Explaining EV to Wellbush
Who says Grand Marty is Flim-flam? I don't!Quote: darkozI thought the point of this thread was to discuss flim-flam.
Like the grand Marty?
Grand Marty is just a wager size variation, money management system. It is not -EV: It is not +EV. It is EV neutral.
It is not dishonest in what it does.
There are fools and con-men that will try to tell you that it is +EV or that it can make a -EV game into a +EV proposition. When such fools or con-men bring that concept to this forum, they and their audience will be helped with the truth. Those who are beyond help can fend for themselves or wallow about, or congregate in, the 'betting systems' sub-forum.
maybe there are fools that think they know what - and + EV is?Quote: OnceDearWho says Grand Marty is Flim-flam? I don't!
Grand Marty is just a wager size variation, money management system. It is not -EV: It is not +EV. It is EV neutral.
It is not dishonest in what it does.
There are fools and con-men that will try to tell you that it is +EV or that it can make a -EV game into a +EV proposition. When such fools or con-men bring that concept to this forum, they and their audience will be helped with the truth. Those who are beyond help can fend for themselves or wallow about, or congregate in, the 'betting systems' sub-forum.
Quote: Wellbushmaybe there are fools that think they know what - and + EV is?
+ and - EV are clearcut gambling math concepts.
If people want to relate gambling tales, then that's one thing. Is it really necessary for people who actually know something about gambling math to have to put up with being constantly trolled like this, though?
I'm insulted that you refer to my post as trolling. It was a neutral q!Quote: Mission146+ and - EV are clearcut gambling math concepts.
If people want to relate gambling tales, then that's one thing. Is it really necessary for people who actually know something about gambling math to have to put up with being constantly trolled like this, though?
And the other insult, asking me to respond on 08/32!
What do you think of the above insults, Dieter? (Not to mention the arrogance that certain people know about gambling math, so I don't and/or they shouldn't be questioned! Ah, as far as I'm aware I have a degree with math majors, but 146?)
If that was a reply to me, I'd like to reply that I did not understand it. Your skill at making brief one line replies has unfortunately lost a bit of context here.Quote: Wellbushmaybe there are fools that think they know what - and + EV is?
as this thread is about gambling flim-flam, would that not include gambling systems?Quote: OnceDearWellbush,
Not Trolling, but it is hijacking.
I'll humour you, but invite you to big up your 'system in it's own thread. One of these, if I recall.
https://wizardofvegas.com/member/wellbush/threads/
Wellbush's Paradox is no paradox.
GrandMartingale is 0EV of itself, so you get the -EV from whatever underlying game you throw it at. Same with regular Marty 0EV.
Again, to anyone thinking of responding. get back on topic and take the systems nonsense back where it belongs.
and whether you're stoking flames or not, OD, would it not be on the topic of this thread to discuss whether the Grand Martingale had a +, - or neutral EV?Quote: OnceDearGood question.
Close call.Quote: Wellbushand whether you're stoking flames or not, OD, would it not be on the topic of this thread to discuss whether the Grand Martingale had a +, - or neutral EV?
I think a bit off topic, but no big deal. I didn't realise there was any question about whether Grand Martingale has a +, - or neutral EV. I take it as a mathematical fact that it is EV neutral
I'd no more think that it was on topic as if you had asserted that the next roulette spin after 5 reds would surely be a black. Best analogy I can think of. Forgive if it's a clunky reply.
whilst I still don't have a full handle on EV, I would have thought the Grand Marty (as opposed to the Marty) had a +EV?Quote: OnceDearClose call.
I think a bit off topic, but no big deal. I didn't realise there was any question about whether Grand Martingale has a +, - or neutral EV. I take it as a mathematical fact that it is EV neutral
I'd no more think that it was on topic as if you had asserted that the next roulette spin after 5 reds would surely be a black. Best analogy I can think of. Forgive if it's a clunky reply.
If we eliminate betting limit constraints and just evaluate the math, wouldn't playing the Grand Marty on a calculator (for example), make the theoretical gambler's bankroll balance increasingly larger, hence a +EV?
No. Not at all, ever!Quote: Wellbushwhilst I still don't have a full handle on EV, I would have thought the Grand Marty (as opposed to the Marty) had a +EV?
If we eliminate betting limit constraints and just evaluate the math, wouldn't playing the Grand Marty on a calculator (for example), make the theoretical gambler's bankroll balance increasingly larger, hence a +EV?
If it did, you could get two guys in a room, give them each half of a big bankroll, say $1m split $500k each, and have them Grand Marty a fair coin toss against eachother.
When one does eventually run out of money, or indeed at any time, you look at the total bankroll of the winner + loser and it would have to be greater than the bankroll that you split in half at the outset. Quite impossible, since no funds entered the room.
That's how EV works.
Half the guy's win amount x: Half the guys lose amount x : It's a 0EV game, so you can't determine who would most likely win. The average amount won by any guy is (x-x)/2 = $0 : Expected value = $0
Quote: Wellbushmaybe there are fools that think they know what - and + EV is?
Quote: Wellbushwhilst I still don't have a full handle on EV, I would have thought the Grand Marty (as opposed to the Marty) had a +EV?
If we eliminate betting limit constraints and just evaluate the math, wouldn't playing the Grand Marty on a calculator (for example), make the theoretical gambler's bankroll balance increasingly larger, hence a +EV?
No. Please go find a definition of, "Expected Value."
It would only be +EV if the person were betting on something that had a positive expectation to begin with.
Actually, let's ignore gambling for a minute. What does the word, 'Expected,' mean to you? If I say, "He is expected to get here at six o' clock," what do you take that statement to mean?
but if we are not betting against one another, but against a theoretical casino, the T casino would need to payout the increasing bet amounts (money flowing to the bettor from the T casino).Quote: OnceDearNo. Not at all, ever!
If it did, you could get two guys in a room, give them each half of a big bankroll, say $1m split $500k each, and have them Grand Marty a fair coin toss against eachother.
When one does eventually run out of money, or indeed at any time, you look at the total bankroll of the winner + loser and it would have to be greater than the bankroll that you split in half at the outset. Quite impossible, since no funds entered the room.
That's how EV works.
Half the guy's win amount x: Half the guys lose amount x : It's a 0EV game, so you can't determine who would most likely win. The average amount won by any guy is (x-x)/2 = $0 : Expected value = $0
Quote: Wellbushbut if we are not betting against one another, but against a theoretical casino, the T casino would need to payout the increasing bet amounts (money flowing to the bettor from the T casino).
You haven't answered my other post yet, but that's fine, because I've got somewhere to be in a little bit. I'll be back on later.
In response to this post, I would ask you this: If the casino actually offered a coin-flip game and paid true odds (no house edge) which entity (casino or player) do you think would have a greater probability of busting the other out assuming the player has substantially less bankroll than the casino?
Anyway, if you're only playing the Grand Martingale against a theoretical casino with theoretical money, that's at least better than playing it in a real casino with real money.
We really should split this off. Will do so.Quote: Wellbushbut if we are not betting against one another, but against a theoretical casino, the T casino would need to payout the increasing bet amounts (money flowing to the bettor from the T casino).
You are really REALLY not getting it at all.But I'll humour you.
So. We have one guy in a no limits casino that does a fair coin flip wager. He wagers against the casino. He applies Grand Marty. He bets heads or tails as he sees fit.
After some period of time, how much has the casino lost and why. I'l give you a clue. It probably won't be zero.
You need to sum up the outcomes of all equally probable outcomes.
That can be your homework. Do it over 1 coin flip, 2 coin flips, 3 coin flips, 4 coin flips. That's just 16 possible outcomes. Never mind heads or tails, just use win/lose as a proxy. What is the average profit/loss to the casino. Shouldn't take you an hour and will be worthwhile.
i have...takes time to understand itQuote: Mission146No. Please go find a definition of, "Expected Value."
yeah, i expect a G Marty would return a + sumQuote: Mission146It would only be +EV if the person were betting on something that had a positive expectation to begin with.
he would arrive at 6 o' clockQuote: Mission146Actually, let's ignore gambling for a minute. What does the word, 'Expected,' mean to you? If I say, "He is expected to get here at six o' clock," what do you take that statement to mean?
Quote: Wellbush
he would arrive at 6 o' clock
... except, that's not what expected means.
Maybe work on that first.
I am still without coffee.
You would be oh so wrong,Quote: Wellbushi have...takes time to understand it
yeah, i expect a G Marty would return a + sum
Wellbush, Are you being deliberately obtuse? There is (effectively) zero* possibility that he would arrive at precisely 6 o'clockQuote:he would arrive at 6 o' clock
* It's an infinity x zero = ? issue if you look at infinitely narrow intervals of zero seconds width.
Quote: OnceDearEXPLAINING EV TO WELLBUSH
Prediction: EV will be explained to him and the majority of his responses will be trolling.
Since virtually every post in here will be blocked for me, maybe someone can help me out and just give me a thumbs up or thumbs down as to whether I am correct or not.
When I realize I can't be somewhere until 8 pm I just say expect me at 8 pm.
I don't understand why 90% of the world seems to have a problem with that.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/62348289/800px-Serena_Eevee.0.0.png)
i always bet that heads will win. G Martying as follows ($): 15, 35, 60, 120.
1. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. H (15) d. H (15) ......return 60
2. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. H (15) d. H (15).......return 50
3. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. H (60) d. H (15).......return 25
4. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. T (-60) d. H (120).....return 10
5. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. T (-15) d. T (-35).......return -30
6. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. H (15) d. T (-35).......return 0
7. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. T (-15) d. H (35).......return 40
8. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. H (60) d. T (-15)......return -5
9. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. T (-60) d. T (-120)....return -230
10. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. T (-35) d. T (-60)....return -95
11. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. T (-35) d. H (60).....return 25
12. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. H (35) d. H (15).....return 50
13. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. H (35) d. T (-15).....return 20
14. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. T (-15) d. T (-35).....return -20
15. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. T (-15) d. H (35).....return 50
16. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. H (15) d. T (-15).....return 30
Total return to player: -80. Total casino profit: 80
But the player is stopping play after exactly 4 bets....
Anyway, what's the EV here? -80/16 = -5? no, maybe -80/64 (4 x 16) = -1.25?
the casino. and?Quote: Mission146In response to this post, I would ask you this: If the casino actually offered a coin-flip game and paid true odds (no house edge) which entity (casino or player) do you think would have a greater probability of busting the other out assuming the player has substantially less bankroll than the casino?
i'm not trying to be smart. i just answered the qsQuote: OnceDearYou would be oh so wrong,Wellbush, Are you being deliberately obtuse? There is (effectively) zero* possibility that he would arrive at precisely 6 o'clock
* It's an infinity x zero = ? issue if you look at infinitely narrow intervals of zero seconds width.
Success!Quote: Wellbushi'm not trying to be smart.
i'm not following you here, OD. 146 asked me: What does the word, 'Expected,' mean to you? If I say, "He is expected to get here at six o' clock," what do you take that statement to mean?Quote: OnceDearYou would be oh so wrong,Wellbush, Are you being deliberately obtuse? There is (effectively) zero* possibility that he would arrive at precisely 6 o'clock
* It's an infinity x zero = ? issue if you look at infinitely narrow intervals of zero seconds width.
my genuine answer: that he would arrive about 6 o'clock.
are there time intervals somewhere that i need to be aware of?
that's an insultQuote: TomGPrediction: EV will be explained to him and the majority of his responses will be trolling.
Quote: Wellbushi'm not following you here, OD. 146 asked me: What does the word, 'Expected,' mean to you? If I say, "He is expected to get here at six o' clock," what do you take that statement to mean?
my genuine answer: that he would arrive about 6 o'clock.
are there time intervals somewhere that i need to be aware of?
What happens if he arrives early? Late? Never shows up? Do you understand the difference between should and would?
He should be there about 6PM
He would be there about 6PM.
Quite different, no?
still not following. he may arrive 4pm, but probably not. more likely he'd arrive somewhere between 5 and 8pm. but probably close to 6pm, as i said🤷♂️Quote: billryanWhat happens if he arrives early? Late? Never shows up? Do you understand the difference between should and would?
He should be there about 6PM
He would be there about 6PM.
Quite different, no?
Corrections in Red
Quote: Wellbush
i always bet that heads will win. G Martying as follows ($): 15, 35, 60, 120.
1. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. H (15) d. H (15) ......return 60
2. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. H (15) d. H (15).......return 50
3. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. H (60) d. H (15).......return 25
4. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. T (-60) d. H (120).....return 10
5. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. T (-15) d. T (-35).......return -30
6. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. H (15) d. T (-15).......return 20
7. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. T (-15) d. H (35).......return 40
8. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. H (60) d. T (-15)......return -5
9. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. T (-60) d. T (-120)....return -230
10. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. T (-35) d. T (-60)....return -95
11. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. T (-35) d. H (60).....return 25
12. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. H (35) d. H (15).....return 50
13. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. H (35) d. T (-15).....return 20
14. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. T (-15) d. T (-35).....return -20
15. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. T (-15) d. H (35).....return 50
16. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. H (15) d. T (-15).....return 30
(60+50+25+10-30+20+40-5-230-95+25+50+20-20+50+30) =0
Total return to player: 0. Total casino profit: 0
But the player is stopping play after exactly 4 bets....
Anyway, what's the EV here? 0/16 = 0? no, maybe 0/64 (4 x 16) = 0?
I think that was a tactical error Mission. You've left him room to misinterpret and misunderstand. For any tussling about your question, I'll leave that to you.Quote: Mission146Actually, let's ignore gambling for a minute. What does the word, 'Expected,' mean to you? If I say, "He is expected to get here at six o' clock," what do you take that statement to mean?
and the point of this OD?Quote: OnceDearOne Outcome wrong and your summing is shot.
Corrections in RedQuote: Wellbush
i always bet that heads will win. G Martying as follows ($): 15, 35, 60, 120.
1. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. H (15) d. H (15) ......return 60
2. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. H (15) d. H (15).......return 50
3. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. H (60) d. H (15).......return 25
4. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. T (-60) d. H (120).....return 10
5. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. T (-15) d. T (-35).......return -30
6. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. H (15) d. T (-15).......return 20
7. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. T (-15) d. H (35).......return 40
8. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. H (60) d. T (-15)......return -5
9. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. T (-60) d. T (-120)....return -230
10. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. T (-35) d. T (-60)....return -95
11. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. T (-35) d. H (60).....return 25
12. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. H (35) d. H (15).....return 50
13. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. H (35) d. T (-15).....return 20
14. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. T (-15) d. T (-35).....return -20
15. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. T (-15) d. H (35).....return 50
16. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. H (15) d. T (-15).....return 30
(60+50+25+10-30+20+40-5-230-95+25+50+20-20+50+30) =0
Total return to player: 0. Total casino profit: 0
But the player is stopping play after exactly 4 bets....
Anyway, what's the EV here? 0/16 = 0? no, maybe 0/64 (4 x 16) = 0?
The point is that, subject to a few errors, YOU have established that your Grand Martingale as applied to a finite number of fair coin tosses is EV Neutral.Quote: Wellbushand the point of this OD?Quote: OnceDearOne Outcome wrong and your summing is shot.
Corrections in RedQuote: Wellbush
i always bet that heads will win. G Martying as follows ($): 15, 35, 60, 120.
1. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. H (15) d. H (15) ......return 60
2. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. H (15) d. H (15).......return 50
3. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. H (60) d. H (15).......return 25
4. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. T (-60) d. H (120).....return 10
5. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. T (-15) d. T (-35).......return -30
6. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. H (15) d. T (-15).......return 20
7. a. T (-15) b. H (35) c. T (-15) d. H (35).......return 40
8. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. H (60) d. T (-15)......return -5
9. a. T (-15) b. T (-35) c. T (-60) d. T (-120)....return -230
10. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. T (-35) d. T (-60)....return -95
11. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. T (-35) d. H (60).....return 25
12. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. H (35) d. H (15).....return 50
13. a. H (15) b. T (-15) c. H (35) d. T (-15).....return 20
14. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. T (-15) d. T (-35).....return -20
15. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. T (-15) d. H (35).....return 50
16. a. H (15) b. H (15) c. H (15) d. T (-15).....return 30
(60+50+25+10-30+20+40-5-230-95+25+50+20-20+50+30) =0
Total return to player: 0. Total casino profit: 0
But the player is stopping play after exactly 4 bets....
Anyway, what's the EV here? 0/16 = 0? no, maybe 0/64 (4 x 16) = 0?
You may have noted that after 1 round it was EV Neutral. After 2 rounds it was EV Neutral, After 3 rounds it was... You got it. EV Neutral.
Congratulations, you just did a worked example of Expected value derivation. Try it with Marty or inverse marty or d'Alembert, Fibonacci, or anything else of your choosing. 0EV game, 0EV outcome by money management.
Obviously SOOPOO's got a great command of math theory that's been hidden from us all. I certainly haven't been aware of this talent over the past 8 months or so I've been posting. Maybe SOOPOO can explain EV in simple terms, and debunk Wellbush's Paradox while he/she's at it. I'm all ears 😊Quote: SOOPOOModerators OnceDear and Dieter..... Do either of you ACTUALLY believe you will be able to explain the quite simple concept of EV to Wellbush? How many more wasted attempts will you guys make? Do either of you feel this thread adds ANYTHING to the WoV forum?
thanks for that, OD. And while we wait for SOOPOO's masterful dissertation on EV and Wellbush's Paradox, I have a question. As I mentioned, these calculations were all done after exactly 4 bets for each variation. Does knowing that a theoretical gambler may continue on the theoretical G Marty sequence, for the sequences that had not finished in profit (for the gambler), be of any value to understand EV here? (SOOPOO can add her/his simple insights too)Quote: OnceDearThe point is that, subject to a few errors, YOU have established that your Grand Martingale as applied to a finite number of fair coin tosses is EV Neutral.
You may have noted that after 1 round it was EV Neutral. After 2 rounds it was EV Neutral, After 3 rounds it was... You got it. EV Neutral.
Congratulations, you just did a worked example of Expected value derivation. Try it with Marty or inverse marty or d'Alembert, Fibonacci, or anything else of your choosing. 0EV game, 0EV outcome by money management.
Quote: SOOPOOModerators OnceDear and Dieter..... Do either of you ACTUALLY believe you will be able to explain the quite simple concept of EV to Wellbush? How many more wasted attempts will you guys make? Do either of you feel this thread adds ANYTHING to the WoV forum?
-EV means you're more likely to lose than win, through a combination of game rules, probabilities, and payout odds.
+EV means you're more likely to win than lose, by the same reasons.
0EV means even chance of winning or losing when adjusted for probability and payout odds.
Any numbers allow you to compare various games and wagers for how likely to lose or win you are.
No point in digging into the math if you don't agree to those principles.
thanks Dieter. SOOPOO must be so intelligent that he doesn't think this adds anything to WOV. I think it is tremendous (but I'm so far below SOOPOO's intelligence quotient, I don't understand his frustration).Quote: Dieter-EV means you're more likely to lose than win, through a combination of game rules, probabilities, and payout odds.
+EV means you're more likely to win than lose, by the same reasons.
0EV means even chance of winning or losing when adjusted for probability and payout odds.
Any numbers allow you to compare various games and wagers for how likely to lose or win you are.
No point in digging into the math if you don't agree to those principles.
If we flip a coin and pay each other 1:1. The EV is 0! However, if we only do it once, there is no way it can be 0! One of us will be up 1 unit. The other down 1 unit. The EV of it means if we play long enough, we ate expected to neither win nor lose. Again, thats not what WILL happen, its whats EXPECTED to happen.
If we flip a coin and I pay you 1:1 if you are right, thats 0 EV!
If we flip a coin and I pay you $0.75 to your dollar for being right. Thats -EV for you.
If we flip a coin and I pay you $1.25 to your dollar, thats +EV and you should try to flip as many coins as I will allow you to!
That being said, that is what is EXPECTED to happen. You still MAY win, lose or tie either of the 3 ways after any number of attempts!
Quote: Wellbushthanks for that, OD. And while we wait for SOOPOO's masterful dissertation on EV and Wellbush's Paradox, I have a question. As I mentioned, these calculations were all done after exactly 4 bets for each variation. Does knowing that a theoretical gambler may continue on the theoretical G Marty sequence, for the sequences that had not finished in profit (for the gambler), be of any value to understand EV here? (SOOPOO can add her/his simple insights too)
Right:
1. STOP YOUR SNIDE REMARKS.
2. THERE IS NO PARADOX IN WELLBUSH'S PARADOX. Only that Wellbush cannot follow logic.
3
It makes no difference to EV if the player continues wagering on those sequences where he has already lost. I could explain it to you graphically or with tables or numbers, but you do not warrant any further assistance because you are not receptive to it.
I am receptive to it. What do you think of SP's remark?Quote: OnceDearRight:
1. STOP YOUR SNIDE REMARKS.
2. THERE IS NO PARADOX IN WELLBUSH'S PARADOX. Only that Wellbush cannot follow logic.
3
It makes no difference to EV if the player continues wagering on those sequences where he has already lost. I could explain it to you graphically or with tables or numbers, but you do not warrant any further assistance because you are not receptive to it.
Quote: WellbushI am receptive to it. What do you think of SP's remark?
You have not demonstrated any progress in your understanding, nor have you shown much appreciation of those who try to help you. So. I assert 'not receptive'
I think we or any number of others could explain it easily and thoroughly. But then no explanation would resolve his apparent lack of understanding of it.Quote: SOOPOOModerators OnceDear and Dieter..... Do either of you ACTUALLY believe you will be able to explain the quite simple concept of EV to Wellbush? How many more wasted attempts will you guys make? Do either of you feel this thread adds ANYTHING to the WoV forum?
Not many more wasted attempts by me. He has the whole internet as a research resource. That doesn't do it. He has 1 to 1 explanations and he comes back with comments like "and the point of this?" I assert that he is not receptive to further assistance. Let others try. Maybe one day he will absorb some truth that manages to dissolve the odd fallacy that he holds dear.
Maybe someone more receptive will read these threads and benefit.
One seldom gets to use the word plinth in daily conversation, so I thank you for that.
I don't agree with any of this. I think it's insulting, and that's not a cliche! From my experiences with you OD, you may need some time out? My q: "The point of this?" was my genuine request for an understanding. EV may seem simple, but there are depths of understanding to it that aren't.Quote: OnceDearYou have not demonstrated any progress in your understanding, nor have you shown much appreciation of those who try to help you. So. I assert 'not receptive'
I think we or any number of others could explain it easily and thoroughly. But then no explanation would resolve his apparent lack of understanding of it.
Not many more wasted attempts by me. He has the whole internet as a research resource. That doesn't do it. He has 1 to 1 explanations and he comes back with comments like "and the point of this?" I assert that he is not receptive to further assistance. Let others try. Maybe one day he will absorb some truth that manages to dissolve the odd fallacy that he holds dear.
Maybe someone more receptive will read these threads and benefit.
And BTW, I don't think SP's comment is warranted, in the slightest.
I just checked in on where this all started: my genuine interest in the status of EV with the G Marty. That's been discussed. I don't think I've taken a one-sided view with the discussion, at all.
If you don't get it by now then the chances are you never really will.Quote: WellbushI don't agree with any of this. I think it's insulting, and that's not a cliche! From my experiences with you OD, you may need some time out? My q: "The point of this?" was my genuine request for an understanding. EV may seem simple, but there are depths of understanding to it that aren't.
And BTW, I don't think SP's comment is warranted, in the slightest.
I just checked in on where this all started: my genuine interest in the status of EV with the G Marty. That's been discussed. I don't think I've taken a one-sided view with the discussion, at all.
Let me ask you this...
Do you consider the people here who have been trying to explain it to you with math and theory smarter than you in this particular area? If so, then you really don't need to understand it, you just need to accept that what they are saying is correct. I could see you questioning it if there was just one person telling you these things, or if there were multiple people with some solid augments backed by math and theory refuting what they are saying, but there aren't any, therefore, you must accept it and move on since it's apparent you are irritating those who were originally trying to help. It seems as if you are intentionally taking them for a ride. Continuing down this path at this point should be viewed as trolling.
I've already made it clear Axelwolf, that I'm not taking anyone for a ride. Therefore it seems, you (and anyone else thinking such) need to move on!Quote: AxelWolfIf you don't get it by now then the chances are you never really will.
Let me ask you this...
Do you consider the people here who have been trying to explain it to you with math and theory smarter than you in this particular area? If so, then you really don't need to understand it, you just need to accept that what they are saying is correct. I could see you questioning it if there was just one person telling you these things, or if there were multiple people with some solid augments backed by math and theory refuting what they are saying, but there aren't any, therefore, you must accept it and move on since it's apparent you are irritating those who were originally trying to help. It seems as if you are intentionally taking them for a ride. Continuing down this path at this point should be viewed as trolling.
Learning takes time. We all need to deal with it and not judge the rate of progress
Quote: WellbushI've already made it clear Axelwolf, that I'm not taking anyone for a ride. Therefore it seems, you (and anyone else thinking such) need to move on!
Learning takes time. We all need to deal with it and not judge the rate of progress
You are so correct Wellbush, have you ever heard of a grade school teacher telling a student to get out of the classroom because he didn't get something correct or is falling behind??????
Quote: Marcusclark66You are so correct Wellbush, have you ever heard of a grade school teacher telling a student to get out of the classroom because he didn't get something correct or is falling behind??????
Have you ever heard of a 50 year old pretending to be a student who acts completely obtuse? Then the teacher realizes it's not a legitimate student and asks him to leave. The 50 year old still insists he's a grade school student though.
Or have you heard the one about the security expert who asks for job advice on a random gambling forum?
How about the gambler that rarely loses and repeatedly experiences 1000 to 1 and greater events on a routine basis?
I bet you've heard all these.
Quote: Marcusclark66You are so correct Wellbush, have you ever heard of a grade school teacher telling a student to get out of the classroom because he didn't get something correct or is falling behind??????
But of course, one day in the future the man's discoveries will be seen on the history channel about the men who made Australia great.
Have you ever heard of the armchair critic who's got nothing better to do?Quote: sabreHave you ever heard of a 50 year old pretending to be a student who acts completely obtuse? Then the teacher realizes it's not a legitimate student and asks him to leave. The 50 year old still insists he's a grade school student though.
Or have you heard the one about the security expert who asks for job advice on a random gambling forum?
How about the gambler that rarely loses and repeatedly experiences 1000 to 1 and greater events on a routine basis?
I bet you've heard all these.
