Overhauling the Betting System Challenge
Don't try to make people speak proper english that is intelligible. Several people have difficulty understanding unnamed people on this site.
Quote: EvenBobThis is from your site: "no betting system can overcome the house edge. You don't gain an advantage just because you're using a betting system."
You ARE saying all betting systems are worthless...
(1) No, you are still putting words in my mouth, because you are misinterpreting what I'm saying.
(2) I already explained the distinction between "worthless" and "not overcoming the house edge". If you choose to ignore it, or you don't understand it, there's nothing I can do about that.
(3) Like I said, if you want to discuss this, then START A NEW THREAD.
The change would be to have the table max apply to each bet, rather than all bets together. I can't imagine that that would let anyone exploit the challenge, since the bets would still be limited by available bankroll, and conceptually there shouldn't be any difference between making two negative-expectation bets consecutively vs. one at a time, but since I have a lot of money on the line here, it behooves me to vet rule changes.
Quote: current wordingThe table limits are $5 minimum and $5000 maximum. In roulette, the minimum is either for a single outside bet, or the total of all inside bets. In craps, the Table Max refers to the Pass Line bet, so a Free Odds bet can exceed the table max. The $5000 max is the total that can be wagered on one round of roulette or baccarat, or one roll in craps, excluding the odds bet. (i.e., It's the sum of all bets placed.) Starting bankroll for each test is $5000.
Quote: proposed wordingThe table limits are $5 minimum and $5000 maximum. In roulette, the minimum is either for a single outside bet, or the total of all inside bets. Multiple bets can be placed on the same round, with each bet subject to the Table Max. (i.e., The Table Max isn't applied to the sum of all bets.) In craps, maximum Free Odds can be taken on a Table Max pass line bet. Starting bankroll for each test is $5000.
BTW, in another thread, a dealer confirmed that the table max refers to individual bets, not the aggregate of all bets by the same bettor.
Quote: slackyhackyBlueJay,
I read your website years ago. I haven't recently.
Also, I haven't read this whole post - I read the first page and the last page.
You are offering $1000 if someone can come up with a betting system that will last for 200,000 turns, correct?
What is the starting bank roll?
What is the cost to the applicant?
Will you sign a NDA to not reveal the money management program?
[The above quote was made in another thread accidentally.]
I have a challenge on my website where I wager $30,000 against a challenger’s $3000 (or $10,000 against their $1000, if they prefer) that they can’t come up with a betting system that beats the real-world challenge rules listed there.
From time to time I contemplate tweaking the rules, and when I do so I post the proposed changes here, so that the community can help me find unexpected ways that a challenger could exploit them. Because my challenge offers whopping 10:1 odds (by $30k to a challenger’s $3k), even a worthless betting system with a lousy 11% chance of winning in the casino could still be a good bet against my challenge. So, it behooves me to make sure that my proposed changes aren’t creating a loophole.
I offer a $1000 reward for anyone who comes up with a system that can beat the proposed rules changes (or for that matter, the existing rules). The difference between this $1000 reward and the challenge is that you don't have to put up any money for your chance of getting the $1000 reward -- you have to just submit your winning idea. Someone did that once (Weaselman), but graciously declined the reward money.
Standard obvious, common-sense disclaimers about the reward money apply: I’m not obligated to code a system that’s submitted if I can see on its face that it will fail, if multiple people submit a similar winning exploit then I need pay only the first person, I can revoke the offer at any time, etc. You’d think I wouldn’t have to point out the obvious, but go back a few pages you'll see why I have to.
I’ll sign a NDA for either the reward money or the challenge.
Quote: MichaelBluejay[The above quote was made in another thread accidentally.]
I have a challenge on my website where I wager $30,000 against a challenger’s $3000 (or $10,000 against their $1000, if they prefer) that they can’t come up with a betting system that beats the real-world challenge rules listed there.
From time to time I contemplate tweaking the rules, and when I do so I post the proposed changes here, so that the community can help me find unexpected ways that a challenger could exploit them. Because my challenge offers whopping 10:1 odds (by $30k to a challenger’s $3k), even a worthless betting system with a lousy 11% chance of winning in the casino could still be a good bet against my challenge. So, it behooves me to make sure that my proposed changes aren’t creating a loophole.
I offer a $1000 reward for anyone who comes up with a system that can beat the proposed rules changes (or for that matter, the existing rules). The difference between this $1000 reward and the challenge is that you don't have to put up any money for your chance of getting the $1000 reward -- you have to just submit your winning idea. Someone did that once (Weaselman), but graciously declined the reward money.
Standard obvious, common-sense disclaimers about the reward money apply: I’m not obligated to code a system that’s submitted if I can see on its face that it will fail, if multiple people submit a similar winning exploit then I need pay only the first person, I can revoke the offer at any time, etc. You’d think I wouldn’t have to point out the obvious, but go back a few pages you'll see why I have to.
I’ll sign a NDA for either the reward money or the challenge.
I totally would probably, perhaps, take you up on the challenge, but my money management schema at the craps game requires $16K starting bank roll.
Quote: slackyhackyI totally would probably, perhaps, take you up on the challenge, but my money management schema at the craps game requires $16K starting bank roll.
Find a table that requires 1/3rd the minimum bet?
Possibly... breakage would be a pain of course.
I had to lookQuote: slackyhackyI totally would probably, perhaps, take you up on the challenge, but my money management schema at the craps game requires $16K starting bank roll.
and that system was from you
that I helped convert from WinCraps Classic to WCPro back in March (my BDay month)
abouts 900 lines of code too
I never played it to see it work until now, and
you would consider the challenge if MB upped the bankroll (and he should) to $16k
His challenge looks safe to me with both sets of rules
of course
his $5k bankroll requirement would be too low for Blackjack, a game not on the challenge list I see,
That leads to the question of why is Blackjack NOT on the list of challenge games when counting is not part of the system
I think the answer is BJ can be beat without card counting
and many would beat a BJ challenge
let us see a craps challenge!
raise the bankroll limit for
slackyhacky
Sally
and no, I have not run his system on the computer with 200,000 bets resolved, win-lose-push
(1) I make it clear on my site that the purpose of offering the challenge is to show that system vendors are selling junk. The existence of the challenge doesn't prove the non-existence of winning betting systems in general, because naysayers would just say that those who have winning betting systems aren't willing to reveal it, and have no need for my $30k anyway because they can already win more in the casinos.
(2) I offer three of the most popular games in the casino. That should be plenty for a challenger to prove whether they've got a winning system or not.
(3) My experence is that no matter what I do, and how liberal I make the rules, people still complain anyway. So I'm done trying to placate people. It never works anyway.
(4) Blackjack is a nightmare to program accurately. I've done it, but depending on how a challenger's system works, it could be a lot of effort to get the system programmed properly. No thanks. Especially when the challenger in this case isn't a system seller. (See note #1 above.)
(5) Blackjack can be beaten by card counting. It would be a nightmare to come up with rules that disallow card counting, it opens up all sorts of arguments as to what card-counting is and whether a system is doing it or not. And see above #'s 1, 2, 3, and 4.
(6) As I've said repeatedly, the challenge has the potential to be beaten by a *losing* betting system, because I'm offering a whopping 10:1 odds. If I increase the bankroll requirements, then that increases the chances that a worthless betting system can be a loser in the casino but still beat my challenge. I'd have to waste my time running a whole nuther round of testing to make sure a losing system couldn't exploit my challenge with a larger bankroll, for a challenge that's almost certainly not going to happen anyway. No thanks. See above, but especially #3.
Arguments against the above are explicitly not welcome. Don't go there.
and why is this important for you to waste your time on, in my opinion?Quote: MichaelBluejay(1) I make it clear on my site that the purpose of offering the challenge is to show that system vendors are selling junk.
eye mean, many people buy junk all the time.
Governments dish it out, you have a site to expose that junk too?
oh, and to offer a challenge that only system vendors that are selling junk, in your opinion, can be a part of
if I understand your writings.
I agree with you on that waste of time thingQuote: MichaelBluejay(6)<snip> I'd have to waste my time running a whole nuther round of testing to make sure a losing system couldn't exploit my challenge with a larger bankroll, for a challenge that's almost certainly not going to happen anyway. No thanks. See above, but especially #3.
our time is limited, in my opinion
unless you, Michael Bluejay, own this universe that we are both in, I consider it excessively rude and offensive thisQuote: MichaelBluejayArguments against the above are explicitly not welcome. Don't go there.
"Don't go there",
I can go there if I want and nothing you can do to stop me.
==============================
Oh, I see you are over 30.
I guess I better lighten up then.
thank you
for sharing all your opinions here and on your web sites too.
opinions are great!
If you die tonight, say past midnight, will all your websites eventually disappear?
I would think so. something to think about
so, back to your topic, I say with your new rules, yes, they can be exploited.
I do not need your $1000 or $30,000
I bet you $5 you were at one time an English teacher.
just my opinion
Sally is nice
Quote: mustangsallyI had to look
and that system was from you
that I helped convert from WinCraps Classic to WCPro back in March (my BDay month)
abouts 900 lines of code too
I never played it to see it work until now, and
you would consider the challenge if MB upped the bankroll (and he should) to $16k
His challenge looks safe to me with both sets of rules
of course
his $5k bankroll requirement would be too low for Blackjack, a game not on the challenge list I see,
That leads to the question of why is Blackjack NOT on the list of challenge games when counting is not part of the system
I think the answer is BJ can be beat without card counting
and many would beat a BJ challenge
let us see a craps challenge!
raise the bankroll limit for
slackyhacky
Sally
and no, I have not run his system on the computer with 200,000 bets resolved, win-lose-push
wow cool. You helped with that? Your uncle (?) was so awesome to help me. I have made some minor adjustments to improve it since then. I think it is slightly better.
I'm reviving this thread (and the $1000 reward for finding exploits) because I want to make a change to the challenge rules, and I'm hoping the collective wisdom here can help me verify that it's not vulnerable to exploits.
The change would be to have the table max apply to each bet, rather than all bets together. I can't imagine that that would let anyone exploit the challenge, since the bets would still be limited by available bankroll, and conceptually there shouldn't be any difference between making two negative-expectation bets consecutively vs. one at a time, but since I have a lot of money on the line here, it behooves me to vet rule changes.
Quote: current wordingThe table limits are $5 minimum and $5000 maximum. In roulette, the minimum is either for a single outside bet, or the total of all inside bets. In craps, the Table Max refers to the Pass Line bet, so a Free Odds bet can exceed the table max. The $5000 max is the total that can be wagered on one round of roulette or baccarat, or one roll in craps, excluding the odds bet. (i.e., It's the sum of all bets placed.) Starting bankroll for each test is $5000.
Quote: proposed wordingThe table limits are $5 minimum and $5000 maximum. In roulette, the minimum is either for a single outside bet, or the total of all inside bets. Multiple bets can be placed on the same round, with each bet subject to the Table Max. (i.e., The Table Max isn't applied to the sum of all bets.) In craps, maximum Free Odds can be taken on a Table Max pass line bet. Starting bankroll for each test is $5000.
BTW, in another thread, a dealer confirmed that the table max refers to individual bets, not the aggregate of all bets by the same bettor.
Quote: MichaelBluejay
....
BTW, in another thread, a dealer confirmed that the table max refers to individual bets, not the aggregate of all bets by the same bettor.
Michael,
FWIW, I have been places where casinos interpret table max per bet as you say, but also seen others who apply table max to the aggregate per betting spot, and I have seen them back down players who overloaded, in once case specifically at roulette. Certainly you can set whatever rules you like for your challenge, but it does go both ways. It can also backfire on you if betting too much to stay under the aggregate table payout limit with a high-odds bet, but that's a separate issue; I only mention it to distinguish it from what you're talking about.
slackyhacky, watch out for egg shells here!Quote: slackyhackywow cool. You helped with that? Your uncle (?) was so awesome to help me. I have made some minor adjustments to improve it since then. I think it is slightly better.
yes, I see you have another version in April, I did not look at it as I only helped with the conversion process
and not writing the actual code. I could though.
I guess MB really cares about his $30k, even though he says he does not, in my opinion
(MB, imo, hates others expressing their opinions too, and that is OK. English teacher)
I think you have a good chance to beat his challenge with your system, but you are not a system seller as I am not too
maybe I look to see how often you can win that 11 out of 20
and PM it to you
I have to remember not to ruffle the feathers of those over 30, especially the males
it changes the history of mankind
right BBB!
Sally is nice
Quote: MichaelBluejay(Since this thread got hijacked, let me repeat my earlier post to get it back on track:)
Did you guys all see this video? I seriously am in love with Kate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyTTX6Wlf1Y
