GAMBLERS FALLACY
Quote: thecesspitSee, how the clown reverses the question and avoids answering any asked at him?
Laughable, sorry, little troll.
What post is that question? I guess I missed it.
Ken
Quote: mrjjjWhat post is that question? I guess I missed it.
Ken
This question:
Now another closely related question. If you do track rolls, and you think that doing so gives you some insight into what numbers (or sections) may be more (or less) likely to hit in the future, do you believe this gives you any kind of advantage over the casino? Do you believe that you are more likely to come out ahead by using this strategy?
Quote: TheNightflyThis question:
Now another closely related question. If you do track rolls, and you think that doing so gives you some insight into what numbers (or sections) may be more (or less) likely to hit in the future, do you believe this gives you any kind of advantage over the casino? Do you believe that you are more likely to come out ahead by using this strategy?
Yes is the short answer but I HATE the word 'advantage'. I have the balls to answer honestly. I'm sure you posted it (I'm not searching) what is your game of choice?
Ken
Yes, I know EACH spin is independant of each other, blah blah blah, I dont need the speach. My point being, the number of times you have read regarding past numbers meaning NOTHING. This misconception is usually from AP guys but there are sometimes others. In 37/38 spins, on average, there are 3 numbers with 3 hits on it. Sometimes 2 numbers, sometimes 4 numbers, whatever.
Lets say its the numbers 5, 17 and 34. I am looking for a YES or a NO to this question......try not to DRIFT from the question. Didn't those three numbers have to have two hits on them (within 37/38) BEFORE it had 3 hits? The number 5 is not going to magically jump from having ONE hit on it, then out of no where, it has 3 hits on it. My point being, if PAST numbers mean nothing, then HOW is it that we can gage that there will 2-4 numbers with 3 hits on them?
An example of a little contest we can have >> We'll track some numbers. Of course we know CHEATING may be involved with that, as usual. lol When we have 25 numbers recorded, I will pick 3 numbers that I think will have 3 hits on it by 38 (or 37) spins. *BUT* I also get to pick ANY 3 numbers for you, you dont get to choose your numbers. At the end of 38 numbers, we'll see who has the most numbers with 3 hits.
Who knows, I might not have any. Also, we'll do this for 30 groups of 38 numbers. At the end of the 30 groups, according to the slide ruler guys, it should be roughly 15/15. Maybe not exact but it should be close. Why? Because "the ball has no memory. All numbers are independant from one another, PAST NUMBERS MEAN NOTHING".
Ken
Quote: mrjjjYes is the short answer but I HATE the word 'advantage'. I have the balls to answer honestly. I'm sure you posted it (I'm not searching) what is your game of choice?
Ken
Whether or not you hate a word has nothing to do with whether or not it is the right word. You believe that the method you use when playing roulette (tracking numbers, selective bet placement and knowing when to leave) will win you money at this game. This means that if your method actually works then you have an advantage when playing this game. This means that if your method actually works that you are an advantage player. The problem is that mathematically your method cannot work, regardless of whether or not you say it does. So, either your method does work and you are an advantage player or your method does not work and you are a fool.
I play poker, live and on line. That is my game of choice.
Of course you have an advantage by waiting till spin 25 to see which numbers have 2 hits on them already. Of course those numbers are more likely to have 3 hits on them by spin 38 BECAUSE they are already at 2 and other numbers are at 0 hits.
However if we JUST take the next 13 spins, your numbers are as likely to have 1 hit on them as mine.
Quote: thecesspitI guess he wants to drink from the same well of ignorance -again-.
Of course you have an advantage by waiting till spin 25 to see which numbers have 2 hits on them already. Of course those numbers are more likely to have 3 hits on them by spin 38 BECAUSE they are already at 2 and other numbers are at 0 hits.
However if we JUST take the next 13 spins, your numbers are as likely to have 1 hit on them as mine.
How in Gods name would they be 'MORE LIKELY'? EVERY SPIN, EVERY SPIN, EVERY SPIN has *NOTHING* to do with what MIGHT hit in the future, so I hear.
Ken
Each spin of the roulette wheel is independent of the previous spins.
1. The numbers are not self aware and they do not know when they are "due to hit, or due to continue hitting".
2. The dealer does not call a "no spin" if a number has already hit once before.
3. The probability of hitting a number remains the same at each spin, regardless of what has hit in the past.
4. The number of numbers on the roulette wheel remains constant from one spin to the next.
Therefore, your system is based on the "gambler's fallacy".
-Keyser
Quote: mrjjjHow in Gods name would they be 'MORE LIKELY'? EVERY SPIN, EVERY SPIN, EVERY SPIN has *NOTHING* to do with what MIGHT hit in the future, so I hear.
Ken
You're right. Every spin has nothing to do with what might hit in the future. What's your point?
Quote: KeyserMr. J.,
Each spin of the roulette wheel is independent of the previous spins.
1. The numbers are not self aware and they do not know when they are "due to hit, or due to continue hitting".
2. The dealer does not call a "no spin" if a number has already hit once before.
3. The probability of hitting a number remains the same at each spin, regardless of what has hit in the past.
4. The number of numbers on the roulette wheel remains constant from one spin to the next.
Therefore, your system is based on the "gambler's fallacy".
-Keyser
I see you changed your view again. Which ever way the wind blows for Keyser, thats his view on THAT day. lol
Ken
Quote: mrjjjHow in Gods name would they be 'MORE LIKELY'? EVERY SPIN, EVERY SPIN, EVERY SPIN has *NOTHING* to do with what MIGHT hit in the future, so I hear.
Ken
Because they have 2 hits on them already. To get to 3 hits by spin 38, they have to have 2 hits. If they have those 2 hits on spin 25, as opposed to those with 0 hits (or 1 hit), they need just 1 hit to get to 3 hits by spin 38. If they have 0 hits, they need to hit 3 times in 13 spins (spins 26 to 38) to get to 3 hits, as they have to go through hit 1 and hit 2 first.
Each spin has nothing to do with the previous spins. The number of times a number has hit in the previous 38 spins has to do with EXACTLY those 38 spins.
Quote: TheNightflyYou're right. Every spin has nothing to do with what might hit in the future. What's your point?
Well then it would not matter if I picked your 3 numbers (or 4, whatever) for the next 13 spins after first tracking 25. It should also not matter if I picked my 3 numbers.....we would both have EQUAL chances over many trials, of coming out around even, correct?
Ken
Quote: mrjjjWell then it would not matter if I picked your 3 numbers (or 4, whatever) for the next 13 spins after first tracking 25. It should also not matter if I picked my 3 numbers.....we would both have EQUAL chances over many trials, of coming out around even, correct?
Ken
You're exactly right. The odds of your numbers hitting in the next 13 spins is exactly the same as the odds of my numbers hitting in the next 13 spins. There is no difference.
If it is over 38 spins -after- 25 spins to track, then it will be even if you ONLY count the 38 spins and ignore the 25 "pre-contest" spins.
Of course, as ever, Mr JJJ doesn't actually state what he means and swings in the breeze and changes his point more often than a baby fills it nappy.
Quote: Mr.JjjWell then it would not matter if I picked your 3 numbers (or 4, whatever) for the next 13 spins after first tracking 25. It should also not matter if I picked my 3 numbers.....we would both have EQUAL chances over many trials, of coming out around even, correct?
Ken
Mr. Jjj.,
If you feel that your system works, then explain why it works. Try and articulate your point more effectively.
Righ now, you're simultaneously arguing that your system IS and IS NOT based on "the gambler's fallacy".
Quote: thecesspitBecause they have 2 hits on them already. To get to 3 hits by spin 38, they have to have 2 hits. If they have those 2 hits on spin 25, as opposed to those with 0 hits (or 1 hit), they need just 1 hit to get to 3 hits by spin 38. If they have 0 hits, they need to hit 3 times in 13 spins (spins 26 to 38) to get to 3 hits, as they have to go through hit 1 and hit 2 first.
Each spin has nothing to do with the previous spins. The number of times a number has hit in the previous 38 spins has to do with EXACTLY those 38 spins.
I was waiting for that. I dont want to hear s**t but let me ask it a bit different, if thats cool with you?
Forget about reaching 3 hits first!!! I'll track the last 350 numbers but I will especially look at the last 25 that hit.
I will pick 5 numbers for you, I will go ALL THE WAY back and find 5 that have not hit, those are your 5.
I will pick 5 for myself, choosing 5 that have hit twice within the last 25 spins. I'll even UP the question. Within those 25, no numbers have three hits on them YET.
Is this still fair? Remember, I did what you wanted me to do. No more RACE for a number to have three hits on it. We are both starting out 0-0 with 13 spins left. We would do this over hundreds of trials. At the end, we should finish around the same, correct?
Ken
Quote: KeyserMr. Jjj.,
If you feel that your system works, then explain why it works. Try and articulate your point more effectively.
Righ now, you're simultaneously arguing that your system IS and IS NOT based on "the gambler's fallacy".
Different definitions for GF and its a method, not a system. Please quote correctly.
Ken
Quote: mrjjjThis question still gets me hard >>>
Yes, I know EACH spin is independant of each other, blah blah blah, I dont need the speach. My point being, the number of times you have read regarding past numbers meaning NOTHING. This misconception is usually from AP guys but there are sometimes others. In 37/38 spins, on average, there are 3 numbers with 3 hits on it. Sometimes 2 numbers, sometimes 4 numbers, whatever.
Lets say its the numbers 5, 17 and 34. I am looking for a YES or a NO to this question......try not to DRIFT from the question. Didn't those three numbers have to have two hits on them (within 37/38) BEFORE it had 3 hits? The number 5 is not going to magically jump from having ONE hit on it, then out of no where, it has 3 hits on it. My point being, if PAST numbers mean nothing, then HOW is it that we can gage that there will 2-4 numbers with 3 hits on them?
An example of a little contest we can have >> We'll track some numbers. Of course we know CHEATING may be involved with that, as usual. lol When we have 25 numbers recorded, I will pick 3 numbers that I think will have 3 hits on it by 38 (or 37) spins. *BUT* I also get to pick ANY 3 numbers for you, you dont get to choose your numbers. At the end of 38 numbers, we'll see who has the most numbers with 3 hits.
Who knows, I might not have any. Also, we'll do this for 30 groups of 38 numbers. At the end of the 30 groups, according to the slide ruler guys, it should be roughly 15/15. Maybe not exact but it should be close. Why? Because "the ball has no memory. All numbers are independant from one another, PAST NUMBERS MEAN NOTHING".
I'd like to point out that mrjjj is in direct violation of the forum rules 2.0 rule number 5. I also think he tends to push rules 3 and 7 a little too much for myself and other users. I quoted and took a screenshot in case he deletes it and denies everything like I expect he will. I'm not sure if excessively posting links to threads you started falls under the same category aswell.
Quote: MarieBicurieI'd like to point out that mrjjj is in direct violation of the forum rules 2.0 rule number 5. I also think he tends to push rules 3 and 7 a little too much for myself and other users. I quoted and took a screenshot in case he deletes it and denies everything like I expect he will. I'm not sure if excessively posting links to threads you started falls under the same category aswell.
I NEVER delete, then run and hide, never. Anyways, a new, easier related question has been posted. Care to respond or are you gonna WAIT and see what the general consensus is and then chime in, agreeing of course. lol
Ken
Quote: mrjjjI was waiting for that. I dont want to hear s**t but let me ask it a bit different, if thats cool with you?
Forget about reaching 3 hits first!!! I'll track the last 350 numbers but I will especially look at the last 25 that hit.
I will pick 5 numbers for you, I will go ALL THE WAY back and find 5 that have not hit, those are your 5.
I will pick 5 for myself, choosing 5 that have hit twice within the last 25 spins. I'll even UP the question. Within those 25, no numbers have three hits on them YET.
Is this still fair? Remember, I did what you wanted me to do. No more RACE for a number to have three hits on it. We are both starting out 0-0 with 13 spins left. We would do this over hundreds of trials. At the end, we should finish around the same, correct?
Ken
Is what still fair? Do what over hundreds of trials? At what end? This is why nobody understands you. You have many question marks, but no well-formed questions.
Tracking past events in any series of independent events with a known distribution doesn't give you any additional information about the likelihood of future events. In roulette, that means that tracking past numbers can't help you guess the future any better than if you just walked up to the table.
Quote: MathExtremistIs what still fair? Do what over hundreds of trials? At what end? This is why nobody understands you. You have many question marks, but no well-formed questions.
Tracking past events in any series of independent events with a known distribution doesn't give you any additional information about the likelihood of future events. In roulette, that means that tracking past numbers can't help you guess the future any better than if you just walked up to the table.
The question(s) are just fine, nice try. An easy way out I guess. lol Look under my NEW thread posted.
Ken
Ken
Quote: mrjjjI was waiting for that. I dont want to hear s**t but let me ask it a bit different, if thats cool with you?
Forget about reaching 3 hits first!!! I'll track the last 350 numbers but I will especially look at the last 25 that hit.
I will pick 5 numbers for you, I will go ALL THE WAY back and find 5 that have not hit, those are your 5.
I will pick 5 for myself, choosing 5 that have hit twice within the last 25 spins. I'll even UP the question. Within those 25, no numbers have three hits on them YET.
Is this still fair? Remember, I did what you wanted me to do. No more RACE for a number to have three hits on it. We are both starting out 0-0 with 13 spins left. We would do this over hundreds of trials. At the end, we should finish around the same, correct?
Ken
Once again you're asking questions that have no point but ok, I'll bite. Yes, we are both starting out 0-0 with 13 spins left. If we did this over hundreds of trials we should finish about the same, assuming that by finish about the same you mean that we'd both hit some of our numbers in that 13 spin trial about the same number of times. If that's not what you mean then I have no idea what you mean.
Quote: thecesspitNot if the trial is over all 38 spins. Seeing 2/3rds of the spins is clearly an advantage for seeing which number came up up most often over 38 spins.
If it is over 38 spins -after- 25 spins to track, then it will be even if you ONLY count the 38 spins and ignore the 25 "pre-contest" spins.
Of course, as ever, Mr JJJ doesn't actually state what he means and swings in the breeze and changes his point more often than a baby fills it nappy.
Seeing which numbers came up most often?? That shouldn't matter at all. Those are PAST numbers (gamblers fallacy) and have no influence on what MIGHT hit in the future, remember?
Ken
Quote: mrjjjOh, oh....TheNightfly and thecesspit have two different views. Right on schedule.
Ken
What are you talking about? Perhaps if you learned to use the quote feature some of your rambling statements and accusations might make a little more sense. I couldn't care less what someone else posts. I am talking to you and asking you questions and answering your questions. If you can't keep that much straight then you obviously are here just trolling for kicks.
You still haven't responded to my earlier post so I'll post is again.
Quote: TheNightflyWhether or not you hate a word has nothing to do with whether or not it is the right word. You believe that the method you use when playing roulette (tracking numbers, selective bet placement and knowing when to leave) will win you money at this game. This means that if your method actually works then you have an advantage when playing this game. This means that if your method actually works that you are an advantage player. The problem is that mathematically your method cannot work, regardless of whether or not you say it does. So, either your method does work and you are an advantage player or your method does not work and you are a fool.
So, which is it? You can't have it both ways.
Ken
Quote: mrjjj"What are you talking about?" >>> The two of you have different views. Does that bother you?
Ken
No it doesn't bother me in the least but what has it got to do with what we're talking about? You and I also have different views but you're the one who is making mathematically unsound, illogical and unquantifiable statements.
Once again I ask you to respond to my last post about you being an advantage player. Yes or no?
And the question is what? If I do 'well' (not the HG) playing methods and *YOU* want to call it an 'advantage', go ahead. Why would I care what *YOU* label it as? What is your casino game of choice?
Ken
Quote: mrjjjWhether or not you hate a word has nothing to do with whether or not it is the right word. You believe that the method you use when playing roulette (tracking numbers, selective bet placement and knowing when to leave) will win you money at this game. This means that if your method actually works then you have an advantage when playing this game. This means that if your method actually works that you are an advantage player. The problem is that mathematically your method cannot work, regardless of whether or not you say it does. So, either your method does work and you are an advantage player or your method does not work and you are a fool. >>>>
And the question is what? If I do 'well' (not the HG) playing methods and *YOU* want to call it an 'advantage', go ahead. Why would I care what *YOU* label it as? What is your casino game of choice?
Ken
I think I might have a flashlight that can peer into the deep dark recesses of your mind's reasoning. Let me brush aside the cobwebs....
Playing at an advantage, i.e., being an AP, does NOT mean you will win at any given point in time. Conversely, having won does NOT mean you were NECESSARILY playing at an advantage. There is only one way to determine whether you are playing at an advantage, and that is MATHEMATICALLY. Actual experiences don't mean anything--someone playing at a disadvantage could still win, or someone playing at an advantage could still lose.
In other words, even if you've won in the past, that doesn't make you an advantage player. If the game you were playing was -EV, then you were a lucky player, or, shall we call it, a "DP"--Disadvantage Player. And DPs definitely do exist!
And what someone calls something is irrelevant, so why debate it?
Quote: mrjjjWhether or not you hate a word has nothing to do with whether or not it is the right word. You believe that the method you use when playing roulette (tracking numbers, selective bet placement and knowing when to leave) will win you money at this game. This means that if your method actually works then you have an advantage when playing this game. This means that if your method actually works that you are an advantage player. The problem is that mathematically your method cannot work, regardless of whether or not you say it does. So, either your method does work and you are an advantage player or your method does not work and you are a fool. >>>>
And the question is what? If I do 'well' (not the HG) playing methods and *YOU* want to call it an 'advantage', go ahead. Why would I care what *YOU* label it as? What is your casino game of choice?
Ken
Once again you choose not to answer the question.
You believe that the method you use when playing roulette (tracking numbers, selective bet placement and knowing when to leave) will win you money at this game. This means that if your method actually works then you have an advantage when playing this game. This means that if your method actually works that you are an advantage player. The problem is that mathematically your method cannot work, regardless of whether or not you say it does. So, either your method does work and you are an advantage player or your method does not work and you are a fool.
The question is, do you have an advantage over the casino using your method? In other words, does your method of playing win you more money than it loses? Is's a simple question. If you answer yes then you believe your method gives you an advantage because you win more money than you lose. This would make you an advantage player by definition. If you answer no then you are admitting that you don't have an advantage at roulette and therefore you must lose more money than you win. Which is it?
Quote: mkl654321I think I might have a flashlight that can peer into the deep dark recesses of your mind's reasoning. Let me brush aside the cobwebs....
Playing at an advantage, i.e., being an AP, does NOT mean you will win at any given point in time. Conversely, having won does NOT mean you were NECESSARILY playing at an advantage. There is only one way to determine whether you are playing at an advantage, and that is MATHEMATICALLY. Actual experiences don't mean anything--someone playing at a disadvantage could still win, or someone playing at an advantage could still lose.
In other words, even if you've won in the past, that doesn't make you an advantage player. If the game you were playing was -EV, then you were a lucky player, or, shall we call it, a "DP"--Disadvantage Player. And DPs definitely do exist!
And what someone calls something is irrelevant, so why debate it?
Why debate what its called? I could careless what you call it. I dont even care what I call it. lol
Ken
Your posts are quite difficult to follow. Please read on how to quote by clicking on -"click here for formatting codes". This is located just below the blue reply box. There you will learn how to quote correctly.
Maybe try thinking through what you want to say before rushing to post. Less posturing and better planning will possibly make your posts much easier for others to read and understand.
Quote: TheNightflyOnce again you choose not to answer the question.
You believe that the method you use when playing roulette (tracking numbers, selective bet placement and knowing when to leave) will win you money at this game. This means that if your method actually works then you have an advantage when playing this game. This means that if your method actually works that you are an advantage player. The problem is that mathematically your method cannot work, regardless of whether or not you say it does. So, either your method does work and you are an advantage player or your method does not work and you are a fool.
The question is, do you have an advantage over the casino using your method? In other words, does your method of playing win you more money than it loses? Is's a simple question. If you answer yes then you believe your method gives you an advantage because you win more money than you lose. This would make you an advantage player by definition. If you answer no then you are admitting that you don't have an advantage at roulette and therefore you must lose more money than you win. Which is it?
I dont know what you mean.....'advantage over the casino'? You sound like Keyser. For years, he tries to get me on RECORD stating something so he can copy/paste it for future use. It never worked so he goes to plan 'B', lying.
"does your method of playing win you more money than it loses?" >>> To be specific. I have 4 CURRENT methods I use that are way ahead. I am *NOT* counting past methods, no longer in play.
Ken
Quote: KeyserMr. J.,
Your posts are quite difficult to follow. Please read on how to quote by clicking on -"click here for formatting codes". This is located just below the blue reply box. There you will learn how to quote correctly.
Maybe try thinking through what you want to say before rushing to post. Less posturing and better planning will possibly make your posts much easier for others to read and understand.
Any chance you answering my related question at GG, general section?
Probably not. lol
Ken
Quote: mrjjjI dont know what you mean.....'advantage over the casino'? You sound like Keyser. For years, he tries to get me on RECORD stating something so he can copy/paste it for future use. It never worked so he goes to plan 'B', lying.
"does your method of playing win you more money than it loses?" >>> To be specific. I have 4 CURRENT methods I use that are way ahead. I am *NOT* counting past methods, no longer in play.
Ken
So you believe your methods will win more money than they will lose playing roulette but you do not believe that you have an advantage playing roulette using these methods. Is that a correct statement?
Once again I'll say that I do not care what anyone else may have said or done in the past regarding your statements. I am concerned only with how you respond to my questions. I don't plan on using anything for future use. I simply want to know what you call your method in relation to the results that you have recorded.
When you play roulette you either have an advantage or are at a disadvantage. Which is it?
Quote: mrjjjI dont know what you mean.....'advantage over the casino'?
That needs to be lesson #1, Ken. If you're not even aware of what the phrase "player advantage" means, how can you credibly hold forth on whether a system/method/whatever has one?
At any rate, if you've been going back and forth on this for "years", you probably aren't interested in learning the facts. The facts take about 30 minutes to comprehend even for someone with little mathematical schooling.
Quote: mrjjjWhy debate what its called? I could careless what you call it. I dont even care what I call it. lol
Ken
You seem to care whether it's a method or a system. You seem to care whether Advantage Play exists, but I can't yet see what you mean by it (DS and Wheel Tracking it seems).
So I think we can care what you call your play.
Quote:Oh, oh....TheNightfly and thecesspit have two different views. Right on schedule.
I thought we'd have all the same view? Huddling together, making sure we follow each other. What's your point, precisely?
Besides, I'm not sure how my point of view is different to TheNightFly.
Quote: TheNightflySo you believe your methods will win more money than they will lose playing roulette but you do not believe that you have an advantage playing roulette using these methods. Is that a correct statement?
Once again I'll say that I do not care what anyone else may have said or done in the past regarding your statements. I am concerned only with how you respond to my questions. I don't plan on using anything for future use. I simply want to know what you call your method in relation to the results that you have recorded.
When you play roulette you either have an advantage or are at a disadvantage. Which is it?
Could you answer that for me? Lets say I'm not lying...I do 'well' and am UP quite a bit over years. What title do you give it? Luck? Perhaps.
I am NOT NOT trying to avoid your question. Trust me, I hate it when its done to me. I do not know if it (or any type of play) is or is not an advantage?
Ken
Quote: MathExtremistThat needs to be lesson #1, Ken. If you're not even aware of what the phrase "player advantage" means, how can you credibly hold forth on whether a system/method/whatever has one?
At any rate, if you've been going back and forth on this for "years", you probably aren't interested in learning the facts. The facts take about 30 minutes to comprehend even for someone with little mathematical schooling.
Nooo, I'm not aware of YOUR definition of advantage play.
Ken
Ken
Quote: mrjjjSpeaking of questions 'not answered'. To the last 3 posters here......Your game of choice is what?
Ken
You seem to not only have trouble answering questions, you seem to have trouble reading the answers given. I said I play poker, live and on line. Apart from being an opportunity for you to change the subject, what has that question got to do with anything we've discussed here? You just like asking nonsensical questions, don't you? You just like to be noticed. well, I've answered all of your questions and you've chosen not to answer mine. you've said things like,
Quote: mrjjjI dont know what you mean.....'advantage over the casino'?
and
Quote: mrjjjI am NOT NOT trying to avoid your question. Trust me, I hate it when its done to me.
and you still refuse to answer a simple question.
Oh well. It looks like you can only hide behind ignorance for so long. If you can't figure out what is meant by "advantage over the casino" when I spell it out for you,
Quote: TheNightflyYou believe that the method you use when playing roulette (tracking numbers, selective bet placement and knowing when to leave) will win you money at this game. This means that if your method actually works then you have an advantage when playing this game. This means that if your method actually works that you are an advantage player. So, either your method does work and you are an advantage player or your method does not work and you are a fool.
You of all posters here should know, you can't have it both ways.
Ken
Quote: mrjjjI answered your question. BTW, poker? So you play a game with a HA against you?
Ken
What gives you the impression that poker has a house advantage (apart from the rake)? I don't play against the house.
Quote: TheNightflyWhat gives you the impression that poker has a house advantage (apart from the rake)? I don't play against the house.
Sooo, then YOU do have an advantage? What if 5 of you were playing, do you all have an advantage?
Ken
Quote: KeyserUnreal, reading this thread makes me feel like I've been drinking "crazy juice".
Then dont respond, move on. Problem solved.
Ken
Quote: mrjjjSooo, then YOU do have an advantage? What if 5 of you were playing, do you all have an advantage?
Ken
I have an advantage if I play by the math, read my opponents well and PLAY INFERIOR PLAYERS.
What has this got to do with you and roulette?
Quote: TheNightflyI have an advantage if I play by the math, read my opponents well and PLAY INFERIOR PLAYERS.
What has this got to do with you and roulette?
I'm not allowed to ask anything? Only you are? My point being.....I love it when people slam a roulette method but when asked what they play, its always the same BS.
Their is no HA against them, just everybody else.
Card counting (cough)
AP for roulette
Its always the same bulls**t coverup answer, over and over again. Two others have STILL not answered what they play, big shock.
Ken
