Quick way to offer the "betting challenge" type of simulation?
November 19th, 2010 at 1:02:30 PM
permalink
I don't know enough about programming to know if this makes sense, but...
Could you write a program to turn out a million roulette spins (or craps rolls, or whatever) so that all possible outcomes are represented in a nice, even distribution? In other words, an equal amount of 0,00,1,2,3's, etc, an equal amount of reds and blacks, and so forth? If so, such a group of results could be fed into whatever "system" one wished, and test it, without the need to adapt the coding of the system to a testing algorithm.
The virtue in constructing such an array would be precisely in its (artificial) "evenness"--you could say, here is an unbiased set of results (i.e., no unrepresentative preponderance of blacks, reds, odds, evens, etc.). Now test your system against these results, and get back to us.
I assume it would be trivial to encode the results in a file that could be used in any one of a variety of programming formats.
Could you write a program to turn out a million roulette spins (or craps rolls, or whatever) so that all possible outcomes are represented in a nice, even distribution? In other words, an equal amount of 0,00,1,2,3's, etc, an equal amount of reds and blacks, and so forth? If so, such a group of results could be fed into whatever "system" one wished, and test it, without the need to adapt the coding of the system to a testing algorithm.
The virtue in constructing such an array would be precisely in its (artificial) "evenness"--you could say, here is an unbiased set of results (i.e., no unrepresentative preponderance of blacks, reds, odds, evens, etc.). Now test your system against these results, and get back to us.
I assume it would be trivial to encode the results in a file that could be used in any one of a variety of programming formats.
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
November 19th, 2010 at 1:16:17 PM
permalink
You could reverse engineer a system that beat the million spins (with some experimentation), without actually designing a system that could beat a random set of one million spins. I have heard there are 'books' that sell lists of spins (sets of 10,000 seem to be common) where people can test their systems.
I don't think it will have the intended results on the masses...
I don't think it will have the intended results on the masses...
Wisdom is the quality that keeps you out of situations where you would otherwise need it
