|1 vote (4%)|
|4 votes (16%)|
|1 vote (4%)|
|16 votes (64%)|
|1 vote (4%)|
|4 votes (16%)|
|9 votes (36%)|
25 members have voted
The actual value of the bet (win or lose) is where the house makes or loses money. As clearly it pays out, or takes in cash every time a bet is resolved. If you want to get technical, on some wagers it has the money before the bet is resolved and pays out when it loses. But in any event, the house's cash flow is based on those hundreds of pluses and minuses every day. But every bet has an expected value to the house (which may be not in their favour).
Words like 'anything can happen' and 'playing in the short term' is just guff that misses out the simple fact that the variance on a single bet is much much larger than the size of the house edge on that bet. Or even on a short sequence of bets. But we can still easily work out what sorts of things can happen in the short term, with how much regularity, and work out what happens in 10 bets as well as we can what happens in 10,000,000 bets. The picture is easier to read on the second than than the first, but pretending that all the 'math' doesn't work over ten bets is to be ignorant of the mathematics of probability.
Gambling is about" beating the odds" so if you think you can't beat the odds then you shouldn't gamble . I think our human failings contribute more to casinos' profits than their HE.
Can you explain what you mean by this? Are you saying you can consistently beat a casino is a -EV situation with money management.Quote: EvenBob
Even with the HE in place, it can be worked around
if you know what you're doing. And many do know
exactly what they're doing.
I understand if they are doing something extra to gain an advantage. But, if you are saying people can use a selective betting system or money management then give a explanation how.
I would agree there are guys that are up money playing "coin flip bets" But it has nothing to do with money management or some system they think it working. its called LUCK. the dumbest guy in the world could achieve the same thing on a game like BAC.
I always laugh at guys that use the term smart BAC play. WTF seriously how smart do you have to be, to pick player or banker? Money management selective betting is not hard anyone can do it. Just set a limit, bet when you think you are due and hope for the best. If enough people try this someone will succeed this dose not mean they are BAC gurus or special in any way. At any moment they could start losing and never win again.
If the HE manifested itself on every bet,
that wouldn't happen. The key word here
is 'manifest', which means to show evidence
of. You can't see the evidence of the HE on
a single bet, the house can win or lose, it's
gambling in the short term just like you are.
The reason that the house edge affects every bet is that when the house wins, they win more than they should, and when they lose, they lose less than they should.
Suppose you make a $19 bet on red in roulette. If you win, you win $19, and if you lose, you lose $19.
If there were no house edge, you could, instead, bet $18 to win $20. By betting $19 to win $19, you win $1 less when you win, and lose $1 more when you lose. Win or lose, the house edge costs you a dollar. The effect on EVERY SINGLE BET is that is costs you a dollar. It doesnt affect the outcome (you are just as likely to win the bet) but it affects the amount of money that changes hands, every single time.
It's all trying to avoid the 'house edge' which still exists on every bet, and you just can't sum a series of negatives into a positive. You can change the variance, and turn a game from a series of single coin flips into bet on event X happening before Y number of bad events. The Martingale is one way. But if you then look at this new game, it's still got a negative expected value, but with wider variance, were you win a little most of the time, or lose a lot a little of the time. There's still a house edge in the new game. They may not have to pay it as often, but it's still a negative expectation game.
And that's fine. Just don't piss on my leg and call it an Advantage Play.
Others tell you can flat bet and read the results (reading random, streaks, variance, quarters of the moon). This is, as far as I can tell, akin to reading the entrails. They'll compare it to weather forecasting, but one of those two arts has a lot more basis in fact and repeatability behind it. As a clue, it's the one with a 24 hour TV channel dedicated to it.
Both methods start talking about discipline, money management (and then the evils of the casino, as well hit and run short sessions), as this is enough to ensure a win. Those things may all be necessary conditions. They are not sufficient conditions to have the upper hand. The mathematical models are very strong. Given the axioms of independent events, etc. The problem these geniuses have is that they can never point where the central axioms of probability theory are wrong. They'll bluster and bloviate, but a short education in Statistics seems to be much to hard for a reasonable assault on the logic behind them. Which is a shame. I'd have far more respect if they'd happily say 'oh well, I assume that the series of events are interdependent on a roulette wheel, so...'. But they never do. Because they don't really actually understand the little Maths they choose to use.
You can be winning but can't win with a negative expectation game right. If you want, you could just make 1-3 bets containing every thing you're willing to lose and walk away either way. Casinos don't like it, but it can either be heaven or he'll for you. Again, just boils down to them needing to smooth out the bets and not gambling themselves.
The Bettor and the Accountant are each aware of other "thumbs on the scale": alcohol, females, music, social groups, festive atmospheres.... these are all house edges that lack precision measurement.
Well, no, these only affect volume. The scales are still right where they belong.
I'm going to say on wins and losses. I sort of imagine it as the casino playing a fair game, but on all bets, taking a fee. Since the casino is taking those risks, their bankroll isn't likely to exhibit a steady rise, but if they have any idea what they're doing, it will rise quickly enough to bankroll the "gamble."
I'd have far more respect if... .
Too bad having your respect is worth exactly
nothing. Maybe that's why they don't bother.
The only people they have to convince is
the casino, they're the only ones paying.
but it affects the amount of money that changes hands, every single time.
No, it doesn't. The house says they'll pay me even
money if I bet red or black. If I bet $1000 on red and win
and leave, the HE did not effect that bet. It only
manifests itself in the long term. This is why casinos
hate hit and run players. Do you think the pit winks
and high fives each other after I go, congratulating
themselves on having the edge working for them
on that bet? I don't think so.