blaxius
blaxius
Joined: May 2, 2012
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 38
May 7th, 2012 at 11:54:21 AM permalink
Quote: rdw4potus

I would tell you that you have a coding error somewhere.

I would also ask how you win 50.5% of the time, but fail 1 in 1,000,000 times?



It's a progressive system. 1 in 1,000,000 times the progression will fail (Approximately, not sure exactly), but each spin I have 50,5% chance rate of winning.
Kind of like martingale.

Quote: EvenBob

Honestly, people here have been quite polite to you.
On a regular gambling forum, they see people who
claim to have found the Holy Grail every other day
and they treat them like crap. You'll see...



You are right. Sorry everyone, I'm just not in the mood today, all this coding is making my head explode.

I am amazed at how much I can post today.

EDIT: Posting limit for today reached. Will answer anything else tomorrow.
EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 421
  • Posts: 23367
May 7th, 2012 at 12:47:01 PM permalink
Here's the address of a gambling forum. http://vlsroulette.com/
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
guido111
guido111
Joined: Sep 16, 2010
  • Threads: 10
  • Posts: 707
May 7th, 2012 at 1:14:09 PM permalink
Quote: blaxius

Yes. About two years ago.

http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/3194-overhauling-the-betting-system-challenge/

No one ever mentioned it in all this time?

You obviously did not understand and/or read Mr. Bluejay's thread about overhauling his system challenge.

Many members gave ideas to beat his challenge, and a long the way a few did, so he changed many things, the rules of the challenge, so one will not be able to win 11 out of 20 with a $5k bankroll. You need to understand this so you can move forward.

Start by reading what was already done in that thread and it will save you time in your programming.

Enjoy
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 101
  • Posts: 5881
Thanks for this post from:
MichaelBluejay
May 7th, 2012 at 1:23:19 PM permalink
Sorry if I seem not nice. It is just very frustrating. Many members have made ridiculous claims, and I have always offerred to bet that they cannot repeat them. See recent Dice Influencing thread, or EWjones thread, or mrjjj roulette threads, or jerrylogan VP thread. Of course, none of these bets ever come to fruition.
I am NOT saying that there is a zero percent chance a progressive system cannot periodically beat a negative expectation game, what i am saying is that it will lose in the long run. For you to offer yourself 100-1 odds, well, that speaks for how highly you regard your own system.
I will allow you to propose a challenge to me, one that suits your system. Give me the number of spins, how much you can spread your bet, and maybe we can come to a bet we can agree on.

Just for elucidation--- maybe someone posted this already, but the concept of the "Betting System Challenge" is that there is NO system that is going to beat a negative expectation game in the long run in a real casino with real rules. Period. Might you find a system that will win $1 51% of the time and lose $1000 49% of the time.. sure... I would define that system as aloser, not a winner...
thecesspit
thecesspit
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
May 7th, 2012 at 1:53:04 PM permalink
Quote: blaxius

It's a progressive system. 1 in 1,000,000 times the progression will fail (Approximately, not sure exactly), but each spin I have 50,5% chance rate of winning.
Kind of like martingale.



I assume you aren't making a Evens bet on a Roulette wheel is each spin has 50.5% chance of winning. If an evens bet has a greater than 50% chance of winning, you don't need a progression :)

Quote:


You are right. Sorry everyone, I'm just not in the mood today, all this coding is making my head explode.



The Betting Systems sub-forum is a rough and tumble place. The piranhas will circle when they smell blood. And I'm as guilty of that as the next person as soon as they enter crazyland.

But right now, you are doing what I did a few years back. Play with systems to see what they look like over time. I didn't figure to be able to "beat" the casino using them though.

Quote:

I am amazed at how much I can post today.

EDIT: Posting limit for today reached. Will answer anything else tomorrow.

"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
weaselman
weaselman
Joined: Jul 11, 2010
  • Threads: 20
  • Posts: 2349
May 7th, 2012 at 6:26:46 PM permalink
Quote: blaxius


I just said that so that he shuts up.


It does not work like that. If you come to a public forum to sound your ideas, you don't get to make people to shut up.
The most you can do in that respect is shut up yourself. Once you are not talking, pretty soon people will stop talking about you, but not before then.


Quote:

If he is not scared at all and 100% sure of winning, then he should take my challenge and prove me wrong instead of making fun of me.


No. Rather you should stop talking about what he should do, and think about what you can.
If you believe you have a good system, think about ways you could make some money with it. 100:1 is pretty freaking outrageous, but, 10:1, maybe, you could find some takers, if you stopped being so obnoxious. Hell, if you are so sure, you are right, why not offer even money?

Quote:

For now, I am not exactly sure of how effective this system is


Then, could it be, that you are actually the one who should shut up, not SOOPOO, who actually knows what he is talking about?

There is not much pride in making a system that wins about half of the time with unlimited bankroll and unlimited maximum bet. A martingale will do that, and it has been known for long while. The question is can you do better than that. The answer is "no".
"When two people always agree one of them is unnecessary"
blaxius
blaxius
Joined: May 2, 2012
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 38
May 8th, 2012 at 10:20:23 AM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

Here's the address of a gambling forum. http://vlsroulette.com/



Thanks, but I think I will stay here for a while longer.

Quote: guido111

You obviously did not understand and/or read Mr. Bluejay's thread about overhauling his system challenge.

Many members gave ideas to beat his challenge, and a long the way a few did, so he changed many things, the rules of the challenge, so one will not be able to win 11 out of 20 with a $5k bankroll. You need to understand this so you can move forward.

Start by reading what was already done in that thread and it will save you time in your programming.

Enjoy



I have read both threads Bluejay started 2 years ago already, in fact I have quoted him here before. And as I have said before, I am improving my system and my chances of winning. I have won 16/100 attempts with two different systems which I keep trying to improve. So I don't think 11/20 is impossible (I remember being discussed in another thread how to calculate the chances of an event with X% of happening once occurring P times in N times but I don't recall which one it was. If you could help me find that thread or teach me how to calculate that, I would be extremely grateful to you).

Quote: SOOPOO

Sorry if I seem not nice. It is just very frustrating. Many members have made ridiculous claims, and I have always offerred to bet that they cannot repeat them. See recent Dice Influencing thread, or EWjones thread, or mrjjj roulette threads, or jerrylogan VP thread. Of course, none of these bets ever come to fruition.
I am NOT saying that there is a zero percent chance a progressive system cannot periodically beat a negative expectation game, what i am saying is that it will lose in the long run. For you to offer yourself 100-1 odds, well, that speaks for how highly you regard your own system.
I will allow you to propose a challenge to me, one that suits your system. Give me the number of spins, how much you can spread your bet, and maybe we can come to a bet we can agree on.

Just for elucidation--- maybe someone posted this already, but the concept of the "Betting System Challenge" is that there is NO system that is going to beat a negative expectation game in the long run in a real casino with real rules. Period. Might you find a system that will win $1 51% of the time and lose $1000 49% of the time.. sure... I would define that system as aloser, not a winner...



I apologize myself too, but you need to understand that it is frustrating for a new member to be made fun of. I just said 100:1 because I knew no one in their right mind would accept it. And I did not mention my system to have that odds, I think you might have misunderstood what I said or I expressed myself incorrectly.

Regarding the challenge, we can make a mini challenge similar to the one Bluejay was offering in the beginning: 10:1 odds, unlimited bankroll, $5 minimum - $5000 maximum, $1 wagers can be placed on any bet, with a minimum of $5 on the outside if any outside wagers are placed, and a minimum of $5 on the inside if any inside wagers are placed, $5000 maximum as the total that can be wagered on one spin, no sit outs (a bet must be placed in every bet), no changing games (in the original Bluejay's thread someone suggested as an idea to start on roulette and after reaching more than 1% of advantage switching to craps that has lower house edge. That was accepted at that time, I don't know if it is accepted in the current challenge but I won't do that, I will only play roulette), but instead of 1 billion spins let's make it 21 attempts (I don't like ties) of 1 million each (I'm not able to beat 1 billion yet =/). An attempt is considered won if I show any profit after the million spin. I don't know how much is ok with you, $500, $1000?

If Mike could be the judge, escrow the funds and do the programming for a fee that would be great.

Quote: thecesspit

I assume you aren't making a Evens bet on a Roulette wheel is each spin has 50.5% chance of winning. If an evens bet has a greater than 50% chance of winning, you don't need a progression :)



I should have not used the word spin here, I should have used "round". 1 "round" would represent a complete circle of the progression; and if a "round" fails, then there is a progression of "rounds" too.

Quote: thecesspit

The Betting Systems sub-forum is a rough and tumble place. The piranhas will circle when they smell blood. And I'm as guilty of that as the next person as soon as they enter crazyland.



I understand, I must be the 1000 person that comes and says he has a winning system, and probably the last 999 people all claiming the same just disappeared later with their heads low. There is nothing I can do to avoid that and the way you feel towards anyone like me.

Quote: thecesspit

But right now, you are doing what I did a few years back. Play with systems to see what they look like over time. I didn't figure to be able to "beat" the casino using them though.



Probably all gamblers have done that before, and it's exactly what I'm doing right now. I'm young, smart, full of ideas, and I have plenty of time. Wish me luck!

Quote: weaselman

It does not work like that. If you come to a public forum to sound your ideas, you don't get to make people to shut up.
The most you can do in that respect is shut up yourself. Once you are not talking, pretty soon people will stop talking about you, but not before then.



No. Rather you should stop talking about what he should do, and think about what you can.
If you believe you have a good system, think about ways you could make some money with it. 100:1 is pretty freaking outrageous, but, 10:1, maybe, you could find some takers, if you stopped being so obnoxious. Hell, if you are so sure, you are right, why not offer even money?


Then, could it be, that you are actually the one who should shut up, not SOOPOO, who actually knows what he is talking about?

There is not much pride in making a system that wins about half of the time with unlimited bankroll and unlimited maximum bet. A martingale will do that, and it has been known for long while. The question is can you do better than that. The answer is "no".



I did not come to this forum to argue, so let's leave it here. I apologize to you if you found what I said offensive, and I have apologized to SOOPOO too. I'll shut up as you suggest, but I'll just say one last thing: I never mentioned unlimited bankroll and unlimited maximum bet.
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 101
  • Posts: 5881
May 8th, 2012 at 1:30:43 PM permalink
Quote: blaxius



Regarding the challenge, we can make a mini challenge similar to the one Bluejay was offering in the beginning: 10:1 odds, unlimited bankroll, $5 minimum - $5000 maximum, $1 wagers can be placed on any bet, with a minimum of $5 on the outside if any outside wagers are placed, and a minimum of $5 on the inside if any inside wagers are placed, $5000 maximum as the total that can be wagered on one spin, no sit outs (a bet must be placed in every bet), no changing games (in the original Bluejay's thread someone suggested as an idea to start on roulette and after reaching more than 1% of advantage switching to craps that has lower house edge. That was accepted at that time, I don't know if it is accepted in the current challenge but I won't do that, I will only play roulette), but instead of 1 billion spins let's make it 21 attempts (I don't like ties) of 1 million each (I'm not able to beat 1 billion yet =/). An attempt is considered won if I show any profit after the million spin.



I did not come to this forum to argue, so let's leave it here. I apologize to you if you found what I said offensive, and I have apologized to SOOPOO too. I'll shut up as you suggest, but I'll just say one last thing: I never mentioned unlimited bankroll and unlimited maximum bet.



The concept of the betting system challenge was to show that no system can reliably beat a negative expectation game in the long run. If your system would show a profit of $1 11 times, and lose $10000 10 times, you would want to declare it a success. We both know that those results would really be a failure for the betting system you propose. I am not the math expert that others here are, but it is quite possible that over 1 million spins, if you are just looking to be $1 ahead, and do not care how much you would lose if you are not ahead, that you might be able to succeed more than 50% of the time. That is why the Wiz expanded to a billion spins.
i owed you an apology first, by the way.
thecesspit
thecesspit
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
May 8th, 2012 at 1:51:00 PM permalink
Progressive Loss systems work exactly as you describe SooPoo... lots of small wins, and a few huge losses. Being up over 80% of the time is doable. That's not hard to do. It's being up more over those 80% of times than you lose 20% of the time (which is not possible with a -EV game).

RSinger's Video Poker system would boast a 80% success rate (or some similar number), which looked good, until you peel back what that means, and realize it's not hard to have a system to do that. As VP gets muddy with variable payouts, and you can further obfuscate it with mini-wins and interim targets and banking certain values, you can make claims that "the big wins cover the times it losses". As a side note, I could never get the results RSinger claimed via simulation on his multi-level systems, but I suspect this was a coding failure (they did SO badly, I can't believe anyone would use them more than once). One day I'll pick the code back up again.

This an aside to what blaxius is talking about, for sure; but shows that this sort of technique has been considered before. I'd again suggest you work through the Gambler's Ruin material rather than trying to code a 'solution'.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
blaxius
blaxius
Joined: May 2, 2012
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 38
May 8th, 2012 at 2:24:06 PM permalink
Quote: SOOPOO

The concept of the betting system challenge was to show that no system can reliably beat a negative expectation game in the long run. If your system would show a profit of $1 11 times, and lose $10000 10 times, you would want to declare it a success. We both know that those results would really be a failure for the betting system you propose. I am not the math expert that others here are, but it is quite possible that over 1 million spins, if you are just looking to be $1 ahead, and do not care how much you would lose if you are not ahead, that you might be able to succeed more than 50% of the time. That is why the Wiz expanded to a billion spins.
i owed you an apology first, by the way.



Apology accepted. I understand what you are saying, that is why I am trying to win the challenge, not creating a system that will beat 100% of the time. That's just impossible, but the closer you get to 100% the more likely you are to win. What I am doing is building a system based on rounds, each round consisting of 50.5% chance of winning, and 49.5% of loosing. Obviously, the 50.5% of wins would give you a smaller income than the lost from 49.5%, and that is why I am talking about rounds inside rounds inside rounds. The concept is like creating a cycle of really really slow bets with 50.5% chance of winning. With the other 49.5%, you would use round 2, which is similar to the first one with really really slow bets too but making you win enough to cover the losses from the first round. And by cycling this way up to the maximum bet, there are chances that you can be ahead over 1 billion spins.

What I am aiming at, is to minimize the chance of loosing so much that you would have 1 chance in 10 billions of loosing, and that would be enough to win the challenge of 1 billion spins. Of course if luck is against you, the 1 chance in 10 billions will come get you and make even bill gates homeless.

By the way, I've doing some research, and with the systems that I was using that had a 16% chance of winning and attempt, I would have 0,00615232472362199% chance of winning 11 times out of 20. Is that correct?? The formula I used was the binomial distribution: P(X=20)= (20(n) choose 11(k))(4/25)^11(1-4/25)^(20-11).
I don't understand much of it, anyone here can correct me if I am wrong?

Quote: thecesspit

This an aside to what blaxius is talking about, for sure; but shows that this sort of technique has been considered before. I'd again suggest you work through the Gambler's Ruin material rather than trying to code a 'solution'.



I am not trying to code a solution, I am trying to beat a challenge here. Frankly, I've been taking a look at the link you sent me: http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath084/kmath084.htm, but I don't understand most of it.

  • Jump to: