Roulette - # of spins
In case anyone is late to the party, I just wanted to point out this exchange with EvenBob wherein he plays his usual game of making two diametrically opposing claims so that matter what you say, he can claim he was right all along:
Quote: EvenBobIf you think the house edge in roulette manifests itself on every single bet for the player and for the casino, please make your case. I'm all ears.
link to original post
(my response, in which I explain the house edge formula)
Quote: TigerWu
That math is in effect on every single bet you make, because those payouts don't change.
link to original post
(EvenBob's response, in complete opposition to his previous post)
Quote: EvenBobOf course it is!
link to original post
LOL
As an added bonus, here's the entirety of that last post, wherein EvenBob makes it perfectly clear (for the millionth time) he has absolutely no idea what the house edge is or how it works, or how the math in roulette works, and how he often contradicts himself from one sentence to the next:
Quote: EvenBob
Of course it is! But not in the short term only in the long-term! When you make a bet in roulette or any table game do you think you're going to win or lose that bet depending on the house edge? Obviously not. If you make a $100 bet in roulette do you really think you're going to get 95% of that bet back right then on a double zero wheel? Really? Do you think it's going to happen on the next bet, or even in that entire session? No, it's not. It's going to happen in the long run and you'll never even get to the long run. Short-term variance is the only thing that counts in short-term play.
link to original post
Quote: TigerWuhe has absolutely no idea what the house edge is or how it works,
link to original post
And yet you don't explain it. You just make blanket statements and go hahaha and you explain nothing. You have no argument except to say I'm wrong which is not an argument. Let's hear the details, I go into details why can't you. You tell me exactly where I'm wrong exactly what I'm not understanding, change my mind. Go ahead, I'm all ears. I bet all I hear is the sound of crickets. LOL
Quote: EvenBobQuote: TigerWuhe has absolutely no idea what the house edge is or how it works,
link to original post
And yet you don't explain it. You just make blanket statements and go hahaha and you explain nothing. You have no argument except to say I'm wrong which is not an argument. Let's hear the details, I go into details why can't you. You tell me exactly where I'm wrong exactly what I'm not understanding, change my mind. Go ahead, I'm all ears. I bet all I hear is the sound of crickets. LOL
link to original post
"Assume a person is making $5 bets on every spin of the roulette wheel, and the wheel spins 50 times an hour. While the person betting may be winning some bets and losing other bets, they are wagering $250 an hour. If the house edge plays out perfectly, at the end of four hours of play, they lose $50, or 5% of $1,000."
But it never ever ever works out perfectly. The vast majority of the time the player will lose the entire amount. Or if he doesn't he might be smart enough to quit while he still has 20 bucks. This is because the house edge never manifests itself in the short term as I keep saying over and over. Yet people constantly assume that it does, it's mind-boggling. If it did work out perfectly the hold at the end of the shift would be 5% of the total that everybody bet and it's more like 18%. It didn't matter that they reinvested their winnings and that's where the 18% comes from. It still did not take those winnings in little 5% chunks it gobbled them up like a greedy beast. Short-term variance it's either your friend or your worst enemy. It happens to be my best friend..
I wasn't talking to you.Quote: EvenBobQuote: OnceDearYou engaged him again. So he won again!
link to original post
I won again because I won the argument and you know it. If I'm wrong make your case which you know you can't do so you think just shutting up is making a statement. The statement its making is that you lost.
link to original post
And this will be the extent of my response to you in this thread. Take that to the bank.
I'll let others mess around with Brandolini's law.
Quote: billryanI'm convinced bob doesn't know the first thing about gambling.
link to original post
He doesn't know anything about gambling because he doesn't gamble. He "makes educated guesses for money."
Reminds me of that interview Elon Musk had recently with BBC. The interviewer says to Musk, what are you going to do about all the hate speech on Twitter. Elon Musk replies, what hate speech, give me some examples. The commentator says well, I don't have any examples. Elon Musk replies, you made the statement give me just one example. The BBC commentator couldn't do it. Just like you people can't do it, you have lots of criticisms but you don't back them up. All you do is make blanket statements.
I go into great detail and your whole argument is, no argument at all. In debate we call this a win for me. Bottom line is, short-term variance is what rules roulette and that's where you can slip in with your own edge and make a killing. Prove me wrong, I dare you.
EB requests math to be proven, math people give a breakdown that would pass diligence with any college math department and then EB acts like it wasn't posted and says he won because nothing was shown.
Let's face it Nathan was more honest (and probably won more at gambling) than EB
Quote: darkozThis is worse than trolling. It's gaslighting.
link to original post
Yet another post with no details of what I'm saying that's wrong just more blah blah blah blanket statements that are meaningless. And they think this presents an argument of some kind. You cannot defeat my arguments and you think this is going to get you out of it. It's not. Explain to me in detail where I'm wrong and if you present the correct argument I won't talk about this anymore. Ever. But you can't do it because you know I'm right.
I'm talking about this argument.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/other-games/38710-roulette-of-spins/2/#post908684
You can only win against a gaslighter by ignoring them
Quote: OnceDearI'll let others mess around with Brandolini's law.
link to original post
You are not even supposed to be talking about Roullet, you went back on your word, and the vote/poll that YOU put up. Why are you not being a man of your word?Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkoz
The OP eagle4x is no longer responding probably because he realizes you have hijacked his thread with your roulette nonsense.
This is the fifth or sixth EB thread about how you beat roulette by doing things with imaginary math.
link to original post
How do you hijack a roulette thread by talking about roulette. If I'm wrong about any of the points I made please point them out which I see you're not doing. Please point out where my math is imaginary. If you think the house edge in roulette manifests itself on every single bet for the player and for the casino, please make your case. I'm all ears.
link to original post
Quote: darkozThis is worse than trolling. It's gaslighting.
EB requests math to be proven, math people give a breakdown that would pass diligence with any college math department and then EB acts like it wasn't posted and says he won because nothing was shown.
link to original post
It's a logical fallacy known as "invincible ignorance," or "argument by pigheadedness."
Quote:.....the person in question simply refuses to believe the argument, ignoring any evidence given. It is not so much a fallacious tactic in argument as it is a refusal to argue in the proper sense of the word. The method used in this fallacy is either to make assertions with no consideration of objections or to simply dismiss objections by calling them excuses, conjecture, etc. or saying that they are proof of nothing, all without actually demonstrating how the objection fit these terms. It is similar to the ad lapidem fallacy, in which the person rejects all the evidence and logic presented, without providing any evidence or logic that could lead to a different conclusion.
Tell me that doesn't describe EB to an absolute T.... LOL
EB also reminds me of this meme:
Quote: AxelWolfYou are not even supposed to be talking about Roullet, you went back on your word, and the vote/poll that YOU put up. Why are you not being a man of your word?Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkoz
The OP eagle4x is no longer responding probably because he realizes you have hijacked his thread with your roulette nonsense.
This is the fifth or sixth EB thread about how you beat roulette by doing things with imaginary math.
link to original post
How do you hijack a roulette thread by talking about roulette. If I'm wrong about any of the points I made please point them out which I see you're not doing. Please point out where my math is imaginary. If you think the house edge in roulette manifests itself on every single bet for the player and for the casino, please make your case. I'm all ears.
link to original post
link to original post
Expecting honesty from a troll is like looking to the west for the sunrise. It's an exercise in futility. Attempting a genuine conversation with EB is a waste of time.
Quote: billryanQuote: AxelWolfYou are not even supposed to be talking about Roullet, you went back on your word, and the vote/poll that YOU put up. Why are you not being a man of your word?Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkoz
The OP eagle4x is no longer responding probably because he realizes you have hijacked his thread with your roulette nonsense.
This is the fifth or sixth EB thread about how you beat roulette by doing things with imaginary math.
link to original post
How do you hijack a roulette thread by talking about roulette. If I'm wrong about any of the points I made please point them out which I see you're not doing. Please point out where my math is imaginary. If you think the house edge in roulette manifests itself on every single bet for the player and for the casino, please make your case. I'm all ears.
link to original post
link to original post
Expecting honesty from a troll is like looking to the west for the sunrise. It's an exercise in futility. Attempting a genuine conversation with EB is a waste of time.
link to original post
I think the only interesting thing about EB’s posts is this….
I firmly believe he knows that he has lost, and will continue to lose at roulette over his lifetime. That he knows his posts are nothing more than incendiary gibberish. That, outside of the food and cat threads, he never comes close to making any sense, and he does so on purpose.
I seem to be in the minority. Most believe in some way he has fooled himself into thinking he has won, and will continue to do so. You guys actually believe that EB believes he has NEVER lost a session? That would make him clinically and legally insane. Or at least ‘out of touch with reality’. I do not believe EB is insane.
Quote: SOOPOOI think the only interesting thing about EB’s posts is this….
I firmly believe he knows that he has lost, and will continue to lose at roulette over his lifetime. That he knows his posts are nothing more than incendiary gibberish. That, outside of the food and cat threads, he never comes close to making any sense, and he does so on purpose.
I seem to be in the minority. Most believe in some way he has fooled himself into thinking he has won, and will continue to do so. You guys actually believe that EB believes he has NEVER lost a session? That would make him clinically and legally insane. Or at least ‘out of touch with reality’. I do not believe EB is insane.
link to original post
I have stopped engaging with EB in any way, shape, or form. I block his posts.
EB is overall +EV if you calculate things from his point of view. Suppose he plays roulette every day betting a non-progressing progression and average $20 wagered per day. then he loses 52 cents per day. What is the value that EB derives by keeping his lead in the post count and winning arguments with so-called experts every day? (EB is always the sole judge of whether or not he has won the argument.) You would have to pay EB $100 a day to stop talking about his roulette nonsense. Even then, he would probably forfeit the $100 on some days just to create more nonsense posts.
I submit that EB has done the EV calculation correctly. We are definitely -EV for even engaging with him. WoV is +EV for monetizing the traffic and engagement that EB generates.
Yes, this post is to you. You ask for details where the House Edge occurs. It's really quite simple: the HE rears its head in two spots: the physical design of the game, and the paytables. I will demonstrate with roulette and craps.
Physical design: If you has a "No Zero" wheel--that is, an unbiased roulette wheel with an unbiased ball-launching method, then there would be zero house edge, as long as every bet is paid fairly. The casino would not make any money, and neither would the player. Short term variance is always in play, but 'over the long run' (meaning when enough winning and losing streaks pile up) the game would be a loser for the casino, given crew costs and player malfeasance. So the casinos added one, two, or three zeros to the wheel. That is where the house edge manifests itself. If you are flat-betting the even-money propositions, you, the player, will lose every time the ball hits green. Every time you bet red/black, you open yourself to the measurable chance of hitting the green and absolutely losing.
PayTable: This is really where the casino makes its money. Take that double-zero wheel in Roulette. When you bet red, and the ball lands in a red pocket, you win. And you lose. For you to win fairly, the casino should pay you $(38/36), or $1.05556 times your bet. But they don't. They pay you even money. That missing $0.05556? That's the house edge. When you said earlier that the casino doesn't take the house edge in little bites, you're quite incorrect. Hit on one of the lone numbers? You get 35 to 1. But a fair payout would be 37 to one, because you beat odds of the one pocket out of the possible 38. But the casino short-changes you. It's much the same in craps, because the paytable is the only place where the casino can manifest the house edge--it can't 'add' a zero to the possible rolls.
There. These are the details behind where the House Edge manifests. Physical design (where possible) and PayTable design (always). Now you cannot whinge that nobody's ever explained them.
Quote: EvenBob
Let's hear the details, I go into details why can't you. You tell me exactly where I'm wrong exactly what I'm not understanding, change my mind. Go ahead, I'm all ears.
[...]
But it never ever ever works out perfectly.[...]
This is because the house edge never manifests itself in the short term as I keep saying over and over. Yet people constantly assume that it does,[...]
It still did not take those winnings in little 5% chunks it gobbled them up like a greedy beast.
link to original post
See the section in "PayTable" in my post above. Because the casino shortchanges your winning bet by a percentage equal to the house edge on that bet, both of the statements immediately above are false. You can now continue to say false things, or you can change your mind about what you have falsely asserted. There is no wiggle room here, EB. Time to throw in your hand.
Do you have this daft idea that you will persuade EB of anything. Do you think he'll even engage with your logic?
He's been practicing this game of his for over a decade. And I don't mean roulette.
You just fed the troll again.
Brandolini's law.
EB can continue to cast his BS which is all fun and no effort for him, while you and others try to clean it up with your earnest and fruitless endeavours. You can't argue logic against gibberish and expect the gibberer to have an epiphany.
Quote: BillHasRetiredEvenBob,
Yes, this post is to you. You ask for details where the House Edge occurs. It's really quite simple: the HE rears its head in two spots: the physical design of the game, and the paytables. I will demonstrate with roulette and craps.
Physical design: If you has a "No Zero" wheel--that is, an unbiased roulette wheel with an unbiased ball-launching method, then there would be zero house edge, as long as every bet is paid fairly. The casino would not make any money, and neither would the player. Short term variance is always in play, but 'over the long run' (meaning when enough winning and losing streaks pile up) the game would be a loser for the casino, given crew costs and player malfeasance. So the casinos added one, two, or three zeros to the wheel. That is where the house edge manifests itself. If you are flat-betting the even-money propositions, you, the player, will lose every time the ball hits green. Every time you bet red/black, you open yourself to the measurable chance of hitting the green and absolutely losing.
PayTable: This is really where the casino makes its money. Take that double-zero wheel in Roulette. When you bet red, and the ball lands in a red pocket, you win. And you lose. For you to win fairly, the casino should pay you $(38/36), or $1.05556 times your bet. But they don't. They pay you even money. That missing $0.05556? That's the house edge. When you said earlier that the casino doesn't take the house edge in little bites, you're quite incorrect. Hit on one of the lone numbers? You get 35 to 1. But a fair payout would be 37 to one, because you beat odds of the one pocket out of the possible 38. But the casino short-changes you. It's much the same in craps, because the paytable is the only place where the casino can manifest the house edge--it can't 'add' a zero to the possible rolls.
There. These are the details behind where the House Edge manifests. Physical design (where possible) and PayTable design (always). Now you cannot whinge that nobody's ever explained them.
link to original post
I'm afraid I've been told I can only discuss my roulette method in the one thread I have going about roulette. Look what happened in this thread, my posts threw two totally innocent bystanders into complete delirium, I injured their delicate sensitivities to such an extent that they were hurling personal insults at me and they both got suspended. I am wracked with guilt over this and don't want to see that happen to you. Please address anything about my roulette method in the thread where I'm allowed to discuss it. The gamble thread.
Quote: OnceDearBHR. What's wrong with you man?
Do you have this daft idea that you will persuade EB of anything. Do you think he'll even engage with your logic?
He's been practicing this game of his for over a decade. And I don't mean roulette.
You just fed the troll again.
Brandolini's law.
EB can continue to cast his BS which is all fun and no effort for him, while you and others try to clean it up with your earnest and fruitless endeavours. You can't argue logic against gibberish and expect the gibberer to have an epiphany.
link to original post
OD,
My father (may he rest in peace) had a saying: "Take away their excuses." I have no illusions about EB: all his history indicates that he will never be constrained by logic, good faith, mathematics, or the rules of civil discourse. However, now he cannot say three things:
1. Nobody ever gave him details about how House Edge works
2. "The House Edge never manifests itself in the short term."
3. "[The House Edge] still did not take those winnings in little 5% chunks."
I know he will still try, but the we can reply "False, see https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/other-games/38710-roulette-of-spins/3/#post908817."
Take away his excuses. Soon, he is left with nothing but bare assertions about his non-random system.
Quote: BillHasRetiredEB can continue to cast his BS which is all fun and no effort for him, while you and others try to clean it up with your earnest and fruitless endeavours. You can't argue logic against gibberish and expect the gibberer to have an epiphany.
link to original post
OD,
My father (may he rest in peace) had a saying: "Take away their excuses." I have no illusions about EB: all his history indicates that he will never be constrained by logic, good faith, mathematics, or the rules of civil discourse. However, now he cannot say three things:
1. Nobody ever gave him details about how House Edge works
2. "The House Edge never manifests itself in the short term."
3. "[The House Edge] still did not take those winnings in little 5% chunks."
I know he will still try, but the we can reply "False, see https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/other-games/38710-roulette-of-spins/3/#post908817."
Take away his excuses. Soon, he is left with nothing but bare assertions about his non-random system.
link to original post
I'm afraid I've been told I can only discuss my roulette method in the one thread I have going about roulette. Look what happened in this thread, my posts threw two totally innocent bystanders into complete delirium, I injured their delicate sensitivities to such an extent that they were hurling personal insults at me and they both got suspended. I am wracked with guilt over this and don't want to see that happen to you. Please address anything about my roulette method in the thread where I'm allowed to discuss it. The gamble thread.
Quote: BillHasRetiredQuote: OnceDearBHR. What's wrong with you man?
Do you have this daft idea that you will persuade EB of anything. Do you think he'll even engage with your logic?
He's been practicing this game of his for over a decade. And I don't mean roulette.
You just fed the troll again.
Brandolini's law.
EB can continue to cast his BS which is all fun and no effort for him, while you and others try to clean it up with your earnest and fruitless endeavours. You can't argue logic against gibberish and expect the gibberer to have an epiphany.
link to original post
OD,
My father (may he rest in peace) had a saying: "Take away their excuses." I have no illusions about EB: all his history indicates that he will never be constrained by logic, good faith, mathematics, or the rules of civil discourse. However, now he cannot say three things:
1. Nobody ever gave him details about how House Edge works
2. "The House Edge never manifests itself in the short term."
3. "[The House Edge] still did not take those winnings in little 5% chunks."
I know he will still try, but the we can reply "False, see https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/other-games/38710-roulette-of-spins/3/#post908817."
Take away his excuses. Soon, he is left with nothing but bare assertions about his non-random system.
link to original post
Hi my friend.
We each 'see through' EB, one way or another.
We can throw facts at him, logic, polite discourse. evidence, proof. But all he ever receives is the amusements of seeing us contort.
He's probably smirking at this very post as he gets another mention in it.
This game of his is his social life. It's cheaper than any casino game. Fire up the PC, throw out a few incendiary bits of jibber jabber, bait a few hooks. See what bites he had on yesterdays baited hooks and taunt anyone daft enough to engage him. Just as he did there. Perfect EB Trolling: Ask a question that requires a detailed answer: Receive detailed answer and then say " I can't debate that here, take it to the other thread". And if you take it to the other thread, do you think it will get any attention? He'll just see you as a fish hanging n his baited hook. He'll tug the line a bit to see if you are still wiggling and then he'll tell his cats how well he just did.
Maybe that's it!!! Eureka! I now see his motivation: He needs some stories to impress his dozen plus cats with, and he probably reads all our responses to them for their shared amusement. Probably boasts to his cats about scoring his latest suspension.
Brandolini's law. Pure and simple. He's now polluted over half a dozen topics on this forum alone and three of those are in the hot threads link.
Damn it man. And now I bumped one of those threads!
Quote: EvenBob
I'm afraid I've been told I can only discuss my roulette method in the one thread I have going about roulette.
link to original post
False. Wizard gave you a hijack warning in the "House Edge Effect on Roulette" thread, but has not given you grief here.
Quote: EvenBob
Look what happened in this thread, {festival of EB onanism snipped}[...] they both got suspended. I am wracked with guilt over this and don't want to see that happen to you.
I throw the brown cow-pie flag on this. You don't know me, but I sense you cannot respond in any intelligible way.
Quote: EvenBob
Please address anything about my roulette method in the thread where I'm allowed to discuss it. The gamble thread.
If you have anything intelligent to say, how about YOU respond to my points in whatever obscure thread you might be restricted to, and provide the link below. Too much for you? Then we are left to conclude that you concede my points and agree to abandon the points I have enumerated in any future responses.
You know, I have a better idea: why not stop dancing around this mysterious system of yours. Lay in all out. Confound us with your brilliance. Leave us speechless at your flawless logic. I suspect you'll come up with some non-reason why it cannot be revealed. In this, you are no better than Professor Marvel riding in his fortune-teller wagon.
Quote: EvenBob
Bob oh Bob you all say, you mouth breathing moronic cretin, you cannot beat the house dge so quit saying you can.
link to original post
Quote: BillHasRetiredQuote: EvenBob
I'm afraid I've been told I can only discuss my roulette method in the one thread I have going about roulette.
link to original post
False. Wizard gave you a hijack warning in the "House Edge Effect on Roulette" thread, but has not given you grief here.
link to original post
Yeah, there are other ways of communicating besides the open forum, if you get my drift. When I say I've been told, it comes from a higher power. Use your imagination as to what that means. We are not allowed to discuss the contents of such communications on the Forum.
