January 8th, 2016 at 10:33:37 AM
permalink

Quote:WizardofnothingWould still love to know whether it's more probably to lose 30 hands of roll 18yos

Or whether Rob Singer strategies actually work.

I'd bet on the 18 elevens first.

DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!

January 8th, 2016 at 10:46:15 AM
permalink

That's funny

No longer hiring, don’t ask because I won’t hire you either

January 8th, 2016 at 11:11:11 AM
permalink

I think the poll about the 18 yos in a row, that I busted, was taking things too far. I should have busted it on first sight, and for not doing so, I apologize to Alan.

It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.

January 8th, 2016 at 11:14:14 AM
permalink

The person that created it should be tarred and feathered - just kidding - maybe should have just had a couple options removed -

No longer hiring, don’t ask because I won’t hire you either

January 8th, 2016 at 11:22:08 AM
permalink

I cannot resist, the devil made me do it perhaps....

The math.

The math is telling, is it not?

I ask YOU cause I don't have a clue, but think maybe you do.....

18 yo's in a row? Possible? Theoretically 'maybe'.

Somewhere in this thread, or the other poll thread that is no more, AoS chimed in and said something along the lines of "good luck, they nailed me to the cross" for a less serious infraction of the probability of the possibilities. AoS also posted a link to another earlier thread, said link just came in at the middle, around pg 29 of a 58 page thread. Silly me, I hit the link, read the remaining 30 or so pages of that thread.. Must have been a slow day...;-)

I read some things there that seemed to make sense, some notes on Reaaaaaaaaally long odds. Notes posted by well intentioned, obviously math savvy types that could think theses things thru way beyond what I could ever hope to do.

But I saw some statements that bothered me.

Liberal paraphrasing here but one was something like:

You lost 15 hands in a row, odds are 'such and such'

Then you lost another 15 hands in row, odds are such and such.

Then the dealer got a 9 card 21, odds are such and such.

Then you lost 30 hands in a row, odds are such and such....

If the take the odds of the first event, combine them with the odds of the second event, combine them with the odds of the third event......etc... Then the odds become astronomically improbable.....

Is that the correct way to calculate the odds? Serious question, and I am rarely serious....

Put another way, simple example.

You lose 16 hands in a row in BJ. I don't care if you count pushes ( why would you?) or don't count pushes, as long as you use the same mathematical logic either way.

Are the odds of having 2 'streaks' of 15 losing hands, back to back, which you just did, even if they overlap, the same as the odds of the one 16 streak of losing hands??

Put another way, not so simple..

Let's say you play 500 hands a day in a practice game, you do it for 90 days, just heads up vs the dealer, use whatever set of rules you like. You play 45,000 hands.

Some weird jhit happens during that 45,000 hands.

Like you win 25 of 26 hands dealt in a row, win 12, lose 1, then win 13 (ignore the pushes, why not ignore pushes).

And you lose 20 hands in a row at one point in there.

And you had 3 instances where you bet the table max ($1k) in your regular progression that turned into $5K bets? Once deuces vs dealer 3, that you split 4 ways and doubled once, and was a push overall. AND twice that were 9's vs dealer 8, one split 3 ways with two doubles, one split 4 ways with one double, and you won both of those $5K wagers?

We're all those events related, and probabilities cumulative, since they all happen in the same 45,000 hands?

Or are they unrelated and they probabilities are not cumulative?

What if you add in some genetic mutant butterfly in Africa that beat it's wings? Did so during that 45,000 hands?

Long post I know.

But if it's possible, doesn't it have to happen?

Does it have to happen twice?

Cheers

2F

The math.

The math is telling, is it not?

I ask YOU cause I don't have a clue, but think maybe you do.....

18 yo's in a row? Possible? Theoretically 'maybe'.

Somewhere in this thread, or the other poll thread that is no more, AoS chimed in and said something along the lines of "good luck, they nailed me to the cross" for a less serious infraction of the probability of the possibilities. AoS also posted a link to another earlier thread, said link just came in at the middle, around pg 29 of a 58 page thread. Silly me, I hit the link, read the remaining 30 or so pages of that thread.. Must have been a slow day...;-)

I read some things there that seemed to make sense, some notes on Reaaaaaaaaally long odds. Notes posted by well intentioned, obviously math savvy types that could think theses things thru way beyond what I could ever hope to do.

But I saw some statements that bothered me.

Liberal paraphrasing here but one was something like:

You lost 15 hands in a row, odds are 'such and such'

Then you lost another 15 hands in row, odds are such and such.

Then the dealer got a 9 card 21, odds are such and such.

Then you lost 30 hands in a row, odds are such and such....

If the take the odds of the first event, combine them with the odds of the second event, combine them with the odds of the third event......etc... Then the odds become astronomically improbable.....

Is that the correct way to calculate the odds? Serious question, and I am rarely serious....

Put another way, simple example.

You lose 16 hands in a row in BJ. I don't care if you count pushes ( why would you?) or don't count pushes, as long as you use the same mathematical logic either way.

Are the odds of having 2 'streaks' of 15 losing hands, back to back, which you just did, even if they overlap, the same as the odds of the one 16 streak of losing hands??

Put another way, not so simple..

Let's say you play 500 hands a day in a practice game, you do it for 90 days, just heads up vs the dealer, use whatever set of rules you like. You play 45,000 hands.

Some weird jhit happens during that 45,000 hands.

Like you win 25 of 26 hands dealt in a row, win 12, lose 1, then win 13 (ignore the pushes, why not ignore pushes).

And you lose 20 hands in a row at one point in there.

And you had 3 instances where you bet the table max ($1k) in your regular progression that turned into $5K bets? Once deuces vs dealer 3, that you split 4 ways and doubled once, and was a push overall. AND twice that were 9's vs dealer 8, one split 3 ways with two doubles, one split 4 ways with one double, and you won both of those $5K wagers?

We're all those events related, and probabilities cumulative, since they all happen in the same 45,000 hands?

Or are they unrelated and they probabilities are not cumulative?

What if you add in some genetic mutant butterfly in Africa that beat it's wings? Did so during that 45,000 hands?

Long post I know.

But if it's possible, doesn't it have to happen?

Does it have to happen twice?

Cheers

2F

Youuuuuu MIGHT be a 'rascal' if.......(nevermind ;-)...2F

January 8th, 2016 at 11:26:56 AM
permalink

When the Big Bang occurred, what would the odds have been on humans coming into existence?

January 8th, 2016 at 11:32:34 AM
permalink

Quote:darkozSo, after the 17th yo, the dice would recognize the previous events and not land that way? You are saying 18 throws of a yo can't happen in a row because the dice have memory and are not really independent events?

I read this the same way, that somehow dice have memory - isn't each roll independent, such as the spin of a roulette wheel?

January 8th, 2016 at 11:41:22 AM
permalink

After an event, or series of events occurs we can say "the odds of that happening were astronomical". But you didn't ask me what the odds of it happening were before the events began. No would would have even speculated - "think I can throw 18 yo's in a row?". I fantasize about rolling two 12's in a row and having parlayed my dollar into 900.

No one would ever place a wager that 18 yo's in a row will occur, but after it happens they would say "Dang, wish I had bet that!"

No one would ever place a wager that 18 yo's in a row will occur, but after it happens they would say "Dang, wish I had bet that!"

January 8th, 2016 at 11:43:49 AM
permalink

Oddly, the odds of one yo is 1 in "18"

Or is it 1 in 6?? :-)

Or is it 1 in 6?? :-)

DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!

January 8th, 2016 at 11:45:19 AM
permalink

Quote:WizardofnothingThe person that created it should be tarred and feathered - just kidding - maybe should have just had a couple options removed -

Poll choices can't be edited once posted. It either stays up or comes down.

BTW, even though you're kidding, stones and glass houses and all that.

If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.