Craps Strategy Investment Opportunity?
Quote: 98stepsI have every confidence that my system will bear out over the long run, provided that real world restraints are in place.
It appears that 98steps now knows that the" challenge rule" of 1 billion resolved wagers can not be beat.
Quote: 98stepsIt is my intention to use his $10,000 to bankroll my Vegas endeavers, and intend to publish my system in 1-3 years.
So it looks like we will have to wait 1 -3 years to read about it in a possible book.
Unless we are interested in investing in the system.
For that , we need to see and test the system ourselves.
I guess direct contact with 98steps would be in order.
He used this forum well to gain full advantage of that goal.
Quote: 7winnerIt appears that 98steps now knows that the" challenge rule" of 1 billion resolved wagers can not be beat.
So it looks like we will have to wait 1 -3 years to read about it in a possible book.
Unless we are interested in investing in the system.
For that , we need to see and test the system ourselves.
I guess direct contact with 98steps would be in order.
He used this forum well to gain full advantage of that goal.
So, behind the scenes, this died? I was away over the weekend. To paraphrase what looks like what happened:
98steps used the knowledge of some folks on the forum to get his system programmed into a simulator, which showed decent results for a while but not 1B trials, then vanished.
Is that it in a nutshell?
Quote: MoscaSo, behind the scenes, this died? I was away over the weekend. To paraphrase what looks like what happened:
98steps used the knowledge of some folks on the forum to get his system programmed into a simulator, which showed decent results for a while but not 1B trials, then vanished.
Is that it in a nutshell?
I think that about sums it up.I think He took the challenge and lost without ever having to pony up the dough. I could be wrong.
Quote: MoscaSo, behind the scenes, this died? I was away over the weekend. To paraphrase what looks like what happened:
98steps used the knowledge of some folks on the forum to get his system programmed into a simulator, which showed decent results for a while but not 1B trials, then vanished.
Is that it in a nutshell?
Yes, seems to be the case here.
I can not blame 98 steps for his methods.
Maybe at first he was so confident that he could beat the "challenge rules" of 1B resolved wagers, but then after finding someone to program his system for computer simulations and seeing the results, he finally descended from his own cloud 9.
I would still like to see results of his system. How it does in short term play. Risk vs Reward.
Guess we have to contact him personally or wait for an upcoming book.
Where is 98steps' final decision?
Off to another thread!
Quote: 7winnerYes, seems to be the case here.
I can not blame 98 steps for his methods.
I hate to say "I told you so," but I predicted back on page 2 of this thread that he would flake at the point where the rules were agreed to, and it was time to pony up the money. Given that his system was tested for free, I can't blame him either.
If that is what indeed happened, I think some kind of public statement is called for. In part to thank those who helped him, and to apologize to Michael Bluejay for wasting his time.
I'm sure the next challenger is not far behind, and more or less the same thing will happen next time.
Quote: WizardIf that is what indeed happened, I think some kind of public statement is called for. In part to thank those who helped him, and to apologize to Michael Bluejay for wasting his time.
98 steps appears to be a nice guy through out this thread and I'm sure he will do what The Wizard has suggested he should do.
I still want to see the system in it's "Gibberish" form when Mr. Bluejay first received it and then the final "Grandma" version.
That seemed to put Mr.MB in orbit, and that alone has increased my curiosity!
Quote: MichaelBluejayChristiaan, I really don't want to see you lose $1000.
Why wouldn't you just hire a programmer for $50 to $100 like I suggested if all you want is a test of your system?
And even if your goal is really to win my $10,000, wouldn't you want to spend $50 first to make sure that you can really win the $10k, so you don't lose your $1000 in the process?
However, if you're really determined to proceed despite my warnings, then the rest of this message is about how we'd continue.
Looks like Mr. MB may get his wish.
I too would like to see the "Gibberish" that was the first written system, just to see why Mr. MB reacted the way he did.
Quote: WizardI hate to say "I told you so," but I predicted back on page 2 of this thread that he would flake at the point where the rules were agreed to, and it was time to pony up the money. Given that his system was tested for free, I can't blame him either.
If that is what indeed happened, I think some kind of public statement is called for. In part to thank those who helped him, and to apologize to Michael Bluejay for wasting his time.
I'm sure the next challenger is not far behind, and more or less the same thing will happen next time.
I was more optimistic. I only laid -500 against the challenge ever actually happening.
I think we all gave 98steps far more credit for being willing to follow through with the challenge than we should have (I gave him at least SOME chance, and I should have made my odds more like -500,000). He got a free test of his "system", wasted a whole bunch of people's time, and (I would hope) found out that his system was the steaming pile of offal that we all knew it must be, even before we actually saw it. I guess this is a collective lesson: nonsense is self-disproving. The assertion that the game of craps could be beaten by any system was inherently fallacious; the system itself didn't need to be "tested" to show that it was so. Where we veered off the mark was that we were basically testing two similar but not equal premises: 1. It is impossible to construct a winning craps "strategy" and 2. 98steps' system will not work. The truth of Premise 1 obviated the need to test Premise 2; the test of Premise 2, either way, would not have affected the validity of Premise 1 (since a "positive" result would have HAD to have been a statistical anomaly).
First of all, it's presumptuous to think that 98 has disappeared. He said he hoped to be ready by Monday. It's still Monday. And maybe something came up and he needs another day or two. I'm sure he has a life outside this forum. If I were him and still intended to proceed with the challenge, I would be miffed at all you guys right now.
Next, it's also presumptuous of you all to impugn 98steps' motives. I think he was genuinely sincere. I absolutely do not believe he came here to get a free test of his system. He didn't ask for one, it was *offered*. And you might recall that he didn't even accept the free offer at first anyway! Now, in your conspiracy-laden world you might think that cleverly enticing the offer was part of his secret plan, to which I say, whatever. This was all far too much trouble to go to just to save $50 (which is probably what he could have paid to get a programmer on Elance to write a sim, as I suggested on my challenge page). You can believe what you want, but do I believe that 98 came here with a clandestine plan to get someone to write a free sim for him? No. He got *offered* help with simulation, through no lobbying of his own, and he simply *accepted* it.
Finally, no apology to me is necessary. I tried to talk 98 out of going through with the challenge repeatedly, because I didn't want to see him lose his money. I would be unreasonable if I expected him to apologize for doing something I specifically suggested that he do.
Quote: MichaelBluejay
Finally, no apology to me is necessary. I tried to talk 98 out of going through with the challenge repeatedly, because I didn't want to see him lose his money. I would be unreasonable if I expected him to apologize for doing something I specifically asked him to do.
But...but...but...
Is his money where his mouth is? Did he put up the $1,000???
Quote: MichaelBluejayGeez, you guys!
First of all, it's presumptuous to think that 98 has disappeared. He said he hoped to be ready by Monday. It's still Monday. And maybe something came up and he needs another day or two. I'm sure he has a life outside this forum. If I were him and still intended to proceed with the challenge, I would be miffed at all you guys right now.
Monday update.
98steps has a final version of his Craps system programmed in Wincraps and is currently testing it for accuracy and I am sure some results.
Quote: MichaelBluejayNext, i's exceptionally presumptuous of you all to impugn 98steps' motives. I think he was genuinely sincere. I absolutely do not believe he came here to get a free test of his system. He didn't ask for one, it was *offered*. And you might recall that he didn't even accept the free offer at first anyway! Now, in your conspiracy-laden world you might think that cleverly enticing the offer was part of his secret plan, to which I say, whatever. This was all far too much trouble to go to just to save $50 (which is probably what he could have paid to get a programmer on Elance to write a sim, as I suggested on my challenge page). You can believe what you want, but do I believe that 98 came here with a clandestine plan to get someone to write a free sim for him? No. He got *offered* help with simulation, through no lobbying of his own, and he simply *accepted* it.
I was asked to assist first in helping to turn Gibberish into the "Grandma" version. My 2 cents, you still need your Grandma to know about Craps in order to understand it.
I only offered to program WinCraps in order for me to get better at programming in WC, and that has happened, thanks to 98step's and goatcabin's help.
I realize that by my offer and 98steps' decision to accept my offer, the challenge would have already taken place.
Quote: MichaelBluejayFinally, no apology to me is necessary. I tried to talk 98 out of going through with the challenge repeatedly, because I didn't want to see him lose his money. I would be unreasonable if I expected him to apologize for doing something I specifically asked him to do.
Mr. Bluejay, you are a good man.
We will soon hear from 98steps.
As of today, I have a complete WinCraps file of my system. Many many thanks to 7craps. Programming my system has been more of a challenge than either he or I ever imagined it would be. 7craps, thank you again.
Currently I am testing the program for errors and accuracy. I appologize for the delay, but feel it is only prudent to accept Mr. Bluejay's advice. Despite many opinions otherwise, I am not a blind system apologist with no regard for the mathmetical aspects of the game. To the contrary, I am very aware of the impact of probablility and statistics. That being said, Short run results of my ongoing tests continue to be very encouraging.
I wish to thank you all for your patience, especially Mr. Bluejay.
Quote: 98stepsI wish to thank you all for your patience, especially Mr. Bluejay.
No patience is necessary, since my challenge offer doesn't have an expiration date. Ironically I may be the one who's *least* impatient about the challenge actually happening.
I want to be perfectly clear, if 98steps walks away without accepting the challenge, there will be zero hard feelings on my part. And if he then came back a full year from now and wanted to try again, he would be absolutely welcome to.
In the meantime, I'll wait for the final word from him about whether the current challenge will proceed, whenever he makes his final decision. I certainly understand that he might want to take his time when he would have so much money on the line.
I have been working with 7craps' finished version of my system in WinCraps for the past two days. While short term results continue to be very strong, in much longer tests I am seeing an inevitable degradation of my win percentage.
I am very disapointed to confirm that I am unable to continue with the challenge at this time. While the system I have developed may be successful over the course of one lifetime, it has proven to me not to be able to stand the test of 1 billion rounds.
I am currently working on making adjustments to the system which I hope will give me more favorable Long Run results. Updates to be posted here as they occur.
To MichaelBluejay- I wish to thank you for the courtesy you have extended to me in accepting me as a serious challenger. I would also like to thank you for your generosity in extending the invitation to accept the challenge in the future. It is my intention to do so when I have my system successfully modified to the point that I expect it to be successful. So as not to be an unwarranted drain on your time and energy, I will not approach you again until I am fully prepared to proceed with the challenge. I will at that time present you with a new write-up that will have already been fully tested. I will also at that time be prepared to sign contracts and deposit my end of the wager.
On other fronts.....Despite the conclusion that my system can not withstand 1 Billion rounds, my short run results still prompt me to take my system to Vegas. As I have stated previously, my research indicates that on a day to day basis I have reason to expect consistant profits.
Since the inception of this discussion, I have continued in my pursuit of investors. At this time I have managed to contract 70% of the necessary bankroll to begin live operations. I am still in search of a final $1500 of investments. If no investor materializes by November 1st, I will be funding that final balance myself. Therefore, I will be starting live operations on the first of November.
If there is continued interest here on the message board, I will be happy to post my daily results.
Quote: 98stepsHello Again to everyone.
I have been working with 7craps' finished version of my system in WinCraps for the past two days. While short term results continue to be very strong, in much longer tests I am seeing an inevitable degradation of my win percentage.
I am very disapointed to confirm that I am unable to continue with the challenge at this time. While the system I have developed may be successful over the course of one lifetime, it has proven to me not to be able to stand the test of 1 billion rounds.
Of course, your system can just as easily fail in the short term. A billion rounds will reflect the actual expectation for the system. 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.
Quote: 98stepsI am currently working on making adjustments to the system which I hope will give me more favorable Long Run results. Updates to be posted here as they occur.
On other fronts.....Despite the conclusion that my system can not withstand 1 Billion rounds, my short run results still prompt me to take my system to Vegas. As I have stated previously, my research indicates that on a day to day basis I have reason to expect consistant profits.
You haven't learned about squeezing the balloon, I guess.
Cheers,
Alan Shank
Woodland, CA
Quote: SOOPOOGee- big surprise. Mr98steps- the REASON Mr. Bluejay has the challenge is because you CANNOT develop a system that will beat a negative EV game. So, it is nothing more than blather about you ever having a system that you will fork up the money to have the challenge go forth. That being said, you seem like a good guy, and, yes, I am interested in your daily results. Just for interest, and maybe you discussed this 400 posts ago, how much total investment were you looking for, and is this investment just a bankroll to play craps with using your system? Good luck at the tables...
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.
Quote: 98stepsThe 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?
Quote: goatcabinSuppose 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.
Quote: goatcabinYou haven't learned about squeezing the balloon, I guess.
Please explain.
Quote: MathExtremistYou'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.
Quote: 98stepsYour 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
Quote: 98stepsYour 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.....
Quote: 98stepsYour 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?
Quote: 98stepsPlease explain.
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
Quote: Zcore13Well, 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.
Of course that's true, but taking advantage of +EV marketing promotions is not a "betting system", it's just one form of advantage play. The basis of a betting system is never "wait for the casino to give you a +EV promotion and then only bet that". A betting system is just a variation of your bet spread based on past events, as if those past events mattered when in fact they do not.
Quote: 98stepsit has proven to me not to be able to stand the test of 1 billion rounds.
I am currently working on making adjustments to the system which I hope will give me more favorable Long Run results.
Updates to be posted here as they occur.
Watch out using that word "hope"
That 1 billion round rule is too powerful.
I know all your simulations will prove that fact.
Most people do not know how LARGE 1 billion really is.
I recently ran a 1 billion simulation, took some time, but my computer completed the task.
And I even beat expectations.
But still have a net bankroll loss to show for it.
Quote: 98stepsI am very disapointed to confirm that I am unable to continue with the challenge at this time.
While the system I have developed may be successful over the course of one lifetime,
That lifetime success is what I wish you luck on. It would be nice if it ends up only being a short run, but then...
What you need to look for is the causes of bankroll failure and you can only "hope" that they do not happen in fast succession and force you to only watch as your bankroll disappears.
Good Luck
Quote: 98stepsPer 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.
How long do you expect to play each day or week?
This can not be a big money making plan unless you devote many hours to actual play, just like the way casinos make their money, from many players and many bets being made over time.
And are you doing ALL the betting and record keeping?? Or is this a team that plays at the same craps table?
I also wish you good luck but do not be surprised if your $5000 bankroll is too small to start with and your losing sessions happen way too often than you hope.
But that is why it is called gambling.
Quote: 98stepsOn other fronts.....Despite the conclusion that my system can not withstand 1 Billion rounds, my short run results still prompt me to take my system to Vegas. As I have stated previously, my research indicates that on a day to day basis I have reason to expect consistant profits.
If there is continued interest here on the message board, I will be happy to post my daily results.
My last 2 cents for this thread,
I think no one here would believe you if you post after 6 months or later that you show a net profit from your system.
You actually can and have shown profits and I hope your bankroll grows fast enough to withstand those large losing sessions that you know will happen and you must expect them to happen.
Most followers of this thread wanted to see you go for the challenge.
Time will tell if you actually do come back to it in the future.
Good Luck to you 98steps on achieving your consistent profits.
I will look you up when I'm in Vegas on my monthly visits.
Those who I really feel sorry for are the investors. If they would waste their money on this, imagine what else they would waste it on. No wonder Bernie Madoff made out as well as he did.
A fool and his money are soon parted.
Quote: 98stepsPer 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.
With that kind of deal anyone can beat the casino. Someone else is giving you money to bet with and you get to keep half of their winnings but have no liability for losses? Now there's a system that'll turn a profit in the short and long run. For you, I mean - not so much for your "investors".
Quote: atlarsonLaugh all you want, but as long as he's playing with investor money, it's +EV for him personally. At least, as long as he's smart enough to quit while he's ahead. It would be better for him to pay out winnings after every session, but from the "gross earnings for a six month period" comment I guess he's not doing that.
Oh, I agree! He managed to get his system tested for free and now will free roll off of the investors money. I have to give them man some credit. That is truly a way to make money off of betting systems, another being selling them. Again, it is the gullible investors who I pity.
Quote: WizardOh, I agree! He managed to get his system tested for free and now will free roll off of the investors money. I have to give them man some credit. That is truly a way to make money off of betting systems, another being selling them. Again, it is the gullible investors who I pity.
98steps' personable manner helped to hide the fact that he was just another fraud and huckster--one of a long, long, long, long series. There are still so many people out there who think they can beat the math. if you keep adding negative numbers, the result will never be positive. It seems so childishly simple to understand! But 98steps has apparently found some gullible children. I agree--congratulations, 98steps!
If we could somehow hunt down and sterilize all people who believe in the irrational, then we could possibly improve the collective human intellect. But there are so many people who depend on that irrational cohort for their livelihood, that will fight to keep them right where they are, and even help them flourish. 98steps, John Patrick, Rob Singer, and the Catholic Church are all tremendously successful frauds that have made money from the gullibility and irrationality of a section of the population that is amazingly huge in this age of science, rationality, and learning.
Maybe we're all going to get dragged into the abyss by these people after all. We're definitely not a lock to overcome the Brainless Bunch.
Quote: mkl654321If we could somehow hunt down and sterilize all people who believe in the irrational, then we could possibly improve the collective human intellect.
That is taking it bit far, don't you think? Maybe it would sound better in the original German.
Quote: WizardThat is taking it bit far, don't you think? Maybe it would sound better in the original German.
I'm not saying that it would be a desirable goal in and of itself; after all, there have to be, as the Bible said, hewers of wood and drawers of water. It's when such people reach positions of authority that I get scared.
And just because the Nazis took that ball and ran with it doesn't mean the goal of eugenics didn't have some merit. When technology outpaces the ability of human evolution to cope with it, there are only three solutions: 1) retard the progress of technology 2) speed up the process of human mental evolution 3) cope with human inability to think and reason in a technologically advanced world. 1) is impossible, 2) is impractical, and 3) is futile. So I can understand why some people wanted to try 2).
The flaw, possibly fatal, of an egalitarian society is that the collective decision process is dumbed down. Where I live, we are currently having a tightly contested congressional race. Many people will vote for one or the other candidate, but almost NONE of them would be able to tell you, if asked, what a congressman DOES, how long his term is, how many congressmen/congresswomen there ARE, etc. etc. Everyone has an opinion on the Obamacare bill, but how many people have read it? One in a hundred thousand? My fate, and yours, is being decided by the ignorant, led by the blind.
Since education doesn't seem to have solved the problem, and eugenics probably can't, I think humanity will remain a chaotic collection of dumdums until it finally manages to blow itself up. The statistic that REALLY horrifies me is that 96% of Americans profess to believe in God. If that figure is anywhere near accurate, do we have any more chance than a snowball in a microwave oven?
Quote: WizardOh, I agree! He managed to get his system tested for free and now will free roll off of the investors money. I have to give them man some credit. That is truly a way to make money off of betting systems, another being selling them. Again, it is the gullible investors who I pity.
It does raise an interesting question, though. Let's assume that he starts with a given bankroll, none of it his own money. He places a sequence of bets, and at some point is allowed to declare the end of a "session". At the end of the session, if the bankroll has decreased, then the process terminates. If the bankroll has increased, then he gets 25% of the winnings. Another 25% disappear, and the remaining 50% remain on the bankroll. He then repeats the process with a new "session", starting from his updated bankroll.
What betting system will maximize his take? And is there any clean theoretical result to be had?
Quote: mkl654321Everyone has an opinion on the Obamacare bill, but how many people have read it?
Have you? I highly doubt it somehow. I don't think there are even too many members of the Congress who read it before voting for it. It is several thousand pages, most of which is legal mumbo-jumbo.
You don't necessarily have to read everything to have an opinion about it.
I have an opinion about 98steps' betting system for example, and I have not even seen it. Obamacare is the same kind of invention. 98steps is at least (almost) honest about his "investors".
Quote: weaselmanI don't think there are even too many members of the Congress who read it before voting for it.
Or even after voting for it, for that matter.
Quote: atlarsonIt does raise an interesting question, though. Let's assume that he starts with a given bankroll, none of it his own money. He places a sequence of bets, and at some point is allowed to declare the end of a "session". At the end of the session, if the bankroll has decreased, then the process terminates. If the bankroll has increased, then he gets 25% of the winnings. Another 25% disappear, and the remaining 50% remain on the bankroll. He then repeats the process with a new "session", starting from his updated bankroll.
What betting system will maximize his take? And is there any clean theoretical result to be had?
That's when he should start Kelly (proportional) betting based on his effective +EV. The casino's still going to get their cut, but his investors will be playing with a -EV to offset both his winnings and the casino edge.
Quote: mkl654321
The flaw, possibly fatal, of an egalitarian society is that the collective decision process is dumbed down. Where I live, we are currently having a tightly contested congressional race. Many people will vote for one or the other candidate, but almost NONE of them would be able to tell you, if asked, what a congressman DOES, how long his term is, how many congressmen/congresswomen there ARE, etc. etc. Everyone has an opinion on the Obamacare bill, but how many people have read it? One in a hundred thousand? My fate, and yours, is being decided by the ignorant, led by the blind.
Misanthropy aside, what are you planning to do about it? I'm not old and cynical yet, but griping (especially here) won't accomplish anything toward changing your perceived flaws in humanity. Most folks haven't been properly trained in critical thinking, which does indeed take as much practice as anything else. (Yes, I'm citing to Alfred Mander).
The point is, you can choose how you respond to your perception that everyone around you is ignorant and/or blind. You can either be miserable about it, or you can get over it. Shakespeare said it best:
"There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so"
(Hamlet, act 2, scene 2)
On the other hand, that quote has been interpreted in two ways. One is an affirmation of the impact of thoughts on perception; the other is a general indictment of intelligence. Along those lines, here's my personal adaptation of an old adage:
"Ignorance is bliss ... but only for the ignorant."
Best of luck...
Quote: mkl654321If we could somehow hunt down and sterilize all people who believe in the irrational, then we could possibly improve the collective human intellect. But there are so many people who depend on that irrational cohort for their livelihood, that will fight to keep them right where they are, and even help them flourish. 98steps, John Patrick, Rob Singer, and the Catholic Church are all tremendously successful frauds that have made money from the gullibility and irrationality of a section of the population that is amazingly huge in this age of science, rationality, and learning.
Maybe we're all going to get dragged into the abyss by these people after all. We're definitely not a lock to overcome the Brainless Bunch.
Naw. Lots of the math people forget that we are biological beings; not minds, but bodies with minds. Not thoughts, but thoughts and emotions. When things don't make sense to the mind, it is usually because those things are feeding the body or the emotions. it doesn't mean right, or wrong; it just is. Some things "just are", no matter whether they are good for humanity, or bad for humanity. This system feeds the emotions. In this particular instance, in the big scheme of things, all the money will be gambled and lost in any case. The only difference here is who is placing the bets.
"The watusi. The twist."
--John Lennon
Quote: WizardOh, I agree! He managed to get his system tested for free and now will free roll off of the investors money. I have to give them man some credit.
That is truly a way to make money off of betting systems, another being selling them. Again, it is the gullible investors who I pity.
Well said Wizard.
98 steps started his thread looking for investors.
They are everywhere!
there are also many people who just throw money at anything to make more money. Most do not value money since they have so much of it. They just play a game of making more money.
Must be nice to be in that position.
98 steps has placed himself in a very good position.
Reward with no risk.
That one took everyone here by surprise.
Craps Strategy Investment Opportunity? » Reply
So how does one invest in your system 98steps?
since the title of your thread now really makes perfect sense.
Quote: MathExtremistThat's when he should start Kelly (proportional) betting based on his effective +EV. The casino's still going to get their cut, but his investors will be playing with a -EV to offset both his winnings and the casino edge.
How do you calculate the +EV of the bet, though? That's got to account for both his immediate winnings (i.e., the 25%), and the value of the remaining bankroll. (For example, if he's well below his initial bankroll, then for his maximum possible bet, his 25% winnings and losses are still both zero, so the Kelly criterion on that tells you nothing. But it's obviously correct for him to keep betting, to try to get above breakeven again.) Intuitively, a dollar in the bankroll should be worth roughly half a dollar to him, less a bit for the house edge, when the bankroll is above its initial value; but what's the exact solution?
Quote: 7winnerHow long do you expect to play each day or week?
This can not be a big money making plan unless you devote many hours to actual play, just like the way casinos make their money, from many players and many bets being made over time.
And are you doing ALL the betting and record keeping?? Or is this a team that plays at the same craps table?q]
I have made a commitment to work 6 - 12 hours daily, a minimum of 5 - 6 days per week, as dictated by the tables. My target for my investors is 9 successful sessions per week, playing 1-4 sessions per day depending on the time requirements of each session.
As far as record keeping, I will be keeping ALL the records, recording each transaction for my investors review. Each session will require an average of 100 transactions according to my trials. My recordkeeping will include a sum of all wagers won or lost on any given roll, as well as a comprehensive count of how each wager used fared over the course of the session. I will do this at the table as the game is in progress, recording each event as it occurs. This information is communicated to my investors at the end of each session.
Quote: 98steps
I have made a commitment to work 6 - 12 hours daily, a minimum of 5 - 6 days per week, as dictated by the tables. My target for my investors is 9 successful sessions per week, playing 1-4 sessions per day depending on the time requirements of each session.
That seems like a bad idea. You should place as few high-variance bets as possible, and you should quit (and wait for the next six month reckoning point) when you get significantly ahead, to lock in your winnings. To win the investors' money, you need variance, so you do need to bet, with the lowest house edge available (full odds, etc.); but too many bets and the house edge grinds you down. I haven't actually done the math, but a thousand hours per tallying seems like way too much. At 60 bets per hour and an average of ten dollars per bet (guessing), and a house edge of 1% (also guessing), that's $6000 expected loss. So you'll need a lot of extra variance to compensate for that. (Of course, the variance is going to be pretty high anyways. So you might still get lucky and win.)
You do understand that this "investment" opportunity is favorable to you in an expected value sense, and unfavorable to the investors. Right?
