Explaining EV to Wellbush

BRyan spends a lot of time interjecting uninvited comments. He's one to talk about "losing the debate!"

Who would I need an invitation from? You?
Last I looked, this is a public forum where members in good standing are free to make comments.

Quote: MDawg

BRyan spends a lot of time interjecting uninvited comments. He's one to talk about "losing the debate!"

link to original post

I’m not sure what about my agreeing with his comment would imply that it was uninvited.

Also, isn’t this a message board?

Quote: Mission146

That makes one of us. I'm trying to be reasonable, but am increasingly losing interest with even reading your, 'Points,' much less responding to them.

No you're not. You have described yourself, in a previous post, as arrogant. So, I am the target du jour; the I am right and do not dispute me posts (you did NOT say that), but it feels like that. I can deal with that. and I do.

Quote: Mission146

Besides, if you want to call EV a theory, then call it a theory. The hell do I care? I've yet to see you propose a mathematically better theory, either way.

Perfect example, ("The hell do I care?") and I have not proposed, but asserted 4th grade arithmetic principles which are indisputable, except perhaps, by you.

Quote: Mission146

Gambling is the math applied, brother.

I do, all the time sometimes successfully and sometimes not.

Quote: Mission

Profit is irrelevant. I'll assume you know the difference between revenue and profit. Casino WIN is a form of revenue. Casinos don't even see all of that revenue, given that states get a substantial percentage of casino WIN. Go look at the annual casino revenues for any jurisdiction that itemizes Roulette, such as New Jersey, casinos don't lose at Roulette.

Make sure you tell owners and stockholders. I am guessing you have never started and owned a business where one would have to calculate the total cost of doing business including taxes and fees and the amount of revenue it would take to support such and then leave a profit that would allow the successful continuance of that business. Casino's main product is gambling and the illusion of easy riches via big wins. So while the NJ casinos won at Roulette, no surprise here, their overall revenue certainly was not sufficient to sustain their business expenses in addition to poor management, dropping patronage and casino overexposure.

Quote: Mission146

The Revel in Atlantic City closed, but they never took a direct loss on the game of Roulette for a year.

So obviously they could not generate enough revenue as shown above to generate enough profit to keep the doors open. Right?

Quote:

Your example above is not real. Roulette, IMHO. is a sucker's game, so the HE is the game itself.

tuttigym

link to original post

Quote: Mission146

All -EV games are sucker's games. Some people are just bigger suckers than others.

link to original post

Well there you go. We agree, and that is one in a row.

tuttigym

Quote: tuttigym

No you're not. You have described yourself, in a previous post, as arrogant. So, I am the target du jour; the I am right and do not dispute me posts (you did NOT say that), but it feels like that. I can deal with that. and I do.


Perfect example, ("The hell do I care?") and I have not proposed, but asserted 4th grade arithmetic principles which are indisputable, except perhaps, by you.


I do, all the time sometimes successfully and sometimes not.


Make sure you tell owners and stockholders. I am guessing you have never started and owned a business where one would have to calculate the total cost of doing business including taxes and fees and the amount of revenue it would take to support such and then leave a profit that would allow the successful continuance of that business. Casino's main product is gambling and the illusion of easy riches via big wins. So while the NJ casinos won at Roulette, no surprise here, their overall revenue certainly was not sufficient to sustain their business expenses in addition to poor management, dropping patronage and casino overexposure.


So obviously they could not generate enough revenue as shown above to generate enough profit to keep the doors open. Right?

Quote:

Your example above is not real. Roulette, IMHO. is a sucker's game, so the HE is the game itself.

tuttigym

link to original post

Quote: Mission146

All -EV games are sucker's games. Some people are just bigger suckers than others.

link to original post

Well there you go. We agree, and that is one in a row.

tuttigym

link to original post

Unfortunately, you are both wrong. Depends if the game is either a random or a non-random game.

Quote: tuttigym

No you're not. You have described yourself, in a previous post, as arrogant. So, I am the target du jour; the I am right and do not dispute me posts (you did NOT say that), but it feels like that. I can deal with that. and I do.

Arrogance does nothing to change whether or not math is right or wrong. However, the nice thing about being indisputably right on this point is that it kind of justifies the arrogance.

Speaking of arrogance:

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/video-poker/35656-ultimate-x-gold/#post822048

Look there for an example of math being applied to advantageous situations with an eye towards the long-term.

So, I'll continue to do that and you continue to try to devise betting combinations in a futile effort to beat negative expectation games. It's fine. I don't care what you do with your money, but when you propose to come here and tell me what's right or wrong about math, we've got an issue.

Or, more to the point, I am here to (pointlessly attempt to) help explain this to you---not the other way around.

Quote:

Perfect example, ("The hell do I care?") and I have not proposed, but asserted 4th grade arithmetic principles which are indisputable, except perhaps, by you.

By me, and everyone else reading this who knows how to do gambling math and calculate EV. Everything that you have said about Craps is the gambling equivalent of what the Flat Earth Society would have to say vis-a-vis the shape of the planet.

Quote:

I do, all the time sometimes successfully and sometimes not.

If you say so. It's not my money, so I don't care.

Quote:

Make sure you tell owners and stockholders. I am guessing you have never started and owned a business where one would have to calculate the total cost of doing business including taxes and fees and the amount of revenue it would take to support such and then leave a profit that would allow the successful continuance of that business. Casino's main product is gambling and the illusion of easy riches via big wins. So while the NJ casinos won at Roulette, no surprise here, their overall revenue certainly was not sufficient to sustain their business expenses in addition to poor management, dropping patronage and casino overexposure.

Tell them what? The difference between revenue and profit? I would hope they already understand that to be owning companies and/or buying stocks.

Okay, so now whether or not I have ever owned a business makes gambling math right or wrong, does it? If I say 2+2 = 4, does whether or not I have owned a business change the validity of that statement? This conversation is a waste of my time. You know I'm doing this for free, right?

Besides, I had to do these sorts of analyses in order to get my degree...which I haven't brought up because my education does not validate or invalidate math. I'm not going to spend my time making logically fallacious appeals to my own authority---it's easier just to be right. I also ran two different hotels---equally irrelevant to whether a mathematical proposition is valid or invalid. You don't need any appeal to authority when you are right.

Quote:

So obviously they could not generate enough revenue as shown above to generate enough profit to keep the doors open. Right?

Both correct and demonstrates nothing. They earned positive revenues on Roulette, which is the question at hand. The casino did not lose money on the Roulette table. Do you have any idea why Revel could not generate sufficient revenues to stay afloat? Look at how much it cost to build and look at their debt load. You know, that business math stuff that you don't think I know anything about?

Quote:

Well there you go. We agree, and that is one in a row.

tuttigym

link to original post

Okay, and Craps is a -EV game...just less so than Roulette, depending on what you are betting.

Quote: BoSox

Unfortunately, you are both wrong. Depends if the game is either a random or a non-ramdon game.

link to original post

I don't have time to list every humanly conceivable qualifier in every sentence that I ever write.

(See, Tuttigym? Didn't I tell you I have to cover every possible qualifier?)

Also:

Quote: Myself

Does betting smaller change the expected value? Not usually. So, why bet smaller? That's where you get into a mathematical gambling concept called, "Variance," which you probably also have no appreciation for, considering that, based on your posts, you don't appreciate house edge. If you make the $500 in bets betting only $0.10 per trial, for instance, it is simply all but literally impossible to, "Run badly enough," such that you would fail to profit if the game is anything close to fair.

So, I have already touched upon potential non-randomness, though for a different sub-point.

Also, can we get this thread hidden? Nobody reading is going to benefit from this pointless exchange.

Actually, can we just hide the entire Betting Systems Sub-Forum?

Quote: Mission146

I don't have time to list every humanly conceivable qualifier in every sentence that I ever write.

link to original post

You might?

Poor spend of time, perhaps, but...

Enough arguing without meaningfully furthering the discussion.

Thread closed; I'm sure another will appear soon enough.