GAMBLERS FALLACY
No Ken, you may ask anything you like. I've answered.Quote: mrjjjI'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
So, again, what does my poker playing have to do with you playing roulette? Do you play with an advantage?
Quote: TheNightflyNo Ken, you may ask anything you like. I've answered.
So, again, what does my poker playing have to do with you playing roulette? Do you play with an advantage?
"Do you play with an advantage?" >>> I already answered (I think twice) I won't answer again. The copy/paste boyz are all geared up. lol
Your poker has nothing to do with roulette, so what?
Ken
Hmmm, now I'm real confused. lol Thats what I love about some, back and fourth, back and fourth. (https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/tables/2825-the-truth-in-a-way-the-past-numbers-to-have-hit-do-matter/)
Ken
Quote: mrjjjI'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
Saying "(cough)" and "lol" with everything you post, and refusing to even start to listen to what people are trying to tell you, will eventually cause people to give up on talking to you. You dragged the discussion over to live poker, and then when it was patiently and carefully explained to you that there is no house advantage in live poker because the house does not participate in the game, you just ignored that explanation and went (cough) (cough) again.
Nobody, my man, is "covering up" anything. Nor are they bullshitting you. You are getting the unvarnished truth. Yet, when you get that truth, all you do is piss on it. This gets old after a while.
There is no roulette "method" that will negate the 5.26% house advantage. We don't really need to know the details of any "method" that claims to negate that simple fact--we already know that it can't work. And that, by the way, does NOT mean that someone can't win using it.
It's the mark of both an unpleasant and an unintelligent person to ask people for information/advice and then either ignore it or crap all over it. You've been treated MUCH more moderately here than you deserve. Cough cough. Lol. ROFL. Kaka poopy doodoo.
Ken
Ken
I'm still waiting for you to explain whether what you do is advantage play or not. You say you've answered the question but the fact that in none of your posts have you actually answered it contradicts this statement. If you can show me where you answered "yes" or "no" to whether or not your roulette method is advantage play I'll apologize for being inattentive and questioning you on this.Quote: mrjjjI'm still waiting on Keyser. He has TWO different views regarding the SAME subject. Hmmm....
Ken
You certainly do have a way of changing the subject. I have never had two views on this so why don't you just ignore this other guy and deal with someone who has only one view. Can you do that or are you concerned that if you actually debate this you'll end up looking a fool? I'm happy to answer any questions you may have regarding your roulette method(s) and why no method can overcome the house edge and make money due to the fact that past results have no bearing on future spins.
Are you going to answer this post or just ignore me and make some silly comment to change the subject?
Quote: TheNightflyI'm still waiting for you to explain whether what you do is advantage play or not. You say you've answered the question but the fact that in none of your posts have you actually answered it contradicts this statement. If you can show me where you answered "yes" or "no" to whether or not your roulette method is advantage play I'll apologize for being inattentive and questioning you on this.
You certainly do have a way of changing the subject. I have never had two views on this so why don't you just ignore this other guy and deal with someone who has only one view. Can you do that or are you concerned that if you actually debate this you'll end up looking a fool? I'm happy to answer any questions you may have regarding your roulette method(s) and why no method can overcome the house edge and make money due to the fact that past results have no bearing on future spins.
Are you going to answer this post or just ignore me and make some silly comment to change the subject?
So, I have to answer for a THIRD time. Do I hear four? I do not know who's DEFINITION of advantage play we/you are using? I know Keyser wants me to go on record bababaaad!! lol I also asked you, if YOU wanted to put a title on it for me? If Keyser wants to call himself an AP (cough), thats fine, have fun. Do I agree with him? No but it is his RIGHT to label himself (or yourself) however you feel most comfortable. Now ask again....
Ken
I will ask again as you still have not answered the question.Quote: mrjjjSo, I have to answer for a THIRD time. Do I hear four? I do not know who's DEFINITION of advantage play we/you are using? I know Keyser wants me to go on record bababaaad!! lol I also asked you, if YOU wanted to put a title on it for me? If Keyser wants to call himself an AP (cough), thats fine, have fun. Do I agree with him? No but it is his RIGHT to label himself (or yourself) however you feel most comfortable. Now ask again....
Ken
When you play roulette do you believe that by using your method(s) that you will win? If I gave you $1,000,000 and you played 1,000 sessions using your method(s), do you believe that at the end of 1,000 sessions you will have more than $1,000,000? It's a simple yes or no Ken. If you won't answer with a yes or no then there's obviously no point in posting anything more.
Quote: TheNightflyI will ask again as you still have not answered the question.
When you play roulette do you believe that by using your method(s) that you will win? If I gave you $1,000,000 and you played 1,000 sessions using your method(s), do you believe that at the end of 1,000 sessions you will have more than $1,000,000? It's a simple yes or no Ken. If you won't answer with a yes or no then there's obviously no point in posting anything more.
Ok, now you asked it a bit MORE IN MY direction. YES, more of a profit after the 1,000 sessions. I would prefer to play on a 0 wheel but 00 is still fine.
Now if *YOU* want to label that answer, *YOU* go ahead.
Ken
So you are saying that you can make money at a game that has a 5.26% advantage. That's a pretty big statement.Quote: mrjjjOk, now you asked it a bit MORE IN MY direction. YES, more of a profit after the 1,000 sessions. I would prefer to play on a 0 wheel but 00 is still fine.
Now if *YOU* want to label that answer, *YOU* go ahead.
Ken
I'm curious to understand how this can be possible. It seems that you believe that you can study a wheel, track its results and use this information to help you determine how to place your bets. You also seem to believe that by studying past results you have found a way to place your bets in such a manner that you will win more money than you will lose. Am I correct?
Quote: TheNightflySo you are saying that you can make money at a game that has a 5.26% advantage. That's a pretty big statement.
I'm curious to understand how this can be possible. It seems that you believe that you can study a wheel, track its results and use this information to help you determine how to place your bets. You also seem to believe that by studying past results you have found a way to place your bets in such a manner that you will win more money than you will lose. Am I correct?
What a long answer because your question is too vague.
Not all methods rely on past numbers. "Can make money"? As in the future? lol What about my past results, that doesn't count?
"That's a pretty big statement" >>> How do you figure? I dont think its a big statement, not in the least!
"that you will win more money than you will lose" >>> Again, too vague. 10 out of 10 sessions? Of course not. Every week a winning week? Of course not BUT I dont recall my last losing month. Let me guess....thats big statement. Its beddy time for Kenny (11:10) Rip me good buddy, all the more posting for me tomorrow.
Ken
Quote: mrjjjI do not know who's DEFINITION of advantage play we/you are using?
There is only one definition of advantage play. Any play strategy in any game that yields a mathematical advantage for the player is advantage play, by definition. Advantage play is theoretically possible in most casino games, though in many cases impractical. A partial list of games which can be played +EV include video poker, slot machines, blackjack, craps, roulette, three card poker, card craps, and Spanish 21. Not all ways of +EV play are legal in all jurisdictions, such as using a computer in one's shoe to clock a roulette wheel (apparently legal in UK, not legal in Nevada).
Of course, I am just as insane for not being able to keep myself from reading it! But c'mon guys, why on earth do you keep feeding this continuous load of BS. It has been shown over and over that he will not answer you questions directly. He just spouts his nonsense and won't take any rational critique of his stupid 'methods'.
However, if you must keep feeding the 'master of the set-up', at least I will be able to giggle before I go to bed.
After seeing all of these moronic 'method' threads, I think I have to stop calling myself the Village Idiot.
Quote: mrjjjSo, I have to answer for a THIRD time. Do I hear four? I do not know who's DEFINITION of advantage play we/you are using?Ken
First of all: learn to spell at at least the fifth-grade level. The word is WHOSE, not "who's".
Second: learn to think. Definitions do not belong to anybody. Therefore, asking "who's" definition should apply is a stupid question.
Third: learn to make your points without acting like a total jerk in the process.
(cough) lol ROFL baaaaaaad wocka wocka wocka wocka
Quote: avargovI do not know which is more insane: MrJJJ's roulette nonsense, or the fact the intelligent, rational folks insist on answering the same nonsense worded differently over and over again!
Of course, I am just as insane for not being able to keep myself from reading it! But c'mon guys, why on earth do you keep feeding this continuous load of BS. It has been shown over and over that he will not answer you questions directly. He just spouts his nonsense and won't take any rational critique of his stupid 'methods'.
However, if you must keep feeding the 'master of the set-up', at least I will be able to giggle before I go to bed.
After seeing all of these moronic 'method' threads, I think I have to stop calling myself the Village Idiot.
I guess we're all kind of curious as to whether he is truly as stupid as he sounds.
Quote: mkl654321I guess we're all kind of curious as to whether he is truly as stupid as he sounds.
Perhaps you are right about that. And perhaps that is why I continue to watch the train wreck....sigh.
Quote: avargovI do not know which is more insane: MrJJJ's roulette nonsense, or the fact the intelligent, rational folks insist on answering the same nonsense worded differently over and over again!
Of course, I am just as insane for not being able to keep myself from reading it! But c'mon guys, why on earth do you keep feeding this continuous load of BS. It has been shown over and over that he will not answer you questions directly. He just spouts his nonsense and won't take any rational critique of his stupid 'methods'.
However, if you must keep feeding the 'master of the set-up', at least I will be able to giggle before I go to bed.
After seeing all of these moronic 'method' threads, I think I have to stop calling myself the Village Idiot.
I know, but I had nothing to do this afternoon and it's such easy pickings. Sometimes I do things for my own amusement.
Quote: TheNightflyI know, but I had nothing to do this afternoon and it's such easy pickings. Sometimes I do things for my own amusement.
And my amusement as well, and for that, I am eternally grateful!
Quote: mrjjjSo, I have to answer for a THIRD time. Do I hear four? I do not know who's DEFINITION of advantage play we/you are using?
How about YOUR definition of advantage play that makes you cough? Seeing as enough people have told you WHAT Advantage Play is, you could try the REAL definition as well. Pick one answer, you can't have it both ways, changing as often as you do.
What casino games I play really doesn't matter, it's immaterial to your posts.
Quote: thecesspitHow about YOUR definition of advantage play that makes you cough? Seeing as enough people have told you WHAT Advantage Play is, you could try the REAL definition as well. Pick one answer, you can't have it both ways, changing as often as you do.
What casino games I play really doesn't matter, it's immaterial to your posts.
It's time to give up on him.
Quote: mkl654321I guess we're all kind of curious as to whether he is truly as stupid as he sounds.
I don't think he is, looks overly dense. But then again, bell curve...
Quote: TheNightflyIt seems that you believe that you can study a wheel, track its results and use this information to help you determine how to place your bets. You also seem to believe that by studying past results you have found a way to place your bets in such a manner that you will win more money than you will lose. Am I correct?
Let me put all of this nonsense to rest. Ken uses a bet selection method and a brass balls progression that lets him stretch out his play to the max. He is constantly trying to improve it, always working on making it better. He typically uses a BR of around $4000 and he's willing to bet ALL of it in a session, lose it, and come back and do it again. The math says he will lose eventually. The math also says if he's careful, and lucky, he can do this for years. Its also possible, remotely, that he won't hit the brick wall in his lifetime. Is he beating the edge? Nope. Is he winning? Yup. Will he be winning in 3 years? Who knows. Can you do this? Doubtful. It takes a person with a true gamblers attitude, and a willingness to risk a huge amount of money every time he plays. Is $4000 a huge amount? To the average person, hell yes.
Quote: avargovI do not know which is more insane: MrJJJ's roulette nonsense, or the fact the intelligent, rational folks insist on answering the same nonsense worded differently over and over again!
Of course, I am just as insane for not being able to keep myself from reading it! But c'mon guys, why on earth do you keep feeding this continuous load of BS. It has been shown over and over that he will not answer you questions directly. He just spouts his nonsense and won't take any rational critique of his stupid 'methods'.
However, if you must keep feeding the 'master of the set-up', at least I will be able to giggle before I go to bed.
After seeing all of these moronic 'method' threads, I think I have to stop calling myself the Village Idiot.
Will you be answering my question on the other thread or just sit there and sound tough? BTW, still waiting on Keyser.
Ken
Quote: thecesspitHow about YOUR definition of advantage play that makes you cough? Seeing as enough people have told you WHAT Advantage Play is, you could try the REAL definition as well. Pick one answer, you can't have it both ways, changing as often as you do.
What casino games I play really doesn't matter, it's immaterial to your posts.
I dont change my answers at all, nice try Charlie. I do 'well' and you want me to LABEL it as to why. I cant, thats as simple an answer as I can give.
"What casino games I play really doesn't matter, it's immaterial to your posts" >>> Let me guess. You play a casino game where only YOU are not affected by the HA, while for everyone else, yes. Close enough? lol
Ken
Quote: mkl654321It's time to give up on him.
Any chance of you answering my EASY question on my other thread? No tricks.
Ken
Quote: mrjjjLet me guess. You play a casino game where only YOU are not affected by the HA, while for everyone else, yes.
That's called Blackjack.
Quote: mkl654321First of all: learn to spell at at least the fifth-grade level. The word is WHOSE, not "who's".
Second: learn to think. Definitions do not belong to anybody. Therefore, asking "who's" definition should apply is a stupid question.
Third: learn to make your points without acting like a total jerk in the process.
(cough) lol ROFL baaaaaaad wocka wocka wocka wocka
Said the guy with HOW MANY warnings to 'cool it' here? Just askin and BTW, I'll spell a word however I feel like it. Wow, an easy way for you to get out of answering my question (lol) figures.
Ken
Quote: mkl654321I guess we're all kind of curious as to whether he is truly as stupid as he sounds.
I don't think this is "stupid". The guy sounds like he is twelve (and with some attention span problems on top of that).
At times I feel sorry for the kid when I am reading these threads, and promise myself to never open one again for ethical reasons. But then, I get bored, and decide, that this is too hilarious to ignore, and it all starts again. This is addictive.
I wish his parents took away his internet privileges ... for all our sakes.
Quote: mrjjjI dont change my answers at all, nice try Charlie. I do 'well' and you want me to LABEL it as to why. I cant, thats as simple an answer as I can give.
Oh, but you do. And the name's not Charlie, Kenny. And you're still avoiding the question. You claim AP doesn't exist, but won't define what it means TO YOU or what you think it means to OTHER PEOPLE. Your out on a limb here, slowly cutting your the wrong side of the branch off.
Quote:"What casino games I play really doesn't matter, it's immaterial to your posts" >>> Let me guess. You play a casino game where only YOU are not affected by the HA, while for everyone else, yes. Close enough? lol
Ken
Not even close enough for handgrenades and horseshoes. I don't make claims that I play with any advantage on any casino game.
Nice try, WattsTheFrequency.
Quote: thecesspit
Nice try, WattsTheFrequency.
Loving the reference.
Quote: weaselmanI don't think this is "stupid". The guy sounds like he is twelve (and with some attention span problems on top of that).
At times I feel sorry for the kid when I am reading these threads, and promise myself to never open one again for ethical reasons. But then, I get bored, and decide, that this is too hilarious to ignore, and it all starts again. This is addictive.
I wish his parents took away his internet privileges ... for all our sakes.
Then dont reply to my posts next time weaselman, problem solved on your end, correct? Isn't your weekend pass just about over? lol Back to the instituation for your meds. lol
Ken
However, since you appear to disagree, show your prove.
In other words, show us your math.
gambling threads. This is one I started
8 years ago. I still laugh at gamblers
fallacy. One persons GF is another's
belly laugh..
example was 8 years ago.
And a misleading concept.Quote: RSDoesn’t say much if your prime
example was 8 years ago.
Quote: RSDoesn’t say much if your prime
example was 8 years ago.
I started at the start, I'm just getting
going. I have tons of gambling threads
I started here that most have never
seen because they weren't here then.
Imagine getting robbed of my wisdom
by never getting to see them. Lets
remedy that..
Quote: FinsRuleHas anyone ever seen Nathan and Evenbob in the same place?
Hey! I'm not EvenBob! I promise! ;)
Quote: EvenBobI started at the start, I'm just getting
going. I have tons of gambling threads
I started here that most have never
seen because they weren't here then.
Imagine getting robbed of my wisdom
by never getting to see them. Lets
remedy that..
Let's not.
Forum rule 9. No thumbtacking. Don't post one or two words just to keep a thread in the top of the list. If that is your motive, at least add something substantive to say about the topic, or at least a joke.
If you continue to revive old threads just to prove a point about content you've posted years ago, that's definitely thumb tacking. Stop now, please.
If a coin flip is Heads 53 times in a row: what are the odds that the coin is rigged and the coin flip is not random? Ditto with roulette wheels ,etc.
After all, weighted coins do exist in the world, as do crooked or broken/worn roulette wheels. When you see something that is so wildly improbable as to be almost impossible, shouldn't you revisit all of your assumptions?
The one fallacy in the Gambler's Fallacy is to assume that every real-world system is perfectly random. Some are designed poorly and some are designed crooked and some are not even random.
Only 12 out of 32 NFL teams make the playoffs. If Bill Belichik's team makes the playoffs 10 years in a row, is it gambler's fallacy to believe that his team's chances to make the playoffs in the next year are much higher than 12/32?
Quote: gordonm888If a coin flip is Heads 53 times in a row: what are the odds that the coin is rigged and the coin flip is not random? Ditto with roulette wheels ,etc.
After all, weighted coins do exist in the world, as do crooked or broken/worn roulette wheels. When you see something that is so wildly improbable as to be almost impossible, shouldn't you revisit all of your assumptions?
The one fallacy in the Gambler's Fallacy is to assume that every real-world system is perfectly random. Some are designed poorly and some are designed crooked and some are not even random.
You're absolutely right!
Once you start down the path of building out all the background assumptions in the gambler's fallacy, you see that it's much weirder a theory than the standard account of independent draws. The fact that it takes some effort to see this is a very interesting brain bug.
Benjamin Golub, PhD in Economics from Stanford. Currently a professor at Harvard University, Cambridge
Gamblers Fallacy is itself a
fallacy, something I have
been saying for 15 years.
"The law of averages doesn't work by canceling out past mistakes. Instead, it works by making them irrelevant."
Quote: gordonm888...The one fallacy in the Gambler's Fallacy is to assume that every real-world system is perfectly random. Some are designed poorly and some are designed crooked and some are not even random...
I like this Mathologer video. He gives us two puzzles at the beginning. He gives the answer to the first one at the end of the video but doesn't explain it. (But ignore his error that a roulette wheel is numbered 0 to 37--he should have said, "0 to 36," of course.)
