Vegas Vacation with AOS
Quote: odiousgambitOK, what I'll buy is that it happened, in the face of such adamant assertion. With a grain of salt.
What I won't buy is that, overall, what will eventually be the story of Ace-of-Spades and his BJ is the story of atrociously bad luck. Maybe on this trip, that's all.
As I keep asserting - the 30 hands was a separate trip entirely - reported ages ago - and there was almost zero debate about whether it happened.
Quote: DeucekiesThis was how I felt until he busted out the "If you don't believe me, you don't get to believe in God" argument. Now I say fire away.
You are misquoting me - my statement was that, if you don't believe me, in which there is a 1 in a billion shot, how can you believe in God?
Also, I thought you were abandoning this thread - you must really like me to come back :)
Quote: rudeboyoiThe most astronomical thing that ever happened to me gambling was getting quartered with a steel wheel in 7-card stud 8/b. Split the low with another wheel and lost the high to a 6high SF.
Yikes! Any bad beat jackpot for the high?
The odds of that on a single hand might out do my 4 dealt deuce-to-seven wheels in 16 hands (1 in 23.25 billion after 16 lifetime hands).
Of course I play the game yesterday for play money and get one dealt wheel (1 in 2548 no biggie) and one dealt AAAA2 (Aces w/kicker dealt 1 in 216,580) . Why couldn't I get that dealt to me on Saturday when I found multipliers on a 50c TDB machine? Ughhhhhhhh...
Quote: aceofspadesYou are misquoting me - my statement was that, if you don't believe me, in which there is a 1 in a billion shot, how can you believe in God?
Same thing. I think right now, even the most ardent atheist would believe in God sooner than they'd believe you.
Quote:Also, I thought you were abandoning this thread - you must really like me to come back :)
I came back to see if Babs had finally put an end to this goofy thread. Guess not.
Quote: andyg99this thread reminds me of the baseball game I went to where I saw: a guy hit for the cycle, an unassisted triple play and a perfect game! oh, and a foul ball also landed in by beer cup!
Wow you joined the site just in time to get in on the pile-up - welcome aboard
Quote: DeucekiesQuote: aceofspadesYou are misquoting me - my statement was that, if you don't believe me, in which there is a 1 in a billion shot, how can you believe in God?
Same thing. I think right now, even the most ardent atheist would believe in God sooner than they'd believe you.
I came back to see if Babs had finally put an end to this goofy thread. Guess not.
Why should it end? If it is so goofy, please unsubscribe.
Quote: aceofspadesWow you joined the site just in time to get in on the pile-up - welcome aboard
sorry man - I hope your luck turns... and don't ever punish yourself just because you are losing at a game of chance...
Quote: andyg99this thread reminds me of the baseball game I went to where I saw: a guy hit for the cycle, an unassisted triple play and a perfect game! oh, and a foul ball also landed in by beer cup!
Did you also see bigfoot when you were on your way to the game, a flying saucer while there, and the loch ness monster on the way home?
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceDid you also see bigfoot when you were on your way to the game, a flying saucer while there, and the loch ness monster on the way home?
Still more likely than ace's story.
(And to think I defended ace in that whole Buzzard thing.)
Ya I think some of us missed that one. We are talking 5 pages VS 75 pages. Some can even believe 30 loses did happen.Quote: aceofspadesAs I keep asserting - the 30 hands was a separate trip entirely - reported ages ago - and there was almost zero debate about whether it happened.
I think the problem with all of this is, you keep having some incredible anomalies happen during some of your trips. If you add all your unlikely events on the last trip to the 30 losses in a row it would make you the the unluckiest thing in the universe . There is talk that you are simply embellishing for page views and a good story. Personally I want to believe.
Quote: AxelWolfYa I think some of us missed that one. We are talking 5 pages VS 75 pages. Some can even believe 30 loses did happen.
I think the problem with all of this is, you keep having some incredible anomalies happen during some of your trips. If you add all your unlikely events on the last trip to the 30 losses in a row it would make you the the unluckiest thing in the universe . There is talk that you are simply embellishing for page views and a good story. Personally I want to believe.
I have no reason to embellish. If the Wizard or Mission or BBB believe that I am doing so in an effort to gain page views, then they can close the thread. Page views do not benefit me in any way. I post on here because I had been enjoying everyone's commentary and liked keeping a record for myself of my travels.
I can, henceforth, keep them as a private journal instead…then I cannot be accused of seeking page views.
IIRC, I posted about it once before, but it bears repeating in the context of this thread.
I play craps, and very rarely make prop bets, other than the occasional two way hard way bet; I do not like to bet any other prop bets.
For one or more nights while trying to fall sleep, I had a very weird feeling, or premonition, telling me that when I was next at Spirit Mtn. Casino I would somehow "know" when to bet a buck on midnight, and that I should immediately parlay my winnings.
It was a strong premonition, and without precedent: it certainly got my attention, as I am an atheist and quite empirical.
I eventually went to Spirit Mtn, bought in at a craps table and after an indeterminate time the proverbial light bulb went off in my noggin, telling me "Now."
I bet a buck on midnight.
It hit.
"Parlay."
It hit.
Whoa.
Quote: MrVAll this talk about improbabilities and impossibilities causes me to recall something so unusual, so improbable, as to defy credulity: but, it really happened.
IIRC, I posted about it once before, but it bears repeating in the context of this thread.
I play craps, and very rarely make prop bets, other than the occasional two way hard way bet; I do not like to bet any other prop bets.
For one or more nights while trying to fall sleep, I had a very weird feeling, or premonition, telling me that when I was next at Spirit Mtn. Casino I would somehow "know" when to bet a buck on midnight, and that I should immediately parlay my winnings.
It was a strong premonition, and without precedent: it certainly got my attention, as I am an atheist and quite empirical.
I eventually went to Spirit Mtn, bought in at a craps table and after an indeterminate time the proverbial light bulb went off in my noggin, telling me "Now."
I bet a buck on midnight.
It hit.
"Parlay."
It hit.
Whoa.
Cool story! These improbable things do happen in life without explanation.
Would you be telling this story if you had lost the dollar?
Quote: aceofspadesI have no reason to embellish. If the Wizard or Mission or BBB believe that I am doing so in an effort to gain page views, then they can close the thread. Page views do not benefit me in any way. I post on here because I had been enjoying everyone's commentary and liked keeping a record for myself of my travels.
I can, henceforth, keep them as a private journal instead…then I cannot be accused of seeking page views.
Too many threads being closed and I have no idea why. I hope this does not become yet another one.
There was an interesting article on probabilistic fact checking of Don Johnson's results in a recent issue of "Chance" magazine (a journal of the American Statistical Association). The interesting part about this article (to me) is that the authors got the math totally wrong. In particular, they did not know how to correctly simulate blackjack. But the point they make is valid: there is a role for probabilistic fact checking in refuting published extraordinary claims.Quote: 1BBToo many threads being closed and I have no idea why. I hope this does not become yet another one.
http://chance.amstat.org/2014/02/blackjack-27-1/
Unlike the DJ article, those posting here who are examining the claims made by AoS are *not* getting the math wrong. There is a lot of educational value in this discussion. As much as AoS may not appreciate those devoted to refuting his claims, mathematics and probability theory can be used for fact checking and in this case the evidence against is overwhelming. There are competing hypothesis and they are orders of magnitude apart in their likelihood, with the claims made by AoS firmly at the bottom.
Quote: teliotThere are competing hypothesis and they are orders of magnitude apart in their likelihood, with the claims made by AoS firmly at the bottom.
Well, considering I am the only one that was there when it happened, my claims are at the top of my list.
Quote: aceofspadesWell, considering I am the only one that was there when it happened, my claims are at the top of my list.
Ace I will give you props for handling the criticism so well. Many people by now would have just thrown out a bunch of profanities and gotten banned.
Quote: aceofspadesWell, considering I am the only one that was there when it happened, my claims are at the top of my list.
the fact that you were the only one there does not matter at all w/r/t probabilistic fact checking.
I didn't go to law school, but isn't it common knowledge among lawyers thats witnesses mis-remember facts all the time? The human memory is far from perfect and people can convince themselves they saw things they didn't see, or mis-remember key facts about what they saw.
I am sure in the fields of psychology or neurology there are a bunch of studies showing how fallible human memory actually is. Just a quick look at Wikipedia gave me this:
"The Innocence Project reports eyewitness misidentification occurs in approximately 75% of convictions that are overturned"
Why do you think you are exempt from making a memory mistake?
Quote: sodawaterQuick question for Ace...
I didn't go to law school, but isn't it common knowledge among lawyers thats witnesses mis-remember facts all the time? The human memory is far from perfect and people can convince themselves they saw things they didn't see, or mis-remember key facts about what they saw.
I am sure in the fields of psychology or neurology there are a bunch of studies showing how fallible human memory actually is.
Why do you think you are exempt from that?
but I would haver to say that the reasons witnesses mis-remember the facts is because they are, a lot of the times, placed under extreme duress or emotional stress.
Compare that to ace who apparently kept clean records of the events by (I would assume) either writing them down or putting some info into his phone for later recollection.
To compare the two I think is a little unfair imo.
I still am not sure if I can believe ace but due to the fact that I have no reason not to believe him, I would give him the benefit of the doubt. This argument is like a dog chasing his own tail. It is going to go around and around and not much will come of it. You either believe him or you don't, not much else to be said that hasn't already been done so!
Quote: GWAEAce I will give you props for handling the criticism so well. Many people by now would have just thrown out a bunch of profanities and gotten banned.
Not my style and not worth it. As an attorney, have to keep my cool when debating.
Quote: sodawaterQuick question for Ace...
I didn't go to law school, but isn't it common knowledge among lawyers thats witnesses mis-remember facts all the time? The human memory is far from perfect and people can convince themselves they saw things they didn't see, or mis-remember key facts about what they saw.
I am sure in the fields of psychology or neurology there are a bunch of studies showing how fallible human memory actually is. Just a quick look at Wikipedia gave me this:
"The Innocence Project reports eyewitness misidentification occurs in approximately 75% of convictions that are overturned"
Why do you think you are exempt from making a memory mistake?
Yes, eyewitness testimony is unreliable and I do not claim to be exempt. However, I am an interested party to the event I am witnessing, not merely a bystander who had no reason to recall the event correctly. (yes, I can foresee everyone quoting the "interested party" phrase but I say that as an interested party the moment it was happening, not as an interested party standing by the claim now) What I claim is that when I make these trip reports, I type up a mini-report on my iPhone after I get up from the table each time. As this happened in rapid succession, with my making three notes (one note after each 10 hand loss), I am not stating these things from memory, but rather from on the spot reporting (after all, the 10 hands only took moments to play).
Quote: Tomspurbut I would haver to say that the reasons witnesses mis-remember the facts is because they are, a lot of the times, placed under extreme duress or emotional stress.
I would say that losing so many hands in a row would be very stressful emotionally for all but the most seasoned professional gamblers.
Quote: Tomspur
I still am not sure if I can believe ace but due to the fact that I have no reason not to believe him, I would give him the benefit of the doubt. This argument is like a dog chasing his own tail. It is going to go around and around and not much will come of it. You either believe him or you don't, not much else to be said that hasn't already been done so!
I have no reason not to believe him, either. That's not how probability works, though. You can't just believe something because someone says it and you can't see why he would be lying. He could easily be mistaken. In this case, it's orders upon orders of magnitude more likely he is mistaken.
Quote: aceofspadesWell, considering I am the only one that was there when it happened, my claims are at the top of my list.
It doesn't matter who was there. If we take everything that you have claimed at face value, then there are two possibilities:
1. You lost 30 hands in a row
2. You made an error somewhere (missed a dealer error, or miscounted the number of hands, or forgot about a push)
What probability do you assign to option #2? You think that it's less than 1 in a billion?
Suppose that you would only make an error like that 1 time in a thousand (and, IMO, that is extremely generous -- no one's memory is that good). Then there is still a 99.9999% chance that you did not lose 30 hands in a row.
So, no, I am not absolutely sure that you are wrong. I am only 99.9999% sure that you are wrong. I admit that there is, perhaps, a 0.0001% chance that you are correct.
The reason that we are coming to different conclusions is that you seem to believe that you are infallible, and are therefore assigning a probability of 0 to event #2. I, on the other hand, believe that everyone makes mistakes sometimes, and therefore assign a non-zero probability to event #2.
Quote: sodawaterI would say that losing so many hands in a row would be very stressful emotionally for all but the most seasoned professional gamblers.
You are absolutely right it must be very stressful but there is a critical difference I believe. The witness, in all probability does not have a phone, pen or paper at hand to write down exactly what happened as it happened, which, in ace's case he said he had done.
Yes, probability states that he did not experience 30 outright losses in a row but without definitive proof either way, do we 100% accurately know that it did not happen?
Quote: Tomspur
Yes, probability states that he did not experience 30 outright losses in a row but without definitive proof either way, do we 100% accurately know that it did not happen?
Yes, we can round to 100% certainty.
Quote: sodawaterI would say that losing so many hands in a row would be very stressful emotionally for all but the most seasoned professional gamblers.
I have no reason not to believe him, either. That's not how probability works, though. You can't just believe something because someone says it and you can't see why he would be lying. He could easily be mistaken. In this case, it's orders upon orders of magnitude more likely he is mistaken.
If your test of whether something happened is that you can't see why the person would be lying - then how can you believe anything that anyone has ever told you. Every person on the planet (including me) can have any one of millions of reasons to lie about anything…religion, science, history, your parents, siblings…all liars and nothing should be believed
Quote: sodawaterYes, we can round to 100% certainty.
Now that is a slippery slope but since.....
1) I suck at math
2) I don't care all that much......
I will leave this conversation :)
Quote: sodawaterYes, we can round to 100% certainty.
Well if you can convince someone in casino surveillance to release the tapes from that session, you will see it as being true. Aside from that, I will never convince anyone that it happened because you were not there and choose math over my actual report.
There really should be no further discussion on this as neither side shall give in and we will likely never be provided with the video.
Quote: TomspurYou are absolutely right it must be very stressful but there is a critical difference I believe. The witness, in all probability does not have a phone, pen or paper at hand to write down exactly what happened as it happened, which, in ace's case he said he had done.
Yes, probability states that he did not experience 30 outright losses in a row but without definitive proof either way, do we 100% accurately know that it did not happen?
I gave the figure 99.9999%. And that was extremely generous.
The fact that you take notes later isn't really all that helpful. Last night (coincidentally) I was practicing blackjack with a friend (actually dealing for her while I watched TV). I was giving her 5 rounds from a single deck. Pretty much, every single deck, there was confusion after 4 or 5 hands as to whether I had dealt 4 (so there was 1 more hand left) or 5 (so it was time to shuffle). People are just not good at remembering stuff like that, especially while trying to do something else (like play blackjack and count cards)
Quote: aceofspadesWell if you can convince someone in casino surveillance to release the tapes from that session, you will see it as being true. Aside from that, I will never convince anyone that it happened because you were not there and choose math over my actual report.
There really should be no further discussion on this as neither side shall give in and we will likely never be provided with the video.
Just as a matter of interest, unless the incident happened within the last week or unless there was a reason to have saved the footage, that footage has long since gone the way of the Dodo....
Just as a matter of interest :)
Quote: AxiomOfChoice
The fact that you take notes later isn't really all that helpful.
Moments after each 10 hand loss - not "later"
Quote: TomspurJust as a matter of interest, unless the incident happened within the last week or unless there was a reason to have saved the footage, that footage has long since gone the way of the Dodo....
Just as a matter of interest :)
Well then my veracity being questioned shall continue
Quote: aceofspadesMoments after each 10 card loss - not "later"
I would say that once you are more than 5 hands in, it's too late.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI gave the figure 99.9999%. And that was extremely generous.
The fact that you take notes later isn't really all that helpful. Last night (coincidentally) I was practicing blackjack with a friend (actually dealing for her while I watched TV). I was giving her 5 rounds from a single deck. Pretty much, every single deck, there was confusion after 4 or 5 hands as to whether I had dealt 4 (so there was 1 more hand left) or 5 (so it was time to shuffle). People are just not good at remembering stuff like that, especially while trying to do something else (like play blackjack and count cards)
But with blackjack tournaments I have run in the past I keep lammers on the side of the table to keep track of the actual amount of hands dealt. After each hand I flip over a lammer. This could be construed as something rather similar than a person keeping track with an aided device?
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI would say that once you are more than 5 hands in, it's too late.
Where is your empirical data on whether a person can remember losing 5 hands better than losing 10 hands…?
Without proof, everyone's arguments shall be treated like you have all treated my argument - as null and void.
Quote: aceofspadesIf your test of whether something happened is that you can't see why the person would be lying - then how can you believe anything that anyone has ever told you. Every person on the planet (including me) can have any one of millions of reasons to lie about anything…religion, science, history, your parents, siblings…all liars and nothing should be believed
that was my point. i am agreeing with you. i was saying tom shouldn't use whether he has a reason the person might be lying as the test of whether something happened.
Quote: TomspurBut with blackjack tournaments I have run in the past I keep lammers on the side of the table to keep track of the actual amount of hands dealt. After each hand I flip over a lammer. This could be construed as something rather similar than a person keeping track with an aided device?
Yes, exactly. You use lammers. You don't wait until after you have dealt what you remember to be 10 hands and then decide that you have dealt 10 hands, and that there is absolutely zero chance that you could possibly be mistaken.
Quote: sodawaterthat was my point. i am agreeing with you. i was saying tom shouldn't use whether he has a reason the person might be lying as the test of whether something happened.
That is an awfully cynical way of going through life BUT to address your point. I was not using it as a test of the happening but rather my knowledge of the man.
There is a difference methinks.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceYes, exactly. You use lammers. You don't wait until after you have dealt what you remember to be 10 hands and then decide that you have dealt 10 hands, and that there is absolutely zero chance that you could possibly be mistaken.
I'll give you that point my good man!
Quote: aceofspadesWhere is your empirical data on whether a person can remember losing 5 hands better than losing 10 hands…?
Without proof, everyone's arguments shall be treated like you have all treated my argument - as null and void.
What argument? Your argument seems to be that you are completely infallible and the probability of you making a mistake is 0 (or, at least, significantly less than 1 in a billion)
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceWhat argument? Your argument seems to be that you are completely infallible and the probability of you making a mistake is 0 (or, at least, significantly less than 1 in a billion)
Not stating I am infallible - I am just stating the methods use to ensure I got it right (such as writing it down immediately upon its happening)
I think perhaps everyone here wishes it happened to them so they could lay claim to a mathematical anomaly LOL
Quote: aceofspadesNot stating I am infallible - I am just stating the methods use to ensure I got it right (such as writing it down immediately upon its happening)
I think perhaps everyone here wishes it happened to them so they could lay claim to a mathematical anomaly LOL
There's probably a greater chance the data on your phone got corrupted and displayed something you didn't input than you losing 30 hands of BJ in a row.
Quote: sodawaterThere's probably a greater chance the data on your phone got corrupted and displayed something you didn't input than you losing 30 hands of BJ in a row.
I will sleep well tonight knowing I am right :)
Quote: aceofspadesNot stating I am infallible - I am just stating the methods use to ensure I got it right (such as writing it down immediately upon its happening)
I think perhaps everyone here wishes it happened to them so they could lay claim to a mathematical anomaly LOL
But do you agree that, even with these methods, there is some non-zero chance of error?
What methods did you use to make sure that the dealer didn't make an error and take your bet on a loss or push? This is extremely common.
Because I can add up to 21 and would see that I either (a) busted or (b) had a total less than the dealer's 17–21
Quote: aceofspadesBecause I can add up to 21 and would see that I either (a) busted or (b) had a total less than the dealer's 17–21
Dealers can add up to 21 too (ok, I'm actually not that confident about that statement) but they make this mistake a lot. I have had to correct dealers several times. They screw up a lot of 5+ card hands.
My point is, how come you think that the dealer can make this mistake and you can't? By the way, have you ever caught a dealer in such a mistake? If not, then you've almost certainly missed a few.
