Thread Rating:

Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 133
  • Posts: 15308
Thanks for this post from:
OnceDear
October 17th, 2021 at 8:37:53 AM permalink
Quote: OnceDear



Thanks Mission.
I fear that your answer brought in too many opportunities for WellBush or others to choose to not understand.
Craps and VP stats also complicated things. My zod. you used lots of numbers and maths and dragged in the concept of regression to the mean. A noble effort wasted.

If Wellbush want's to say that he has debunked the Gamblers Fallacy, that he's debunked everything you ever posted, or that he derides that none of the maths community can debunk his paradoxes, then he's going to do so indefinitely. And 'The maths community' will bang their heads against the wall, getting nowhere.

He's already asserted that we are all unable to debunk his so called paradox. He can and will assert any old nonsense. I think it's time he found a new audience of his peers.
link to original post



I should like to think that the time has come for Wellbush to take his deliberate choice to not understand somewhere else---permanently---but Administration will do with him what it will do with him. I don't know how many times directly insulting the math community should be permitted here, though. It's basically a direct insult to the Wizard, who built these sites on the math...so Wellbush's post is the equivalent of walking into someone's house and urinating on their carpet...

I don't consider the effort wasted as long as at least one other person reads it and learns something from it. I've had people thank me for putting things in a mathematical perspective and teaching them certain concepts before, both publicly and privately---and just one thank you is enough to make the work worth it. One person who might have bought lots of lottery tickets and stops doing so, one person who might have played betting systems with real money and chose not to---you know what it is.

I usually don't like to pat myself on the back, but that's also one of my better more recent posts and I expressed what I wanted as concisely as you will ever see me do, so I'm also happy with that.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
OnceDear
Administrator
OnceDear
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
  • Threads: 51
  • Posts: 6392
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146Marcusclark66
October 17th, 2021 at 9:48:24 AM permalink
Quote: Wellbush

The Gambler's Falacy states that every fair play in a game of chance, is independent, and has no better or worse chance based on past play.

... So, the math community unequivocally state the percentages that will eventually occur in each game, for the house, and the gambler.

But how can this be true, due to the Gambler's Falacy???? Another paradox!!!!

How can math say on one hand, you cannot give predictions re chances, but on the other hand predict future chances down to percentage points? Is the math community moronic???
link to original post



I see some moderator changed the title of the thread to make it less hostile. Thanks.

As I understand the OP's question, I'll paraphrase as...
"If the Gamblers' fallacy says that past events cannot predict future outcomes, how can mathematicians say, at the same time; that the long term results (of say a coin toss) will occur in some known proportion?"

This is NOT a paradox.
The fallacy in the gamblers fallacy comes from a misinterpretation of 'regression to the mean'.

As we approach the first flip of a fair coin, we have absolutely zero knowledge of the first outcome. But we DO know that it will be either heads or tails.
Physics experts, or observant gamblers can assert that over the long term, we can expect to see about the same number of heads results as tails results. About 50% probability of each. But not over 1 flip!
Thus sayeth probability theory and 'the maths community. Same with a fair six sided die. We have ZERO knowledge of the first next roll. It can be 1,2,3,4,5 or 6. Intuitively and with deep analysis of physics, we can expect those outcomes to each have equal probability of 1/6 each.
Again zero prediction of the next outcome or any future outcome. Only that in the long term, we will tend towards an equal proportion of each. NOT and absolutely NOT expecting ever to have an equal number of each outcome.
So. NO predictive power to tell us the next outcome. Physical and empirical ability to predict the tendency of a large number of outcomes.

Now. Mission has referred to 'Regression towards the mean' Let's explore that with a fair coin flip.

We flip a coin 1 time and note the outcome. Count the heads and count the tails and work out percentage heads.
Repeat this with a set of 100 more flips.
Repeat this for a set of 1,000,000 flips
Repeat this for a set of 10,000,000 flips
Maintain a chart of count of heads and count of tails and ratio of those.

After 1 flip, we either have 100% heads or 0% heads. Never any other value. The absolute count difference will be one coin flip
After 2 flips we either have 0% heads, or 25% or 50% or 75% or 100% heads The absolute count difference cannot exceed 2 coin flips
After 3 flips we either have 0% heads, or 33.3% or 66.7% or 100% heads ( there are multiple ways of getting the middle two)
And so on. As we flip more and more often, we will get more and more potential results. More often tending towards the middle value.

After a very large number of repeated trials, we will TEND towards a ratio of heads to tails of 50% That's what probability theory tells us.
BUT

After 1 flip, we either have 1 head or 1 tails. A 100% difference Never any other value. The absolute count difference cannot exceed 1 coin flip

After 1 million flips might reasonably have 490,000 heads and 510,000 tails for a percentage heads of 49%. The absolute count difference would be be 20,000 coin flips.

After 10 million flips we might have 4,950,000 heads and 5,050,000 Still A reasonable result.
The percentage heads is (4,950,000/10,000,000) = 49.5% The absolute count difference would be 50,000 coin flips

Observe that the absolute numerical count difference in outcomes did NOT approach zero. It actually got bigger We did NOT get as many heads as tails and the actual count difference has quite reasonably increased from 1 through 20,000 through to 100,000

But the percentage probability of heads did as regression to the mean said. the percentage outcomes observed went from 100% through 49% to 49.5%. The percentage outcome 'tended towards the expected value of 50%'

And therein lies the fallacy that is the gamblers' fallacy: That the the difference in the count of heads and the count of tails will tend towards zero as either heads or tails 'catches up'. Probability theory does not suggest that and probability theory has been shown over centuries of growing casinos, to be reliable.

No paradox. No predictive power in the gamblers fallacy. The only predictive power in probability theory is to define and assign expected ranges of outcomes.
Last edited by: OnceDear on Oct 17, 2021
Beware. The earth is NOT flat. Hit and run is not a winning strategy: Pressing into trends IS not a winning strategy: Progressives are not a winning strategy: Don't Buy It! .Don't even take it for free.
MDawg
MDawg
Joined: Sep 27, 2018
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 4539
Thanks for this post from:
Marcusclark66
October 17th, 2021 at 10:34:10 AM permalink
WellBush should not have used the term "moronic" and therein lies the insult and perhaps suspension worthy post, although - it wasn't directed at anyone in particular, and in the past when someone made a post that was clearly insultingly directed at me she was allowed to wiggle out of it by claiming that it wasn't directed at anyone in particular. So the precedent seems to be that vague insults not directed at anyone in particular are allowed especially if the poster comes in and cringes and grovels for mercy.

As far as repeated "trolling," I'd say that AxelWolf takes the opportunity to mention his belief that Baccarat is unbeatable in about 80% of his rarely-on-topic-lately posts. Another 10% he spends trying to put down anyone who follows MDawg's ideas.

In general, I don't think any Moderator should decide that content with which he disagrees is automatically trolling, especially if at the same time allowing trolling comments to pass by with which he might agree.

Wellbush is just...Wellbush. It takes all kinds to make up a community and it's odd to me that anyone would be up in arms about such content on of all places, the internet. Just don't read it if you don't want to.
I tell you it’s wonderful to be here, man. I don’t give a damn who wins or loses. It’s just wonderful to be here with you people. https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/33908-the-adventures-of-mdawg/
Marcusclark66
Marcusclark66
Joined: Mar 26, 2020
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 1140
October 17th, 2021 at 10:37:20 AM permalink
Quote: MDawg

WellBush should not have used the term "moronic" and therein lies the insult and perhaps suspension worthy post, although - it wasn't directed at anyone in particular, and in the past when someone made a post that was clearly insultingly directed at me she was allowed to wiggle out of it by claiming that it wasn't directed at anyone in particular. So the precedent seems to be that vague insults not directed at anyone in particular are allowed if the poster comes in and cringes and grovels for mercy.

As far as repeated "trolling," I'd say that AxelWolf takes the opportunity to mention his belief that Baccarat is unbeatable in about 90% of his rarely-on-topic-lately posts.

In general, I don't think any Moderator should decide that content with which he disagrees is automatically trolling, especially if at the same time allowing trolling comments to pass by with which he might agree.

Wellbush is just...Wellbush. It takes all kinds to make up a community and it's odd to me that anyone would be up in arms about such content on of all places, the internet. Just don't read it if you don't want to.
link to original post



So I remember a few times people saying, that is a stupid way you wager, or what an a**hole way to bet, etc.

Does that mean I am those things.

Or not?

Just saying. Kinda along the same lines.
Marcus Clark. Real Person; AKA MarcusClark66. *Professional Casino Security Expert. *Certified EMT *Certified Company Firearms Instructor. *Certified Gaming Regulations Interpreter for Corporate Applications. *Domestic UrbanTactical Combat Casualty Expert. *Tic-Tac-Toe Expert (Real Competitive Versions) & Mastering Chess. *Honorary & Official #1 Fan of the MDawg Adventures Club. *Mastering Cracking it. Bit-by-Bit, Piece-by-Piece Crediting Forum Members. *Certified Casino Property Entry & Exit Point Analyzer *Baccarat Winning Session Record: 12 out of 12 & 1 out of 1 Mini Session. Baccarat Losing Session Record: 2 Losing Sessions.
Dieter
Administrator
Dieter
Joined: Jul 23, 2014
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 3209
October 17th, 2021 at 10:48:29 AM permalink
Quote: Marcusclark66


So I remember a few times people saying, that is a stupid way you wager, or what an a**hole way to bet, etc.

Does that mean I am those things.

link to original post



No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.
May the cards fall in your favor.
OnceDear
Administrator
OnceDear
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
  • Threads: 51
  • Posts: 6392
October 17th, 2021 at 10:53:30 AM permalink
Quote: MDawg

WellBush should not have used the term "moronic" and therein lies the insult and perhaps suspension worthy post, although - it wasn't directed at anyone in particular, and in the past when someone made a post that was clearly insultingly directed at me she was allowed to wiggle out of it by claiming that it wasn't directed at anyone in particular. So the precedent seems to be that vague insults not directed at anyone in particular are allowed especially if the poster comes in and cringes and grovels for mercy.

As far as repeated "trolling," I'd say that AxelWolf takes the opportunity to mention his belief that Baccarat is unbeatable in about 80% of his rarely-on-topic-lately posts. Another 10% he spends trying to put down anyone who follows MDawg's ideas.

In general, I don't think any Moderator should decide that content with which he disagrees is automatically trolling, especially if at the same time allowing trolling comments to pass by with which he might agree.
...link to original post

If MDawg or his #1 fan want to discuss moderator actions or suspension decisions, there is a thread for that

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/info/rules/36338-discussion-iii-about-the-suspension-list/

Unfortunately i cannot MOVE these two posts. In future, such discussion about suspension, in thread, might be deemed hijacking or, as has been suggested to me, 'trolling the green team' . I will not answer MDawg's comments here.
Beware. The earth is NOT flat. Hit and run is not a winning strategy: Pressing into trends IS not a winning strategy: Progressives are not a winning strategy: Don't Buy It! .Don't even take it for free.
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
  • Threads: 152
  • Posts: 20169
October 17th, 2021 at 11:38:22 AM permalink
Quote: MDawg

WellBush should not have used the term "moronic" and therein lies the insult and perhaps suspension worthy post, although - it wasn't directed at anyone in particular, and in the past when someone made a post that was clearly insultingly directed at me she was allowed to wiggle out of it by claiming that it wasn't directed at anyone in particular. So the precedent seems to be that vague insults not directed at anyone in particular are allowed especially if the poster comes in and cringes and grovels for mercy.

As far as repeated "trolling," I'd say that AxelWolf takes the opportunity to mention his belief that Baccarat is unbeatable in about 80% of his rarely-on-topic-lately posts. Another 10% he spends trying to put down anyone who follows MDawg's ideas.

In general, I don't think any Moderator should decide that content with which he disagrees is automatically trolling, especially if at the same time allowing trolling comments to pass by with which he might agree.

Wellbush is just...Wellbush. It takes all kinds to make up a community and it's odd to me that anyone would be up in arms about such content on of all places, the internet. Just don't read it if you don't want to.
link to original post

Said the guy who has a dedicated section on a blog site for the sole purpose of bashing members of this and other forums, a blog site that has been previously mentioned here on WOV.

Baccarat IS beatable when real Advantage Play strategies are used, that's a fact.
No betting system can beat baccarat or any -EV game that's dealt randomly. IIRC Mike said somewhere on the forum that he didn't witness you using any Advantage play method, or somthing like that, but then you asked him to delete that post or whatever.

Have you seen the supposed members of your fan club? It's not too impressive, there are perhaps 3. The members of your hate club far outnumber your fan club, many of them we know are legit members who have been around for years. There are probably SOME 60 members of your hate club.

Your supposed fan club seems to post things frequently that warrant being call out. One might say your supposed fans have come here for no other reason than to troll the forum.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
  • Threads: 152
  • Posts: 20169
October 17th, 2021 at 11:41:20 AM permalink
Quote: Marcusclark66

Quote: MDawg

WellBush should not have used the term "moronic" and therein lies the insult and perhaps suspension worthy post, although - it wasn't directed at anyone in particular, and in the past when someone made a post that was clearly insultingly directed at me she was allowed to wiggle out of it by claiming that it wasn't directed at anyone in particular. So the precedent seems to be that vague insults not directed at anyone in particular are allowed if the poster comes in and cringes and grovels for mercy.

As far as repeated "trolling," I'd say that AxelWolf takes the opportunity to mention his belief that Baccarat is unbeatable in about 90% of his rarely-on-topic-lately posts.

In general, I don't think any Moderator should decide that content with which he disagrees is automatically trolling, especially if at the same time allowing trolling comments to pass by with which he might agree.

Wellbush is just...Wellbush. It takes all kinds to make up a community and it's odd to me that anyone would be up in arms about such content on of all places, the internet. Just don't read it if you don't want to.
link to original post



So I remember a few times people saying, that is a stupid way you wager, or what an a**hole way to bet, etc.

Does that mean I am those things.

Or not?

Just saying. Kinda along the same lines.
link to original post

I belive those things to be true.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
gordonm888
Administrator
gordonm888
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
  • Threads: 55
  • Posts: 3700
October 17th, 2021 at 12:24:55 PM permalink
Quote: MDawg

[snip]
In general, I don't think any Moderator should decide that content with which he disagrees is automatically trolling, especially if at the same time allowing trolling comments to pass by with which he might agree.

[snip]
link to original post



I agree with MDawg on the above concept 100%.

I used to endure posts from a certain game developer/dealer (paigowdan) who asserted in over 100 posts that card counting was cheating. This was insulting to the entire community of card counters in this forum, but no moderator ever even suggested that stating this opinion was an actionable offense. Because, of course, it was not.

People here have also expressed very insulting opinions of casino security personnel calling them thugs, etc. That has never been cited as an actionable offense.

The phrase "personal insult" has the adjective "Personal" in it. The phrase "Free speech" has the phrase "Free" in it.
So many better men, a few of them friends, are dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things live on, and so do I.
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 133
  • Posts: 15308
October 17th, 2021 at 12:40:38 PM permalink
If I were to go on a forum dedicated to auto repair and criticize the way that mechanics participating on that forum describe how to change a head gasket as, “Moronic,” and, “Pathetic,” how long do you think until they ban me?

Wellbush more than that, because he’s doing the equivalent of calling the math community moronic just for believing that head gaskets exist and sometimes need to be changed.

In the meantime, there’s almost never anything interesting or useful in any of his posts. His posts do nothing but subtract from the quality of the forum and he calls the math community, “Pathetic?”

IMO, he’s had his fun here and it’s time for him to move on. Free Speech in good faith is one thing, but I don’t see how anyone can maintain that he’s even conceivably posting in good faith anymore.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219

  • Jump to: