https://news.yahoo.com/former-fbi-agent-sentenced-gambling-025840260.html
$721 x 100 rounds/hr. x 0.5% house edge x 3 hours = $1081.50 in expected loss, quite far from $13,000.
So at least one of these must be true:
(1) He's bad at blackjack.
(2) He's a generous tipper.
(3) He was super unlucky.*
(4) The numbers in the article were wrong.
*EDIT: As per the discussion below, just unlucky, not "super" unlucky.
Quote: MichaelBluejay
So at least one of these must be true:
(1) He's bad at blackjack.
(2) He's a generous tipper.
(3) He was super unlucky.
(4) The numbers in the article were wrong.
link to original post
(5) Theoretical results can be way different than actual results.
That's a re-stating of #3.Quote: AlanMendelson(5) Theoretical results can be way different than actual results.
If he made 200 bets then his expectation, assuming 0.5% edge, was -1 +/- 16. Applying $721 gives $-721 +/- $11,536 so losing $13,000 would be easy
I’d guess his edge was more like 2%, making a $13k loss within one standard deviation of $2884 expected loss
Yes, that would be #1 and #3.Quote: Ace2Ever hear of variance?...I’d guess his edge was more like 2%, making a $13k loss within one standard deviation of $2884 expected loss
link to original post
$13k is normal variance regardless of his skills. Losing/winning that amount wouldn’t be super unlucky/luckyQuote: MichaelBluejayYes, that would be #1 and #3.Quote: Ace2Ever hear of variance?...I’d guess his edge was more like 2%, making a $13k loss within one standard deviation of $2884 expected loss
link to original post
link to original post
I do realize that I erred by considering only flat betting. Certainly if he often bet a lot more than average, then variance would be a lot higher.
I'm also remembering from my counting days that spreading $25-$150 resulted in about ±$1000/hr, and $100-600 was about ±$4000/hr. So yeah, if $100-600 could yield -$12,000, then $721 certainly could certainly yield about that result. (Not an exact comparison, b/c -$4000/hr. for one hour is a lot less likely than -$12,000 for three hours, because we'd have to be in the bad range for a one-hour return three times in a row, much less likely than doing so just once.)
Quote: MichaelBluejay
$721 x 100 rounds/hr.
100 rounds an hour? That seems awfully slow for blackjack, unless he was on a full table. I've never played blackjack in a high limit room. Is it really that much slower?
Depends on who’s at your table in high limit but imo those games actually move faster due mainly to lack of side bets and less full tables, fewer inexperienced/indecisive players.
I'll go with number 4.
Everyone knows this. It's common knowledge among the law enforcement community.
Definitely not true. A few years back it came out that an FBI agent Dale Cooper (working under the alias D. Jones) used his AP skills as a slot player to clean out a Las Vegas casino of $425,000. He was working on a related operation and the winnings nearly blew his cover.Quote: GundyFBI agents are ploppies. 100% of them.
Everyone knows this. It's common knowledge among the law enforcement community.
link to original post
Quote: AlanMendelsonYeah he lost... but look at the free play offers he'll be getting....
link to original post
There seems to be many of these special agents around gambling cities. Blending in losing government money. It’s the only logical conclusion after watching guys lose tens of thousands a week for months on end. They also seem to ask to many questions about Ap, pretend to be APs,, but never win. I wonder …