have discussed that possible outcome in great depth with all of my investors.

In a negative EV game it is IMPOSSIBLE to have a .9 probability of winning 800 and a .1 probability of losing 4000.
IMPOSSIBLE IMPOSSIBLE IMPOSSIBLE
I am beginning to feel sad for you that you cannot understand this.....
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
• Posts: 6526
October 13th, 2010 at 1:32:10 PM permalink
Quote: 98steps

Your equation is accurate. But if I am able to change just one of those variables, then I have a positive expectation.

.9 probability of winning 800 units = 720
.1 probability of losing 4000 units = -400
expected net profit of 320 units

You are correct also in stating that the chance of losing the very first session is concern. I have discussed that possible outcome in great depth with all of my investors.

That's like saying "if I can change just one of the payouts on the passline to 2-to-1, then I have a positive expectation." Sure it's true, but where can you make that bet?

There is no combination of bets in a casino that gives you a 90% probability of winning 800 units and a 10% probability of losing 4000. That combination of bets would have an 8% edge over the house. In order for that 8% edge to occur, at least one of your bets must have a player edge. Which one is it?
"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
Zcore13
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
• Posts: 3564
October 13th, 2010 at 3:06:07 PM permalink
Well, I actually think there are some combination of bets a casino gives you that you can win money. You just have to look for special promotions and take advantage. I've heard of a few recently. My Casino recently had a promotion where it paid 2-1 on blackjacks and 3-1 on suited blackjacks. The max payout is \$300 for a Blackjack and it was limited to three different hours during the day and was available only for a month (and again soon in December 2010). I beleive during these times the player actually has the advantage over the house.
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.
goatcabin
Joined: Feb 13, 2010
• Posts: 664
October 13th, 2010 at 4:52:04 PM permalink
Quote: 98steps

If you squeeze a balloon on one side, it bulges out on the other side. Gambling on negative-expectation games is the same thing. Anything you do to increase the probability of a winning session increase the amount of the (rarer) loss. Anything you do to increase the amount of winnings reduces the probability of those winnings.

Believe me, I have long experience simulating (and playing) different strategies. Take an example:

\$5 pass, take 3, 4, 5X odds. \$500 bankroll, \$100 extendable win goal, stop after 400 rolls and a loss
20,000 sessions
bust: 1026
reach one or more win goals: 13496
reach 400 rolls: 5478
overall average net result: -\$3.67, SD 195
winning sessions: 13887
breakeven sessions: 49
losing sessions: 6064

So, I decide to lower my win goal to \$50.
20,000 sessions
bust: 805
reach one of more win goals: 16232
reach 400 rolls: 2963
overall average net result: -\$2.39 SD \$156
winning sessions: 16289
breakeven sessions: 16
losing sessions: 3695

Why the lower average loss? Simply because the sessions ended sooner, so the total bet handle was less. The results are still very close to "edge * action", as I assure you they always will be.

Hey, why not have a loss limit and reduce the amount of the losses? Good idea. Let's reduce the bankroll to \$300, still \$50 win goal.
20,000 sessions
bust: 3042
reach one of more win goals: 16028
reach 400 rolls: 930
overall average net result: -\$2.16 SD \$139
winning sessions: 16058
breakeven sessions: 11
losing sessions: 3931

The loss is even smaller. Why? You're busting more often, which means you stop betting, and you're still stopping 80+% of the time for the win goal. Lower bet handle means lower loss, i.e. EDGE * ACTION.

Do you see what I mean by "squeezing the balloon"? You can change the shape of the graph, but you cannot change the mean outcome from edge * action. In these example the edge is very small, because most of the bet handle is made up of odds bets, but it's there and you cannot get around it by any combination of strategies - win goals, loss limits, progressions, regressions, offsetting bets.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Cheers, Alan Shank "How's that for a squabble, Pugh?" Peter Boyle as Mister Moon in "Yellowbeard"
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010