EvenBob
Quote: AxelWolfI have seen that before, and when browsing I noticed something that made me no longer interested. *See below, the last paragraph.Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolfYou were claiming that since poker and BJ use a random pre shuffle, and people have figured out proven ways to beat those games(Proven AP methods) then it shouldn't be a surprise that people have figured out a way to beat roulette with non-AP methods.Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolfYou used poker and Blackjack as examples of random games people figured out how to beat. There have been many programs made that are able to beat both those games but you're claiming it can't be done for roulette.
link to original post
The only thing blackjack and poker have in common with roulette is they both use random outcomes. That's it they have absolutely nothing else in common so any other comparisons you make have zero validity. The only point I was trying to make and I've said this about 20 times now is that they both use random outcomes. Period.
link to original post
Yet, you fail to state or understand the obvious reason people can beat those games. You fail to state or understand the fact that there's math and logic behind that proof. Most people understand why those games can give someone an advantage, despite an initial random shuffle. No one who is logical, understands mathematics, and is sane can understand how it's possible. Guess why...because it isn't possible,
You want to use examples only when you believe it adds credibility to your method SYSTEM and ignore them when it's legit debunking your method SYSTEM.
You couldn't have found 2 worst examples.
link to original post
Here is someone using math to show that past outcomes can indeed be used to gain the advantage in roulette. I suppose you think he's full of crap to because he doesn't agree with your opinion.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/37509-my-governor-changed-my-life/17/#post864077
link to original post
I'm self-aware enough to know I don't understand everything in that research(I doubt you can either). I haven't a clue what a vector matrix is(sounds like a modern car name).
If someone knew when and how to time their bets then, of course, they would win, but you can't, nor can anyone else.
I have seen too many situations where someone is using fuzzy math, leaving out key factors or it's just not a proper scientific test. Someone inevitably shows some math and logic debunking it.
And there's this...
* "This study, however, has a flaw, the simulation of the Markov chain is done using R. The
results from this analysis study would have been stronger and more convincing if the simulation
is done in the actual game."
link to original post
He says the results of the study would have been stronger and more convincing if done in the actual game and you think that's a bad thing? Of course it would be better using actuals is always better. I don't get why you would dismiss it because of that. So you think he's submitted this paper using Fuzzy Math? That's ridiculous. I've looked at enough Markov chains now to realize he's using a genuine Markov chain. I'm not a math person I do not understand the fine details of it. Let's see if somebody here can debunk it. It's very strange to me that he details what I do, the hair on the back of my neck stood up when I was reading this for the first time. That's no coincidence that he hit the nail on the head so many times.
Everything he says might be true as per his research. But, does that give one the ability to beat roulette? Can you explain what part of his research you're using to beat roulette? Please Quote/copy that part and explain how you adapt that.Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolfI have seen that before, and when browsing I noticed something that made me no longer interested. *See below, the last paragraph.Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolfYou were claiming that since poker and BJ use a random pre shuffle, and people have figured out proven ways to beat those games(Proven AP methods) then it shouldn't be a surprise that people have figured out a way to beat roulette with non-AP methods.Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolfYou used poker and Blackjack as examples of random games people figured out how to beat. There have been many programs made that are able to beat both those games but you're claiming it can't be done for roulette.
link to original post
The only thing blackjack and poker have in common with roulette is they both use random outcomes. That's it they have absolutely nothing else in common so any other comparisons you make have zero validity. The only point I was trying to make and I've said this about 20 times now is that they both use random outcomes. Period.
link to original post
Yet, you fail to state or understand the obvious reason people can beat those games. You fail to state or understand the fact that there's math and logic behind that proof. Most people understand why those games can give someone an advantage, despite an initial random shuffle. No one who is logical, understands mathematics, and is sane can understand how it's possible. Guess why...because it isn't possible,
You want to use examples only when you believe it adds credibility to your method SYSTEM and ignore them when it's legit debunking your method SYSTEM.
You couldn't have found 2 worst examples.
link to original post
Here is someone using math to show that past outcomes can indeed be used to gain the advantage in roulette. I suppose you think he's full of crap to because he doesn't agree with your opinion.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/37509-my-governor-changed-my-life/17/#post864077
link to original post
I'm self-aware enough to know I don't understand everything in that research(I doubt you can either). I haven't a clue what a vector matrix is(sounds like a modern car name).
If someone knew when and how to time their bets then, of course, they would win, but you can't, nor can anyone else.
I have seen too many situations where someone is using fuzzy math, leaving out key factors or it's just not a proper scientific test. Someone inevitably shows some math and logic debunking it.
And there's this...
* "This study, however, has a flaw, the simulation of the Markov chain is done using R. The
results from this analysis study would have been stronger and more convincing if the simulation
is done in the actual game."
link to original post
He says the results of the study would have been stronger and more convincing if done in the actual game and you think that's a bad thing? Of course it would be better using actuals is always better. I don't get why you would dismiss it because of that. So you think he's submitted this paper using Fuzzy Math? That's ridiculous. I've looked at enough Markov chains now to realize he's using a genuine Markov chain. I'm not a math person I do not understand the fine details of it. Let's see if somebody here can debunk it. It's very strange to me that he details what I do, the hair on the back of my neck stood up when I was reading this for the first time. That's no coincidence that he hit the nail on the head so many times.
link to original post
And, explain why if he can use R programming language to figure all that out why someone can't use that or another programming language to make a program that can do it?
Quote: EvenBobI appreciate all the thought that you put into your questions feel free to keep asking. I'll basically tell you anything you want to know. I used to be afraid somebody would steal this but now I know nobody will steal it because it's too hard to learn and nobody wants to take the time to do it.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/37509-my-governor-changed-my-life/17/#post863748
I went go on to ask in a very polite manner and without attacking you and I got this (for me) very disappointing answer
Quote: EvenBobWhat you're looking for are rules and regulations and triggers and a road map of where to make the next bet. It doesn't exist if it did everybody would be doing this and nobody's doing it. What you want is for me to say if you see A bet on B. I don't play that way, it doesn't work. You will be wrong half the time. You are never going to understand this unless you start studying outcomes and you do that by logging into an online casino writing down the outcomes and where you think the bets are or download actual outcomes from some of the German casinos that are online which is what I did for years. I also bought something called Roulette Xtreme that you download online and you can put actual outcomes in it from real casinos and play it like it's real roulette. It's an invaluable tool for learning how to deal with outcomes. In order to understand this you have to put in the time of playing and playing and playing and playing virtually on something like the software I just mentioned. I've thrown away boxes and boxes and boxes of notebooks that are full on both sides of the paper front to back of virtual sessions that I played online. Not betting real money just learning how to do it. I'm realizing that answering questions is not going to get you anywhere except confused. People who think this can be programmed are wrong because there are no rules there are no triggers. What there is is understanding how the outcomes behave. Confused yet?
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/37509-my-governor-changed-my-life/17/#post863996
to be frank I did not ask you for any education to play roulette without risking any money. I promise I will not ask you any more questions.
Please let me add that member AxelWolf has many very good points/arguments
stay safe
Quote: AxelWolfEverything he says might be true as per his research. But, does that give one the ability to beat roulette? Can you explain what part of his research you're using to beat roulette? Please Quote/copy that part and explain how you adapt that.
link to original post
Right now I'm using his conclusions that you can look at past results and figure out what your next bet is that will give you an advantage. Which is exactly what I do and exactly what sticks in the craw of everybody around here who says you can't use past results. Here's a math guy saying yes you can. I have to figure out these different states he's talking about and how to recognize them when I'm playing I only discovered this a couple days ago and I missed the whole day yesterday because the power was out and I had no computer access in the evening. I will figure it out eventually. As far as programming it goes I would not have the vaguest idea what to enter into the program. You keep acting like I'm looking for something governed by rules and regulations and there are none. In blackjack for instance it's very specific you raise your bet when the count is in your favor. There is no such thing in what I do. Maybe it's just me maybe somebody else will figure it out and write a program for it but the information is not going to come for me because I have no idea what to put in the program.
Quote: seven
to be frank I did not ask you for any education to play roulette without risking any money. I promise I will not ask you any more questions.
Please let me add that member AxelWolf has many very good points/arguments
stay safe
link to original post
I was having a hard time answering some of your questions because they require very specific answers and I don't have very specific answers. There's nothing very specific about this that's the problem. You gain far more from study of the outcomes then anything else. I'm sorry you took it personally, I didn't mean it that way. It's very understandable that you want exacting rules that tell you when to place a bet because that's what everybody wants. Just tonight I'm looking at lightning roulette to see if there's anything to bet on and there was not but I can't tell you exactly why I knew that. I have just seen so many thousands and thousands of outcomes that I know automatically by looking at it that it's too chaotic. It wasn't any one specific thing it was everything together. If you and Axle think this can be programmed I don't know how it's possible. Maybe somebody else will learn it and program it who knows but it's not going to be me because I wouldn't know what to put in the program.
The man who wrote the theory of relativity and E=MC squared.
His name was Einstein.
He studied Roulette and admitted it could not be beat.
I'm glad EB has a higher intellect than Einstein.
I'm a little confused how EB can't understand math like Markov chains but I am sure Einstein didn't understand math all too well either.
Quote: darkozI'm just saying.
I'm a little confused how EB can't understand math like Markov chains but I am sure Einstein didn't understand math all too well either.
link to original post
Dude he studies the outcomes and makes educated guesses. What's there so hard to understand?
Quote: Lucky5o3Quote: darkozI'm just saying.
I'm a little confused how EB can't understand math like Markov chains but I am sure Einstein didn't understand math all too well either.
link to original post
Dude he studies the outcomes and makes educated guesses. What's there so hard to understand?
link to original post
I think the hard thing to understand is educated guesses and doing better than uneducated guesses.
Guessing correctly with an 80% hit rate over 500 guesses is hard to understand.Quote: Lucky5o3Quote: darkozI'm just saying.
I'm a little confused how EB can't understand math like Markov chains but I am sure Einstein didn't understand math all too well either.
link to original post
Dude he studies the outcomes and makes educated guesses. What's there so hard to understand?
link to original post
If I understand well you said that you look for 1 unit profit per day and you have a hit rate of 80%. If you are betting for 21 months I will guess that is something arround 1000 units? Correct me if I am wrong please.
Thanks.
Quote: Lucky5o3EvenBob either you're the most epic troll in the world that managed to waste the time of so many people here or you're just out of your mind.
link to original post
This is a personal insult. You are suspended 3 days.
Please read our forum rules Forum Rules. Note that the first rule is "Absolutely no personal insults."
Quote: darkozI'm just saying.
The man who wrote the theory of relativity and E=MC squared.
His name was Einstein.
He studied Roulette and admitted it could not be beat.
I'm glad EB has a higher intellect than Einstein.
I'm a little confused how EB can't understand math like Markov chains but I am sure Einstein didn't understand math all too well either.
link to original post
Yeah, Einstein. You might want to read this and cry yourself to sleep at night.
5 TImes Einstein Was Wrong https://astronomy.com/news/2018/09/5-times-einstein-was-wrong
And they are some big mistakes too. Also he never studied roulette he glanced at it and he was wrong. Big surprise.
Quote: CristobalHi EvenBob, can I ask you how many units have you bet since january 2021 when you begging to betting in online casino?
If I understand well you said that you look for 1 unit profit per day and you have a hit rate of 80%. If you are betting for 21 months I will guess that is something arround 1000 units? Correct me if I am wrong please.
Thanks.
link to original post
Yes you are wrong. Casino gambling was passed in January 2021 but the casinos didn't actually open online until September 2021 so it was a year ago. I don't remember exactly when I started playing for real but it wasn't in September it was a couple months later I think. I said in this thread already but it's over 500 units. It's only possible to have that high a hit rate because they show me 90 spends an hour. In a brick-and-mortar casino my hit rate is much smaller.
Quote: rainmanBob have you done any research on the paper writer to find if he is filthy rich from playing the roulette?
link to original post
And how rich did Edward Thorp get writing his book that taught the world how to beat blackjack. He didn't get rich at all from blackjack because he didn't play he wrote a book about it. And he didn't even get rich from the book over 50 years it's only sold a million copies. Stephen King sells more books than that in pre-orders before the book even comes out. Edward Thorp was not a gambler he was a math guy. Why would he care about getting filthy rich from playing Blackjack. The guy who wrote the Markov chain article is obviously a student and probably not a gambler. Did you actually read it and discover how much time you have to give to it to make it pay off? Why would he want to do that.
Quote: unJonQuote: Lucky5o3Quote: darkozI'm just saying.
I'm a little confused how EB can't understand math like Markov chains but I am sure Einstein didn't understand math all too well either.
link to original post
Dude he studies the outcomes and makes educated guesses. What's there so hard to understand?
link to original post
I think the hard thing to understand is educated guesses and doing better than uneducated guesses.
link to original post
Regular guessing is just betting randomly on random outcomes. Educated guessing is betting non randomly, all the math here that people quote about roulette was done on the supposition that you're betting randomly. When you start betting nine randomly that math no longer applies.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkozI'm just saying.
The man who wrote the theory of relativity and E=MC squared.
His name was Einstein.
He studied Roulette and admitted it could not be beat.
I'm glad EB has a higher intellect than Einstein.
I'm a little confused how EB can't understand math like Markov chains but I am sure Einstein didn't understand math all too well either.
link to original post
Yeah, Einstein. You might want to read this and cry yourself to sleep at night.
5 TImes Einstein Was Wrong https://astronomy.com/news/2018/09/5-times-einstein-was-wrong
And they are some big mistakes too. Also he never studied roulette he glanced at it and he was wrong. Big surprise.
link to original post
Big difference between him and you.
When he was wrong he admitted it(according to your own article).
He was rarely wrong.
And when he was wrong I guarantee his response wouldn't have been "I don't care".
Quote: darkoz
Big difference between him and you.
When he was wrong he admitted it(according to your own article).
He was rarely wrong.
And when he was wrong I guarantee his response wouldn't have been "I don't care".
Love it, man. LOL
tuttigym
Quote: darkozQuote: EvenBobQuote: darkozI'm just saying.
The man who wrote the theory of relativity and E=MC squared.
His name was Einstein.
He studied Roulette and admitted it could not be beat.
I'm glad EB has a higher intellect than Einstein.
I'm a little confused how EB can't understand math like Markov chains but I am sure Einstein didn't understand math all too well either.
link to original post
Yeah, Einstein. You might want to read this and cry yourself to sleep at night.
5 TImes Einstein Was Wrong https://astronomy.com/news/2018/09/5-times-einstein-was-wrong
And they are some big mistakes too. Also he never studied roulette he glanced at it and he was wrong. Big surprise.
link to original post
Big difference between him and you.
When he was wrong he admitted it(according to your own article).
He was rarely wrong.
And when he was wrong I guarantee his response wouldn't have been "I don't care".
link to original post
The point is he was wrong occasionally and he was certainly wrong about roulette which he never studied, that's a well-known fact. He just glanced at it and took the popular opinion. And I am not wrong I do this every day and the casino pays me every day. Well almost everyday, on Sunday I couldn't find anything to bet on.
Who knew?
Alas, only EB has the necessary powers of divination; I guess the rest of us are consigned to the slag heap.
EB has reversed the playing field; now he has the upper hand.
He's like a clairvoyant in a carnival sideshow,
Now it's up to the casinos to "stump the guesser.'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J51zLyjWQlg
Quote: EvenBobOn Sunday I sent the Markov chain article to my daughter who I've said many times here is a college math professor. She doesn't teach this kind of math so she sent it to a math professor friend of hers who does. She got an email from her today saying that she looked at it and the math seemed sound to her. I'm still waiting for somebody here to debunk it. I'm in the process of trying to get ahold of the author of the article to see if he's doing any more work on this or what his thoughts are today about it.
link to original post
You are too funny! We have how many math experts on this forum who know that you are just trolling the forum! How many math experts do you need? You are not hitting 80% of your bets. You are not winning money playing roulette. Those are simple facts. You can post any baloney you want to because posting absolute nonsense is allowed here. Your posts, in totality, are absolute nonsense. It’s really plain to see….
Quote: EvenBobOn Sunday I sent the Markov chain article to my daughter who I've said many times here is a college math professor. She doesn't teach this kind of math so she sent it to a math professor friend of hers who does. She got an email from her today saying that she looked at it and the math seemed sound to her. I'm still waiting for somebody here to debunk it. I'm in the process of trying to get ahold of the author of the article to see if he's doing any more work on this or what his thoughts are today about it.
link to original post
You are literally trying to contact the wrong person.
You should be trying to contact the professor who the paper was submitted to and get her grade and expert opinion on it.
I suspect the paper may have received a failing grade.
And if it didn't get a failing grade that would validate you more than contacting the student.
But what you really want is bias gratification.
This happens a lot with people who have bias gratification.
First, disrepute the respected professionals (like Albert Einstein).
Then point to unproven sources as evidence to support your claims.
Flat earthers do this tactic
The women in Ghostbusters did it. Yes, they were proven right. There were ghosts. And that film isn't classified as non-fiction either.
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: EvenBobOn Sunday I sent the Markov chain article to my daughter who I've said many times here is a college math professor. She doesn't teach this kind of math so she sent it to a math professor friend of hers who does. She got an email from her today saying that she looked at it and the math seemed sound to her. I'm still waiting for somebody here to debunk it. I'm in the process of trying to get ahold of the author of the article to see if he's doing any more work on this or what his thoughts are today about it.
link to original post
You are too funny! We have how many math experts on this forum who know that you are just trolling the forum! How many math experts do you need?
And to date how many have debunked the Markov chain article? So far not one. What you know for sure and a dollar bill will get you coffee at McDonald's. What I know for sure gets me paid by the casino every time I play. Live with it.
Quote: darkozQuote: EvenBobOn Sunday I sent the Markov chain article to my daughter who I've said many times here is a college math professor. She doesn't teach this kind of math so she sent it to a math professor friend of hers who does. She got an email from her today saying that she looked at it and the math seemed sound to her. I'm still waiting for somebody here to debunk it. I'm in the process of trying to get ahold of the author of the article to see if he's doing any more work on this or what his thoughts are today about it.
link to original post
You are literally trying to contact the wrong person.
You should be trying to contact the professor who the paper was submitted to and get her grade and expert opinion on it.
I suspect the paper may have received a failing grade.
And if it didn't get a failing grade that would validate you more than contacting the student.
But what you really want is bias gratification.
This happens a lot with people who have bias gratification.
First, disrepute the respected professionals (like Albert Einstein).
Then point to unproven sources as evidence to support your claims.
Flat earthers do this tactic
The women in Ghostbusters did it. Yes, they were proven right. There were ghosts. And that film isn't classified as non-fiction either.
link to original post
And you do not have confirmation bias? Give me a break. The math professor confirming that the math looks sound to her is for my benefit not yours. I don't care if you believe it or not, I totally expected you not to believe it. Your confirmation bias will never let you believe this. Let me repeat that. Your confirmation bias will never ever let you believe that I'm beating roulette. Got it? Get it?
As I said in my last post I'm in the process of contacting the author of the article. I have no intention of bothering the person who was submitted the article college professors are very busy people and I didn't even really like asking my daughter about this. But I did it anyway because I knew she would do it even if she didn't want to.
Quote: Deadsh0tQuote: EvenBob
And to date how many have debunked the Markov chain article? So far not one. What you know for sure and a dollar bill will get you coffee at McDonald's. What I know for sure gets me paid by the casino every time I play. Live with it.
link to original post
EvenBob is a legend.
link to original post
For all the wrong reasons.
Since Gonzalo’s long span of roulette wins, casinos have tried to fix any mistakes that could influence the way the roulette wheel spins. Most wheels are now manufactured on lines to help keep imperfections from appearing and casinos have updated their cameras so they can keep their eyes out for anyone spending too much time studying the roulette wheel.
Hmm, but if casinos are still on the lookout, that means....
Quote: MDawgGonzalo Garcia-Pelayo: Master of Roulette
Since Gonzalo’s long span of roulette wins, casinos have tried to fix any mistakes that could influence the way the roulette wheel spins. Most wheels are now manufactured on lines to help keep imperfections from appearing and casinos have updated their cameras so they can keep their eyes out for anyone spending too much time studying the roulette wheel.
link to original post
That's been going on for quite a while now. I was asked to leave Vegas casinos at least twice the last time I was there because I was writing down the results of the spins and I wasn't playing. They just assumed I was clocking the wheel and got rid of me. Both casinos were downtown one was the Fremont and I think the other one was at the Plaza. They were so uptight about somebody beating their wheels so they got rid of their Marquis so we can't see the past spins. This was five or six years ago I don't know what's going on there now.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkozQuote: EvenBobOn Sunday I sent the Markov chain article to my daughter who I've said many times here is a college math professor. She doesn't teach this kind of math so she sent it to a math professor friend of hers who does. She got an email from her today saying that she looked at it and the math seemed sound to her. I'm still waiting for somebody here to debunk it. I'm in the process of trying to get ahold of the author of the article to see if he's doing any more work on this or what his thoughts are today about it.
link to original post
You are literally trying to contact the wrong person.
You should be trying to contact the professor who the paper was submitted to and get her grade and expert opinion on it.
I suspect the paper may have received a failing grade.
And if it didn't get a failing grade that would validate you more than contacting the student.
But what you really want is bias gratification.
This happens a lot with people who have bias gratification.
First, disrepute the respected professionals (like Albert Einstein).
Then point to unproven sources as evidence to support your claims.
Flat earthers do this tactic
The women in Ghostbusters did it. Yes, they were proven right. There were ghosts. And that film isn't classified as non-fiction either.
link to original post
And you do not have confirmation bias? Give me a break. The math professor confirming that the math looks sound to her is for my benefit!
Your confirmation bias will never let you believe this. Let me repeat that. Your confirmation bias will never ever let you believe that I'm beating roulette.
I have no intention of bothering the person who was submitted the article college professors are very busy people
link to original post
Why would contacting the math professor only be for your benefit and why would a professor who's student figured out how to beat Roulette mathematically not be interested in discussing such an amazing discovery?
You make excuses because you know this poor student got a failing grade and you don't want anything to disprove this paper from this student.
As for repeating that I have confirmation bias, you only repeated it once. You have to make the statement three times for it to be true and make certain to click your heels at the Same time.
Quote: darkozQuote: EvenBobQuote: darkozQuote: EvenBobOn Sunday I sent the Markov chain article to my daughter who I've said many times here is a college math professor. She doesn't teach this kind of math so she sent it to a math professor friend of hers who does. She got an email from her today saying that she looked at it and the math seemed sound to her. I'm still waiting for somebody here to debunk it. I'm in the process of trying to get ahold of the author of the article to see if he's doing any more work on this or what his thoughts are today about it.
link to original post
You are literally trying to contact the wrong person.
You should be trying to contact the professor who the paper was submitted to and get her grade and expert opinion on it.
I suspect the paper may have received a failing grade.
And if it didn't get a failing grade that would validate you more than contacting the student.
But what you really want is bias gratification.
This happens a lot with people who have bias gratification.
First, disrepute the respected professionals (like Albert Einstein).
Then point to unproven sources as evidence to support your claims.
Flat earthers do this tactic
The women in Ghostbusters did it. Yes, they were proven right. There were ghosts. And that film isn't classified as non-fiction either.
link to original post
And you do not have confirmation bias? Give me a break. The math professor confirming that the math looks sound to her is for my benefit!
Your confirmation bias will never let you believe this. Let me repeat that. Your confirmation bias will never ever let you believe that I'm beating roulette.
I have no intention of bothering the person who was submitted the article college professors are very busy people
link to original post
Why would contacting the math professor only be for your benefit and why would a professor who's student figured out how to beat Roulette mathematically not be interested in discussing such an amazing discovery?
You make excuses because you know this poor student got a failing grade and you don't want anything to disprove this paper from this student.
As for repeating that I have confirmation bias, you only repeated it once. You have to make the statement three times for it to be true and make certain to click your heels at the Same time.
link to original post
You contact the professor if it is such a big deal to you. I love how you and Soopoo know everything about this when you actually know nothing about it. The only thing you are experts at is your confirmation bias opinion.
Quote: MDawgGonzalo Garcia-Pelayo: Master of Roulette
Since Gonzalo’s long span of roulette wins, casinos have tried to fix any mistakes that could influence the way the roulette wheel spins. Most wheels are now manufactured on lines to help keep imperfections from appearing and casinos have updated their cameras so they can keep their eyes out for anyone spending too much time studying the roulette wheel.
Hmm, but if casinos are still on the lookout, that means....
link to original post
I read the article and wonder if any LV casino gave him a W2G.
tuttigym
Quote: darkozI'm just saying.
The man who wrote the theory of relativity and E=MC squared.
His name was Einstein.
He studied Roulette and admitted it could not be beat.
I'm glad EB has a higher intellect than Einstein.
I'm a little confused how EB can't understand math like Markov chains but I am sure Einstein didn't understand math all too well either.
link to original post
Chronology of Einstein’s Mistakes
1905 Mistake in clock synchronization procedure on which Einstein based special relativity
1905 Failure to consider Michelson-Morley experiment
1905 Mistake in transverse mass of high-speed particles
1905 Multiple mistakes in the mathematics and physics used in calculation of viscosity of liquids, from which Einstein deduced size of molecules
1905 Mistakes in the relationship between thermal radiation and quanta of light
1905 Mistake in the first proof of E = mc2
1906 Mistakes in the second, third, and fourth proofs of E = mc2
1907 Mistake in the synchronization procedure for accelerated clocks
1907 Mistakes in the Principle of Equivalence of gravitation and acceleration
1911 Mistake in the first calculation of the bending of light
1913 Mistake in the first attempt at a theory of general relativity
1914 Mistake in the fifth proof of E = mc2
1915 Mistake in the Einstein-de Haas experiment
1915 Mistakes in several attempts at theories of general relativity
1916 Mistake in the interpretation of Mach’s principle
1917 Mistake in the introduction of the cosmological constant (the “biggest blunder”)
1919 Mistakes in two attempts to modify general relativity
1925 Mistakes and more mistakes in the attempts to formulate a unified theory
1927 Mistakes in discussions with Bohr on quantum uncertainties
1933 Mistakes in interpretation of quantum mechanics (Does God play dice?)
1934 Mistake in the sixth proof of E = mc2
1939 Mistake in the interpretation of the Schwarzschild singularity and gravitational collapse (the “black hole”)
1946 Mistake in the seventh proof of E = mc2
And these were just his big mistakes. He had tons and tons of mistakes all through his work on a minor level that had to be corrected by others. So quoting his opinion on roulette something that he never even studied is worthless. As are most of the quotes attributed to Einstein. To top it off there's no evidence at all that Einstein ever said this about roulette. But there is evidence that he never said it.
"the earliest evidence of the saying was from the pen of Ted Thackrey, Jr. QI suspects that the roulette anecdote and quotation are part of a tall tale to go along with a larger-than-life gambler. QI does not know if the tale was created by Dandolos or Thackrey."
Iogue Macaraig had a downward spiritual after having lost all his money playing roulette.Quote: EvenBobOn Sunday I sent the Markov chain article to my daughter who I've said many times here is a college math professor. She doesn't teach this kind of math so she sent it to a math professor friend of hers who does. She got an email from her today saying that she looked at it and the math seemed sound to her. I'm still waiting for somebody here to debunk it. I'm in the process of trying to get ahold of the author of the article to see if he's doing any more work on this or what his thoughts are today about it.
link to original post
In an attempt to rebuild his bankroll, he started down a dark path of theft, drugs, and male prostitution.
Nowadays, you can occasionally spot him playing poop roulette on the streets of San Francisco while shouting, "There are corn patterns, they tell me when to bet!!"
2022 EvenBob mistake in everything related to gambling methods.Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkozI'm just saying.
The man who wrote the theory of relativity and E=MC squared.
His name was Einstein.
He studied Roulette and admitted it could not be beat.
I'm glad EB has a higher intellect than Einstein.
I'm a little confused how EB can't understand math like Markov chains but I am sure Einstein didn't understand math all too well either.
link to original post
Chronology of Einstein’s Mistakes
1905 Mistake in clock synchronization procedure on which Einstein based special relativity
1905 Failure to consider Michelson-Morley experiment
1905 Mistake in transverse mass of high-speed particles
1905 Multiple mistakes in the mathematics and physics used in calculation of viscosity of liquids, from which Einstein deduced size of molecules
1905 Mistakes in the relationship between thermal radiation and quanta of light
1905 Mistake in the first proof of E = mc2
1906 Mistakes in the second, third, and fourth proofs of E = mc2
1907 Mistake in the synchronization procedure for accelerated clocks
1907 Mistakes in the Principle of Equivalence of gravitation and acceleration
1911 Mistake in the first calculation of the bending of light
1913 Mistake in the first attempt at a theory of general relativity
1914 Mistake in the fifth proof of E = mc2
1915 Mistake in the Einstein-de Haas experiment
1915 Mistakes in several attempts at theories of general relativity
1916 Mistake in the interpretation of Mach’s principle
1917 Mistake in the introduction of the cosmological constant (the “biggest blunder”)
1919 Mistakes in two attempts to modify general relativity
1925 Mistakes and more mistakes in the attempts to formulate a unified theory
1927 Mistakes in discussions with Bohr on quantum uncertainties
1933 Mistakes in interpretation of quantum mechanics (Does God play dice?)
1934 Mistake in the sixth proof of E = mc2
1939 Mistake in the interpretation of the Schwarzschild singularity and gravitational collapse (the “black hole”)
1946 Mistake in the seventh proof of E = mc2
And these were just his big mistakes. He had tons and tons of mistakes all through his work on a minor level that had to be corrected by others. So quoting his opinion on roulette something that he never even studied is worthless. As are most of the quotes attributed to Einstein. To top it off there's no evidence at all that Einstein ever said this about roulette. But there is evidence that he never said it.
"the earliest evidence of the saying was from the pen of Ted Thackrey, Jr. QI suspects that the roulette anecdote and quotation are part of a tall tale to go along with a larger-than-life gambler. QI does not know if the tale was created by Dandolos or Thackrey."
link to original post
Quote: AxelWolf2022 EvenBob mistake in everything related to gambling methods.Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkozI'm just saying.
The man who wrote the theory of relativity and E=MC squared.
His name was Einstein.
He studied Roulette and admitted it could not be beat.
I'm glad EB has a higher intellect than Einstein.
I'm a little confused how EB can't understand math like Markov chains but I am sure Einstein didn't understand math all too well either.
link to original post
In order to prove himself right, EB now is trying to prove Einstein wrong.
Chronology of Einstein’s Mistakes
1905 Mistake in clock synchronization procedure on which Einstein based special relativity
1905 Failure to consider Michelson-Morley experiment
1905 Mistake in transverse mass of high-speed particles
1905 Multiple mistakes in the mathematics and physics used in calculation of viscosity of liquids, from which Einstein deduced size of molecules
1905 Mistakes in the relationship between thermal radiation and quanta of light
1905 Mistake in the first proof of E = mc2
1906 Mistakes in the second, third, and fourth proofs of E = mc2
1907 Mistake in the synchronization procedure for accelerated clocks
1907 Mistakes in the Principle of Equivalence of gravitation and acceleration
1911 Mistake in the first calculation of the bending of light
1913 Mistake in the first attempt at a theory of general relativity
1914 Mistake in the fifth proof of E = mc2
1915 Mistake in the Einstein-de Haas experiment
1915 Mistakes in several attempts at theories of general relativity
1916 Mistake in the interpretation of Mach’s principle
1917 Mistake in the introduction of the cosmological constant (the “biggest blunder”)
1919 Mistakes in two attempts to modify general relativity
1925 Mistakes and more mistakes in the attempts to formulate a unified theory
1927 Mistakes in discussions with Bohr on quantum uncertainties
1933 Mistakes in interpretation of quantum mechanics (Does God play dice?)
1934 Mistake in the sixth proof of E = mc2
1939 Mistake in the interpretation of the Schwarzschild singularity and gravitational collapse (the “black hole”)
1946 Mistake in the seventh proof of E = mc2
And these were just his big mistakes. He had tons and tons of mistakes all through his work on a minor level that had to be corrected by others. So quoting his opinion on roulette something that he never even studied is worthless. As are most of the quotes attributed to Einstein. To top it off there's no evidence at all that Einstein ever said this about roulette. But there is evidence that he never said it.
"the earliest evidence of the saying was from the pen of Ted Thackrey, Jr. QI suspects that the roulette anecdote and quotation are part of a tall tale to go along with a larger-than-life gambler. QI does not know if the tale was created by Dandolos or Thackrey."
link to original post
link to original post
Quote: AxelWolf2022 EvenBob mistake in everything related to gambling methods.Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkozI'm just saying.
The man who wrote the theory of relativity and E=MC squared.
His name was Einstein.
He studied Roulette and admitted it could not be beat.
I'm glad EB has a higher intellect than Einstein.
I'm a little confused how EB can't understand math like Markov chains but I am sure Einstein didn't understand math all too well either.
link to original post
Chronology of Einstein’s Mistakes
1905 Mistake in clock synchronization procedure on which Einstein based special relativity
1905 Failure to consider Michelson-Morley experiment
1905 Mistake in transverse mass of high-speed particles
1905 Multiple mistakes in the mathematics and physics used in calculation of viscosity of liquids, from which Einstein deduced size of molecules
1905 Mistakes in the relationship between thermal radiation and quanta of light
1905 Mistake in the first proof of E = mc2
1906 Mistakes in the second, third, and fourth proofs of E = mc2
1907 Mistake in the synchronization procedure for accelerated clocks
1907 Mistakes in the Principle of Equivalence of gravitation and acceleration
1911 Mistake in the first calculation of the bending of light
1913 Mistake in the first attempt at a theory of general relativity
1914 Mistake in the fifth proof of E = mc2
1915 Mistake in the Einstein-de Haas experiment
1915 Mistakes in several attempts at theories of general relativity
1916 Mistake in the interpretation of Mach’s principle
1917 Mistake in the introduction of the cosmological constant (the “biggest blunder”)
1919 Mistakes in two attempts to modify general relativity
1925 Mistakes and more mistakes in the attempts to formulate a unified theory
1927 Mistakes in discussions with Bohr on quantum uncertainties
1933 Mistakes in interpretation of quantum mechanics (Does God play dice?)
1934 Mistake in the sixth proof of E = mc2
1939 Mistake in the interpretation of the Schwarzschild singularity and gravitational collapse (the “black hole”)
1946 Mistake in the seventh proof of E = mc2
And these were just his big mistakes. He had tons and tons of mistakes all through his work on a minor level that had to be corrected by others. So quoting his opinion on roulette something that he never even studied is worthless. As are most of the quotes attributed to Einstein. To top it off there's no evidence at all that Einstein ever said this about roulette. But there is evidence that he never said it.
"the earliest evidence of the saying was from the pen of Ted Thackrey, Jr. QI suspects that the roulette anecdote and quotation are part of a tall tale to go along with a larger-than-life gambler. QI does not know if the tale was created by Dandolos or Thackrey."
link to original post
link to original post
EB now dedicated to proving Einstein wrong so he can prove he understands more than Einstein.
EvenBob is providing evidence that even one of the greatest scientists of all time made mistakes.Quote: darkozQuote: AxelWolf2022 EvenBob mistake in everything related to gambling methods.Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkozI'm just saying.
The man who wrote the theory of relativity and E=MC squared.
His name was Einstein.
He studied Roulette and admitted it could not be beat.
I'm glad EB has a higher intellect than Einstein.
I'm a little confused how EB can't understand math like Markov chains but I am sure Einstein didn't understand math all too well either.
link to original post
Chronology of Einstein’s Mistakes
1905 Mistake in clock synchronization procedure on which Einstein based special relativity
1905 Failure to consider Michelson-Morley experiment
1905 Mistake in transverse mass of high-speed particles
1905 Multiple mistakes in the mathematics and physics used in calculation of viscosity of liquids, from which Einstein deduced size of molecules
1905 Mistakes in the relationship between thermal radiation and quanta of light
1905 Mistake in the first proof of E = mc2
1906 Mistakes in the second, third, and fourth proofs of E = mc2
1907 Mistake in the synchronization procedure for accelerated clocks
1907 Mistakes in the Principle of Equivalence of gravitation and acceleration
1911 Mistake in the first calculation of the bending of light
1913 Mistake in the first attempt at a theory of general relativity
1914 Mistake in the fifth proof of E = mc2
1915 Mistake in the Einstein-de Haas experiment
1915 Mistakes in several attempts at theories of general relativity
1916 Mistake in the interpretation of Mach’s principle
1917 Mistake in the introduction of the cosmological constant (the “biggest blunder”)
1919 Mistakes in two attempts to modify general relativity
1925 Mistakes and more mistakes in the attempts to formulate a unified theory
1927 Mistakes in discussions with Bohr on quantum uncertainties
1933 Mistakes in interpretation of quantum mechanics (Does God play dice?)
1934 Mistake in the sixth proof of E = mc2
1939 Mistake in the interpretation of the Schwarzschild singularity and gravitational collapse (the “black hole”)
1946 Mistake in the seventh proof of E = mc2
And these were just his big mistakes. He had tons and tons of mistakes all through his work on a minor level that had to be corrected by others. So quoting his opinion on roulette something that he never even studied is worthless. As are most of the quotes attributed to Einstein. To top it off there's no evidence at all that Einstein ever said this about roulette. But there is evidence that he never said it.
"the earliest evidence of the saying was from the pen of Ted Thackrey, Jr. QI suspects that the roulette anecdote and quotation are part of a tall tale to go along with a larger-than-life gambler. QI does not know if the tale was created by Dandolos or Thackrey."
link to original post
link to original post
EB now dedicated to proving Einstein wrong so he can prove he understands more than Einstein.
link to original post
And yet, EvenBob doesn't realize that it's almost a certainty that he's making a mistake.
Quote: darkozQuote: AxelWolf2022 EvenBob mistake in everything related to gambling methods.Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkozI'm just saying.
The man who wrote the theory of relativity and E=MC squared.
His name was Einstein.
He studied Roulette and admitted it could not be beat.
I'm glad EB has a higher intellect than Einstein.
I'm a little confused how EB can't understand math like Markov chains but I am sure Einstein didn't understand math all too well either.
link to original post
Chronology of Einstein’s Mistakes
1905 Mistake in clock synchronization procedure on which Einstein based special relativity
1905 Failure to consider Michelson-Morley experiment
1905 Mistake in transverse mass of high-speed particles
1905 Multiple mistakes in the mathematics and physics used in calculation of viscosity of liquids, from which Einstein deduced size of molecules
1905 Mistakes in the relationship between thermal radiation and quanta of light
1905 Mistake in the first proof of E = mc2
1906 Mistakes in the second, third, and fourth proofs of E = mc2
1907 Mistake in the synchronization procedure for accelerated clocks
1907 Mistakes in the Principle of Equivalence of gravitation and acceleration
1911 Mistake in the first calculation of the bending of light
1913 Mistake in the first attempt at a theory of general relativity
1914 Mistake in the fifth proof of E = mc2
1915 Mistake in the Einstein-de Haas experiment
1915 Mistakes in several attempts at theories of general relativity
1916 Mistake in the interpretation of Mach’s principle
1917 Mistake in the introduction of the cosmological constant (the “biggest blunder”)
1919 Mistakes in two attempts to modify general relativity
1925 Mistakes and more mistakes in the attempts to formulate a unified theory
1927 Mistakes in discussions with Bohr on quantum uncertainties
1933 Mistakes in interpretation of quantum mechanics (Does God play dice?)
1934 Mistake in the sixth proof of E = mc2
1939 Mistake in the interpretation of the Schwarzschild singularity and gravitational collapse (the “black hole”)
1946 Mistake in the seventh proof of E = mc2
And these were just his big mistakes. He had tons and tons of mistakes all through his work on a minor level that had to be corrected by others. So quoting his opinion on roulette something that he never even studied is worthless. As are most of the quotes attributed to Einstein. To top it off there's no evidence at all that Einstein ever said this about roulette. But there is evidence that he never said it.
"the earliest evidence of the saying was from the pen of Ted Thackrey, Jr. QI suspects that the roulette anecdote and quotation are part of a tall tale to go along with a larger-than-life gambler. QI does not know if the tale was created by Dandolos or Thackrey."
link to original post
link to original post
EB now dedicated to proving Einstein wrong so he can prove he understands more than Einstein.
link to original post
Either way I win.
1905 E=mc^2 appeared in Einstein’s “Special Theory of Relativity,” first published in 1905. The formula’s groundbreaking conclusion presents energy and mass as interchangeable entities and unites three apparently disparate natural elements. He also explained that the velocity of light in vacuum is fixed and does not depend upon the velocity of the light source.
In a 1905 paper, Einstein presented an equation that explained the random movements of particles, known as Brownian motion, as resulting from impacts with hitherto unknown molecules, which provided the foundation for particle theory.
In 1910, Einstein published a paper on critical opalescence, which explains the phenomenon of light dispersion that gives the sky its color.
1915 “General Relativity” was published in 1915, The most significant aspect of general relativity is tthat space-time is malleable and describes the distortion that massive objects render upon space-time. This distortion draws smaller objects toward the larger, which explains the existence of gravity. The presentation of space-time as malleable means that time itself is not a constant.
In 1921 he won the Nobel Prize for explaining light as a collection of particles (now called photons), rather than a wave.
In 1924, Einstein drew implications from Satyendra Bose’s theory on the composition of light to explain the structure of atoms. The so-called Bose-Einstein statistic now provides insight into the assembly of boson particles.
Einstein did make mistakes but we all know that everyone does and the best of us learn from our mistakes. His mistakes show that he was not an unerring automaton but they in no way diminish his genius.
You will not convince us of your brilliance by comparing yourself to Einstein. You might as well throw a rock at the moon and try to knock it from the sky.
Quote: gordonm888You will not convince us of your brilliance by comparing yourself to Einstein. You might as well throw a rock at the moon and try to knock it from the sky.
If you can't bowl them over with your brilliance, then baffle them with your BS.
Case...in...point...
Quote: EvenBobQuote: SOOPOOQuote: EvenBobOn Sunday I sent the Markov chain article to my daughter who I've said many times here is a college math professor. She doesn't teach this kind of math so she sent it to a math professor friend of hers who does. She got an email from her today saying that she looked at it and the math seemed sound to her. I'm still waiting for somebody here to debunk it. I'm in the process of trying to get ahold of the author of the article to see if he's doing any more work on this or what his thoughts are today about it.
link to original post
You are too funny! We have how many math experts on this forum who know that you are just trolling the forum! How many math experts do you need?
And to date how many have debunked the Markov chain article? So far not one. What you know for sure and a dollar bill will get you coffee at McDonald's. What I know for sure gets me paid by the casino every time I play. Live with it.
link to original post
Hi, math guy here. I've wanted to post this ever since this "paper" was posted in this thread back on page 7 by AitchTheLetter, but I couldn't justify wasting more time on what I suspect to be a troll thread. But, here I am posting anyway, over 80 pages later...
First off, I think it's a stretch to call this an "academic paper." As far as I can tell, this looks merely like a slapdash course project.
As for the content, it's largely devoid of any, but it jumps to illogical conclusions at the end. On previous pages, the author looks at the distribution over states S_i, where S_i is defined as having just seen a streak of length i. On page 11, the author claims " However, if a higher state occurs, you can expect that it will take a while before another higher state occurs. And so, the idea is to time the bet on S1." There is no reason why this "idea" has any effect on the expected value of a bet. All bets are still independent, despite just having left a state representing a long streak. So, while this does actually sound like EvenBob's streak based betting, it has no actual mathematical justification.
I believe anyone with a modicum of mathematical maturity would very quickly see there is no real content in this "paper," but I might be the only one to have spent time reading through it...
Quote: WizardMy question is are you open to a challenge?
From page one of the thread.
At least Mdawg let the wizard watch him once to see the gist of his method(s).
Troll thread until the challenge is accepted
link to original post
didn't want the paparazzi crashing his birthday party but loved the photo so much he ordered moreQuote: gordonm888
You will not convince us of your brilliance by comparing yourself to Einstein. You might as well throw a rock at the moon and try to knock it from the sky.
link to original post
I'm confused. Where and when did I compare myself to Einstein? He never said the statement of the only way to beat roulette is to steal chips from the dealer. That's a totally made-up story look it up. I can't find any evidence that Einstein ever studied roulette or said anything about it.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: CristobalHi EvenBob, can I ask you how many units have you bet since january 2021 when you begging to betting in online casino?
If I understand well you said that you look for 1 unit profit per day and you have a hit rate of 80%. If you are betting for 21 months I will guess that is something arround 1000 units? Correct me if I am wrong please.
Thanks.
link to original post
Yes you are wrong. Casino gambling was passed in January 2021 but the casinos didn't actually open online until September 2021 so it was a year ago. I don't remember exactly when I started playing for real but it wasn't in September it was a couple months later I think. I said in this thread already but it's over 500 units. It's only possible to have that high a hit rate because they show me 90 spends an hour. In a brick-and-mortar casino my hit rate is much smaller.
link to original post
This is not accurate. I played online casino in Michigan in August 2021.
Quote: djtehch34tQuote: EvenBobQuote: SOOPOOQuote: EvenBobOn Sunday I sent the Markov chain article to my daughter who I've said many times here is a college math professor. She doesn't teach this kind of math so she sent it to a math professor friend of hers who does. She got an email from her today saying that she looked at it and the math seemed sound to her. I'm still waiting for somebody here to debunk it. I'm in the process of trying to get ahold of the author of the article to see if he's doing any more work on this or what his thoughts are today about it.
link to original post
You are too funny! We have how many math experts on this forum who know that you are just trolling the forum! How many math experts do you need?
And to date how many have debunked the Markov chain article? So far not one. What you know for sure and a dollar bill will get you coffee at McDonald's. What I know for sure gets me paid by the casino every time I play. Live with it.
link to original post
Hi, math guy here. I've wanted to post this ever since this "paper" was posted in this thread back on page 7 by AitchTheLetter, but I couldn't justify wasting more time on what I suspect to be a troll thread. But, here I am posting anyway, over 80 pages later...
First off, I think it's a stretch to call this an "academic paper." As far as I can tell, this looks merely like a slapdash course project.
As for the content, it's largely devoid of any, but it jumps to illogical conclusions at the end. On previous pages, the author looks at the distribution over states S_i, where S_i is defined as having just seen a streak of length i. On page 11, the author claims " However, if a higher state occurs, you can expect that it will take a while before another higher state occurs. And so, the idea is to time the bet on S1." There is no reason why this "idea" has any effect on the expected value of a bet. All bets are still independent, despite just having left a state representing a long streak. So, while this does actually sound like EvenBob's streak based betting, it has no actual mathematical justification.
I believe anyone with a modicum of mathematical maturity would very quickly see there is no real content in this "paper," but I might be the only one to have spent time reading through it...
link to original post
That's fine about what I expected from somebody on this forum. I've already contacted a professional mathematician, and I'm paying them to analyze this for me. When he'll be done I have no idea. I find it odd that this guy describes what I do in his paper and draws the same conclusions that I did. That's not a coincidence so there's something here. There's way too much confirmation bias on this forum. I'd rather pay a professional, an outsider with no skin in the game.
"The probability values in columns for S9 and S10 are not actually zeroes. But, since it is extremely low, it becomes zero after being rounded off."
This is beyond stupid.
On another issue brought up in this thread, there are many online casino games where you can see bets of other players. The software usually partially obscures the screen names. In online live-dealer BJ, you can see the bets and the moronic play of other layers at your table. On the DK Rocket game, you can see the bets and obscured screen names of the top 10 bets of other players on the rocket. I usually max bet $1000, and my bet and first and last letters of my screen name are up there for all to see.
Quote: SOOPOOListen kids, depending on how you are interpreting ‘random’ you are both correct. The next card in blackjack is ‘random’ with regards to the remaining cards in the deck. The next spin in roulette is random with regards to the 38 possible outcomes. Which is why the mumbo jumbo Bob post’s is just that, mumbo jumbo.
Just a reminder that EB does NOT win 80% of his even chance bets. That he does NOT pay his bills from his easily obtained roulette winnings. That there is not ONE post he has made in this thread that there is ANY reason to believe is based on any real life occurrence.
Reminder…. This ENTIRE thread is nothing but a troll thread. It is embarrassing that it is allowed to exist here.
link to original post
You are conflating "random" with "random outcome" (which is the crux of the argument).
Blackjack is not a "random outcome" game because prior events influence the next. But there is a card draw is a "random event" (which seems to be your definition of random).
The next spin of a roulette wheel is always a "random outcome", the next draw of a BJ hand generally is not.
