August 25th, 2010 at 9:38:21 AM
permalink
Hi all
i got a question. i have been playing baccarat at the following website
the following is the detail
total game play : 10,000 round
total win : 55%
total lose : 45%
i bet on some simple rules that i created myself
what u all think about it? example pure luck or?
Please advise
thank you
i got a question. i have been playing baccarat at the following website
the following is the detail
total game play : 10,000 round
total win : 55%
total lose : 45%
i bet on some simple rules that i created myself
what u all think about it? example pure luck or?
Please advise
thank you
August 25th, 2010 at 9:46:52 AM
permalink
Quote: blurhoeex... i bet on some simple rules that i created myself.
What do you think? (You said that, not me.)
Why bet at all, if you can be sure?
Anyway, what constitutes a "good bet"? - The best slots-game in town; a sucker's edge; or some gray-area blackjack-stunts?
(P.S. God doesn't even have to exist to be God.)
August 25th, 2010 at 9:53:30 AM
permalink
what i think is there should be some luck involve in it
August 25th, 2010 at 9:58:56 AM
permalink
Quote: blurhoeexwhat i think is there should be some luck involve in it
Perhaps some of the more-eloquent posters, than i here, would please define that thing called 'luck'?
Why bet at all, if you can be sure?
Anyway, what constitutes a "good bet"? - The best slots-game in town; a sucker's edge; or some gray-area blackjack-stunts?
(P.S. God doesn't even have to exist to be God.)
August 25th, 2010 at 10:02:11 AM
permalink
perharps my rules fit better into the first 10,000 games.
maybe the next 10k games the win percentage maybe be less than 50%
maybe the next 10k games the win percentage maybe be less than 50%
August 31st, 2010 at 12:16:42 PM
permalink
Probablility laws are meant to apply over an infinite population of events, so yeah, you probably just had good luck. "Luck" defined as "results more favorable to you than the math predicts."
10,000 hands may seem like a lot to play, and it is, but set against the number of baccarat hands dealt, it's infinitessimal. I would suggest playing a billion hands or something like that.
Ever see those political polls where it surveys, like, 1000 voters and assigns a margin of error? They're guessing election results using 1,000 trials in a population of, oh, 100 million or so. I think your win pct. is what "margin of error" looks like for, say, 10,000 trials in an infinite population.
But also, it *COULD* be that the programming for WOO's game has built in a higher win pct than a deck of cards actually yields. I can't imagine why this would be if he's really trying to simulate the game to match casino results, but I also don't know anything about programming and, for all I know, it would take a zillion lines of code to simulate it perfectly.
BTW, this is why I always wonder about "practicing" casino games using computer programs. Yes, you almost have to these days, but is there a way that we coudl be sure that the programming reflects actual gaming conditions as accurately as possible?
10,000 hands may seem like a lot to play, and it is, but set against the number of baccarat hands dealt, it's infinitessimal. I would suggest playing a billion hands or something like that.
Ever see those political polls where it surveys, like, 1000 voters and assigns a margin of error? They're guessing election results using 1,000 trials in a population of, oh, 100 million or so. I think your win pct. is what "margin of error" looks like for, say, 10,000 trials in an infinite population.
But also, it *COULD* be that the programming for WOO's game has built in a higher win pct than a deck of cards actually yields. I can't imagine why this would be if he's really trying to simulate the game to match casino results, but I also don't know anything about programming and, for all I know, it would take a zillion lines of code to simulate it perfectly.
BTW, this is why I always wonder about "practicing" casino games using computer programs. Yes, you almost have to these days, but is there a way that we coudl be sure that the programming reflects actual gaming conditions as accurately as possible?
August 31st, 2010 at 12:26:10 PM
permalink
Not really. In fact, many downloadable shareware programs will intentionally degrade their performance if you fail to pay the fees.Quote: ItsCalledSoccerbut is there a way that we could be sure that the programming reflects actual gaming conditions as accurately as possible?
August 31st, 2010 at 2:05:03 PM
permalink
Quote: FleaStiffNot really. In fact, many downloadable shareware programs will intentionally degrade their performance if you fail to pay the fees.
Yeah, I've heard of that, even that Microsoft intentionally bugs the Mac adaptations of Office applications. Don't knwo why, they still get their retail price.
Anyway, why would someone not pay other than being cheap (which I proudly am at some things)? I mean, if you really get interested in a game and want to learn it for your next LV trip, and you're going to put even $5 a hand for 20 hands, isn't it worth the $0.99 for the iPhone app? Sheesh!