strategy for 𝑷𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓𝒃𝒂𝒍𝒍 that could possibly give you an edge when the payout is greater than the number of possible combinations
play these 7 numbers:
nobody plays those numbers because they think it's impossible that they could come - so there won't be a split of the pot
Actually, in the early days of California's Lotto (that had only 6 numbers), they asked a number of famous people what numbers they play, and it was either Steve Jobs or Steve Wozniak that responded, "1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, because they are just as likely as any other numbers."
This reminds me of a couple of contests Games Magazine ran - in one, you sent in a valid uncapitalized English word, and in another, you sent in an integer from 1 to 1,000,000; in both cases, the winner was the person who sent in the first (in alphabetical order, or from smallest to largest, accordingly) value that was not sent in by anyone else. The most popular responses were "a" and "1," and in just about every case, the reason was, "Just in case everybody else thinks that nobody else will do it." (I think the second most popular entry in the number contest was 1,000,000, but that was because of a flaw in the rules; the prize was capped at $1000, except that if the winning number turned out to be 1,000,000, the winner would get $10,000.)
So, just for chuckles I tried that. Keep in mind that I am an (out-of-practice) physicist.
I tried to formulate a hypothesis as follows (written in non-rigorous jargon):
Perhaps the nature of spacetime has a lower energy state, that is, it has a "causal preference" for the periodic repetition (in time) for the exact same mass and energy configurations that have earlier occurred in time in that same small position in space, To wit, if the roulette ball went into the five slot at a certain angular speed of the ball, at a certain angular speed of the wheel and at a certain angular location, then maybe the waveform of spacetime prefers the ball to go into the 5 slot again when those precise values of rotational speeds and positions are matched. (I use the word "prefer" to indicate that there might be a lower energy state for spacetime if that were to happen.) And that the nature of the fabric of space time prefers this local repetition of angular speed, position ,and ball movement so much that it distorts randomness by nudging the speeds and positions of the apparatus so as to slightly increase the probability of a a certain mass/energy state occurring again (such as the roulette ball going into the 5 slot.)
So, I was trying to hypothesize that the space-time fabric of the universe might favor that local, identical configurations of mass and energy be repeated in time. I was fancifully thinking of localized virtual wormholes that might connect time A and time B at the same spatial location if times A and B had nearly identical mass/energy configurations. Such virtual wormholes might lower the energy level of spacetime and provide a source of energy for the departure from randomness. Absolutely, no proof, of course - but striving to think of a possible reason for non-randomness in the physical universe.
Then I realized something that made this silly idea fall part.
That roulette wheel system is on a planet that is rotating around its axis, that is moving rapidly in orbit around the sun, and is part of a solar system that is in orbit around the Milky Way Galaxy. The roulette wheel is not stationary, rather it is moving through space at very high speeds (and in a non-inertial frame of reference) and thus there is no "local spacetime fabric" to recognize that the identical roulette wheel configuration exists at two different points in time and to participate in causing non-random outcomes on the wheel. There is insufficient symmetry in space, mass and energy between the two points in time.
So, I can't even begin to make it work. Sorry, I tried. But, I think we're still stuck with randomness.
Important note: none of Charles'
Is there a link to this Charles
person? I need a good laugh..
This past Thursday, had a Caitlyn Jenner type person at the table, and they would hit nearly every hand from 12 to hard 16 regardless of what the dealer was showing, and surprisingly enough, won the majority of hands and walked out with $975 after buying in for $140. Their bets ranged from $25-$200 and unless their wig had X-ray vision that sent signals to this person, there's no way it was anything but random luck.
Maybe I will snap my fingers and make half the random outcomes disappear.
Random results can be influenced by outside forces that cause the "randomness" to be not so random. This isn't even part of my formula, but something I learned through my research and experiences.
When I win 1,000 bets in a row, using a specific bet selection method, I begin to think that it's not random.
Charles refused to lower his figures to make them seem more realistic. I am doing the same. Sorry, but I choose to live in the real world.