Evenbob's Roulette Thread
Quote: tuttigymQuote: billryanWhy was that challenge never resumed? Didn't bob insist ist was only suspended? If EB keeps backing out of challenges, he might lose some of his credibility.
link to original post
Ya think?
Let's see, I am reading almost ZERO credibility from the rank and file opposing posters. So where is the mystery?
tuttigym
link to original post
I do appreciate you trying to keep up. Bless your heart.
Quote: billryanQuote: tuttigymQuote: billryanWhy was that challenge never resumed? Didn't bob insist ist was only suspended? If EB keeps backing out of challenges, he might lose some of his credibility.
link to original post
Ya think?
Let's see, I am reading almost ZERO credibility from the rank and file opposing posters. So where is the mystery?
tuttigym
link to original post
I do appreciate you trying to keep up. Bless your heart.
link to original post
Thank you. "keeping up" with the laughable squabbling among adults? Wow, you folks are in a circular firing squad accomplishing nothing. Have at it.
tuttigym
Quote: AxelWolf
Always having problems with other people? This may be the reason why
link to original post
There's a few sayings about this....
"If you walk around all day smelling dog poop, check your shoes."
and
"If you meet an a-hole in the morning, you met an a-hole. If you meet a-holes all day, you're the a-hole."
Quote: tuttigymThank you. "keeping up" with the laughable squabbling among adults? Wow, you folks are in a circular firing squad accomplishing nothing. Have at it.
link to original post
...said the pot to the kettle.
Quote: EvenBob
And here I go again for the third time. 'Chance of winning' is arrived at from making random bets against random outcomes. I do not make random bets, all my bets are the polar opposite of random. This is where we get into the discussion that the exact same thing happens in blackjack when the player starts making non-random bets because of the information he gets from counting cards. The information I get from roulette allows me to make non-random bets at the right time and this math of yours goes out the window because you have no math calculated for making non random bets. Here's an example. I see 14 Reds in a row and I make the calculated decision to make a non-random bet on red based on this information. When you figure out how to calculate the math for making non random bets get back to me.
Dude.... LOL.... that's exactly what I am asking YOU do to.... that's YOUR claim, not mine. Don't ask ME to prove your BS claims.
I asked you to disprove the math stating the fact that you have a negative house edge in Roulette, contrary to your claim that you have a >2% house edge. You failed to do that. You CAN'T do it. Expected value does not "go out the window" no matter how random or non-random your bets are. That doesn't even make any sense. You've already conceded that card counters make non-random bets, and you've already conceded that those non-random bets result in a positive house edge. You've claimed that your non-random bets in roulette result in a higher house edge than a card counter gets in blackjack. I provided you with the equation to mathematically demonstrate those claims, and you have failed, for the third time now, to do it.
When you figure out how to calculate the math for making non-random bets to provide a positive house edge in Roulette, get back to me.
Quote: TigerWuExpected value does not "go out the window" no matter how random or non-random your bets are.
link to original post
When the math is calculated using only non random betting, of course it goes out the window. You just changed a major parameter of how the math was arrived at so now it's worthless. And please don't tell me that you cannot make non random bets against random outcomes. The card counter does it every time the count is in his favor in blackjack, he makes a non random bet. I'm not making this up, I read it in more than one place.
Quote: TigerWu
When you figure out how to calculate the math for making non-random bets to provide a positive house edge in Roulette, get back to me.
link to original post
So, from the start of this thread your rationality was impeccable. But then I read through your subsequent posts and the only thing I'm persuaded of is that there indeed are some things more inane than "tilting at windmills".
Quote: darrenhayQuote: TigerWu
When you figure out how to calculate the math for making non-random bets to provide a positive house edge in Roulette, get back to me.
link to original post
So, from the start of this thread your rationality was impeccable. But then I read through your subsequent posts and the only thing I'm persuaded of is that there indeed are some things more inane than "tilting at windmills".
link to original post
Post of the day.
Quote: EvenBob. I prove it every time I consistently win at the casino and it pays me.
he believes that posting on a gambling forum that he consistently wins at the casino proves something
I had stated earlier that I would no longer respond to his posts
and I didn't honor that - I continued to respond - because I believed that someone making illogical statements on a gambling board could be harmful to some
but now I'm completely done - hopefully - I don't want to debate an illogical person - it's useless - I've done my share
I'm sure that others will do their due diligence and rebut his nonsensical claims
.
Funny you should mention that.Quote: darrenhayQuote: TigerWu
When you figure out how to calculate the math for making non-random bets to provide a positive house edge in Roulette, get back to me.
link to original post
So, from the start of this thread your rationality was impeccable. But then I read through your subsequent posts and the only thing I'm persuaded of is that there indeed are some things more inane than "tilting at windmills".
link to original post
Tilting at windmills is a little understood Meme which plucks just a tiny bit out of the Novel Don Quixote.
I don't read many novels, but have just dived into that one. It's available here...
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/996 I recommend it. It's a novel from the 1600s translated from Spanish.
In the book, Don Quixote is the deranged man that tilts at windmills, which are, real, unyielding and stubborn. Don was a decent guy with good principles. He was just detached from reality. Don had spent years, locked in study of chivalry and had the dream of righting wrongs as a Knight Errant. He made his own truth.
DON is the fool in that meme. The Windmill represents reality.
But in this thread, it's everyone except EvenBob that is tilting at windmills. They, the supposedly sane majority, are the ones wasting their time and looking foolish.
We/they take EB to task for his oft repeated nonsense. And it is nonsense. EB reacts with more nonsense. Who's putting on a clown show to what audience? EvenBob, or his hecklers?
Quote: OnceDear
We/they take EB to task for his oft repeated nonsense. And it is nonsense. EB reacts with more nonsense. Who's putting on a clown show to what audience? EvenBob, or his hecklers?
you have a point
but I believe that when EB posts his illogical nonsense it should be rebutted by somebody
it should not stand alone
.
Quote: OnceDearFunny you should mention that.Quote: darrenhayQuote: TigerWu
When you figure out how to calculate the math for making non-random bets to provide a positive house edge in Roulette, get back to me.
link to original post
So, from the start of this thread your rationality was impeccable. But then I read through your subsequent posts and the only thing I'm persuaded of is that there indeed are some things more inane than "tilting at windmills".
link to original post
Tilting at windmills is a little understood Meme which plucks just a tiny bit out of the Novel Don Quixote.
I don't read many novels, but have just dived into that one. It's available here...
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/996 I recommend it. It's a novel from the 1600s translated from Spanish.
In the book, Don Quixote is the deranged man that tilts at windmills, which are, real, unyielding and stubborn. Don was a decent guy with good principles. He was just detached from reality. Don had spent years, locked in study of chivalry and had the dream of righting wrongs as a Knight Errant. He made his own truth.
DON is the fool in that meme. The Windmill represents reality.
But in this thread, it's everyone except EvenBob that is tilting at windmills. They, the supposedly sane majority, are the ones wasting their time and looking foolish.
We/they take EB to task for his oft repeated nonsense. And it is nonsense. EB reacts with more nonsense. Who's putting on a clown show to what audience? EvenBob, or his hecklers?
link to original post
That’s what he said. The hecklers tilting at EB is the something indeed worse than tilting at windmills.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: OnceDear
We/they take EB to task for his oft repeated nonsense. And it is nonsense. EB reacts with more nonsense. Who's putting on a clown show to what audience? EvenBob, or his hecklers?
you have a point
but I believe that when EB posts his illogical nonsense it should be rebutted by somebody
it should not stand alone
.
link to original post
If a flat Earther posted his same fantastical rubbish here every day, would he, should he be taken to task every day?
Should it be allowed to dominate the forum?
Wizard has a propensity for giving even Flat Earthers a polite and fair hearing. Would he ever eject one as just too disruptive?
No.
Wizard doesn't care.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: TigerWuExpected value does not "go out the window" no matter how random or non-random your bets are.
link to original post
When the math is calculated using only non random betting, of course it goes out the window. You just changed a major parameter of how the math was arrived at so now it's worthless. And please don't tell me that you cannot make non random bets against random outcomes. The card counter does it every time the count is in his favor in blackjack, he makes a non random bet. I'm not making this up, I read it in more than one place.
link to original post
Your comparison to card counting is inane and ridiculous. A counter is counting cards already played and that can't be in the remaining deck. You remove nothing and eliminate no possibities. Claiming you can predict when a non-random spin will occur is laughable. That you are allowed to sprout this nonsense over multiple threads is pathetic.
Quote: lilredrooster
but now I'm completely done - hopefully - I don't want to debate an illogical person - it's useless - I've done my share
link to original post
Same here. There's nothing more to be said. EB's claims have been debunked into the ground halfway to China and we're still where we were on day one. Oh, well, guess it was fun while it lasted...???
Quote: OnceDear
Wizard doesn't care.
link to original post
It sucks that the onus is on the forum members to ignore trolls rather than the mods to ban them.
Quote: TigerWu
Quote: OnceDear
Wizard doesn't care.
link to original post
It sucks that the onus is on the forum members to ignore trolls rather than the mods to ban them.
link to original post
It's all 'content' to TPTB.
Quote: OnceDearQuote: lilredroosterQuote: OnceDear
We/they take EB to task for his oft repeated nonsense. And it is nonsense. EB reacts with more nonsense. Who's putting on a clown show to what audience? EvenBob, or his hecklers?
you have a point
but I believe that when EB posts his illogical nonsense it should be rebutted by somebody
it should not stand alone
.
link to original post
If a flat Earther posted his same fantastical rubbish here every day, would he, should he be taken to task every day?
Should it be allowed to dominate the forum?
Wizard has a propensity for giving even Flat Earthers a polite and fair hearing. Would he ever eject one as just too disruptive?
No.
Wizard doesn't care.
link to original post
The comparison to Flat Earthers seems illustrative rather than specific.
While no literal Flat Earth ejections come to mind, I do seem to recall some permanent bans for math denial that was deemed too extreme and distracting.
Illustrative indeed.Quote: Dieter
The comparison to Flat Earthers seems illustrative rather than specific.
While no literal Flat Earth ejections come to mind, I do seem to recall some permanent bans for math denial that was deemed too extreme and distracting.
link to original post
I've had the actual discussion with Wizard about how he would deal with actual flat Earthers. I recall some was in open forum and some in PM. So I hope I don't compromise the privacy of those PM's
Wizard has said that he would give a polite hearing to a flat earther and defend the guy's right to spout such stuff.
We've also discussed mental health and dealing with the mentally challenged.
He's a kind man, that Wizard. Too kind for the forum's good, IMHO.
Still, Content -> Traffic -> Adclicks -> Revenue.
Just think how much quality, on topic, content we could have if 'they' didn't keep suspending or driving away those who care about the raison d'etre of the forum, for the offence of insulting the trolls.
.
Quote: EvenBobThere's nothing in these recent posts from today that I haven't replied to in other threads and this one over and over and over. Really tired of repeating myself.
Then stop.
Quote:I have that math, I know what my edge is, I'm not posting it because it would just open another big can of worms.
link to original post
"You wouldn't know my math.... it goes to another school in Canada..."
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: OnceDear
We/they take EB to task for his oft repeated nonsense. And it is nonsense. EB reacts with more nonsense. Who's putting on a clown show to what audience? EvenBob, or his hecklers?
you have a point
but I believe that when EB posts his illogical nonsense it should be rebutted by somebody
it should not stand alone
.
link to original post
I guess I will repeat a suggestion I’ve made before. Letting someone post 800 times about the validity of flat Earth theory isn’t a celebration of free speech, it’s a celebration of the abuse of free speech. I don’t why the site allows so many repetitions of the same nonsense in the name of free speech. Someone posts some new angle of nonsense, then immortalize it, but don’t think you have to engage in the same madness of listening to it over and over once you have. You’ve done your job, in allowing some freedom of expression, you needn’t feel guilty putting it in check from endless repetitions held hostage to that nonsense as some sort of ideal you must accept from being a cast as a censoring tyrant. Censoring is when you blot it out from being found at ever existing. As long as you’re not doing that, it’s fine.
Just my opinion of course.
Quote: rxwineI don’t why the site allows so many repetitions of the same nonsense in the name of free speech.
link to original post
I don't know about you, but I never post nonsense. And in these threads on roulette, it takes two to tango. I don't remember a single time I've ever been talking to myself for very long. So many of you don't want these threads to exist, STOP POSTING IN THEM and they will go away.
Replying with nonsense, incorrectness, and non answers isn't helpful to anyone. Why is it do you think people keep asking the same questions? When soo many people are pointing at you and you and you are pointing at everyone else, the problem is probably YOU.Quote: EvenBobThere's nothing in these recent posts from today that I haven't replied to in other threads and this one over and over and over. Really tired of repeating myself. When you come up with something new, like the math for EV when you are right far more often than wrong in betting on roulette, let me know. I have that math, I know what my edge is, I'm not posting it because it would just open another big can of worms. Hair pulling, gnashing of teeth, wild eyes, ranting with arms waving over your heads, who needs it.
link to original post
Show us the math, show us the proof, show us something significantly substantial that at least makes us say Hmm...
What solid evidence have you ever provided that shows us you can beat games of chance?
Nothing, nada, zilch.
But hey, keep telling us how you are going to prove us wrong and keep failing to do so.
Physicists, when formulating a theory of the universe usually start out with this fundamental principal: Causality. Cause and effect.
Basically, this means that everything that happens has a cause. Its a fundamental principal of reality.
In a brick and mortar casino, one can at least postulate causes for why an observer might be able to watch a roulette wheel and eventually predict the outcome of the spins with more than random success. Perhaps the roulette wheel operator starts the ball rolling on the same number on most spins. Maybe the wheel is out of balance. Maybe the roulette wheel bearings have experienced mechanical wear and there is some correlation to the outcome of the spin. These are all unlikely, but at least possible or conceivable.
But given an online casino and a digital roulette wheel? What could possibly cause patterns in earlier spins to contain information about what the likely outcome is in later spins? Remember, all effects must have a cause. What causes the outcomes at the present time to allow anyone to be able to foretell the outcomes of events in the future?
You can write a fantasy novel or comic book and invoke "magic" and make anything happen - but that is not possible in the real world. EB's claims that he can exploit patterns in prior spins to predict outcomes of future spins fails this basic test of causality, and therefore cannot be part of the real universe. He is claiming an effect without providing any possible cause. The laws of physics indicate that his claims cannot be true.
Quote: EvenBobI don't know about you, but I never post nonsense.
link to original post
You could post more nonsense, but there is only so much time in the day. Oh well, forgot about your time tricks.
Quote: gordonm888EB's claims that he can exploit patterns in prior spins to predict outcomes of future spins fails this basic test of causality, and therefore cannot be part of the real universe.
link to original post
But the patterns produced by random outcomes are not real patterns.
"Each outcome is independent of previous ones, and there is no underlying order or pattern. However, when humans observe sequences of random events, we may perceive patterns because of a limited size sample."
Patterns in roulette are like a mirage, they don't last very long. You cannot apply the laws of physics to something that doesn't really exist. However this does not mean that these peceived patterns cannot be exploited in the extreme short term. It's a fact that in games like roulette and Baccarat one side or the other dominates sometimes and produces patterns and these patterns can be used to your advantage. The reason is you are observing them in the extreme short term and exploiting them immediately as they happen. But like a mirage, it doesn't last very long and you have to move on and wait for another one. You have to be satisfied with making a very small number of units such as one or two.
By the way I calculated my edge over the casino when I use a certain method and it's 56%. On a single zero wheel. The casino's edge when betting randomly against random outcomes is just over 2%. My edge when betting non randomly is 56%. . Let the screaming, the hair pulling, and the eye rolling name calling begin.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: gordonm888EB's claims that he can exploit patterns in prior spins to predict outcomes of future spins fails this basic test of causality, and therefore cannot be part of the real universe.
link to original post
But the patterns produced by random outcomes are not real patterns.
"Each outcome is independent of previous ones, and there is no underlying order or pattern. However, when humans observe sequences of random events, we may perceive patterns because of a limited size sample."
Patterns in roulette are like a mirage, they don't last very long. You cannot apply the laws of physics to something that doesn't really exist. However this does not mean that these peceived patterns cannot be exploited in the extreme short term. It's a fact that in games like roulette and Baccarat one side or the other dominates sometimes and produces patterns and these patterns can be used to your advantage. The reason is you are observing them in the extreme short term and exploiting them immediately as they happen. But like a mirage, it doesn't last very long and you have to move on and wait for another one. You have to be satisfied with making a very small number of units such as one or two.
By the way I calculated my edge over the casino when I use a certain method and it's 56%. On a single zero wheel. The casino's edge when betting randomly against random outcomes is just over 2%. My edge when bidding non randomly is 56%. . Let the screaming, the hair pulling, and the eye rolling name calling begin.
link to original post
What do you calculate the standard deviation of that edge to be?
Quote: unJon
What do you calculate the standard deviation of that edge to be?
link to original post
I ran it through an AI and it's between four and five.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: unJon
What do you calculate the standard deviation of that edge to be?
link to original post
I ran it through an AI and it's between four and five.
link to original post
You do realize that AI is neither a calculator nor a viable source of information, correct?
It's purpose is to create information whether truthful or not and it is just giving you what it thinks you want.
It can't be used like Google to find out facts.
A lawyer just found out the hard way.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/new-york-lawyers-sanctioned-using-fake-chatgpt-cases-legal-brief-2023-06-22/
Quote: darkoz
You do realize that AI is neither a calculator nor a viable source of information, correct?
link to original post
Luckily I know enough about standard deviation to know that the number it came up with is fairly accurate. Contrary to popular belief I'm not a total idiot. People say the same thing about Wikipedia. You have to know how to read these things and not be a total gullible bystander.
Quote: EvenBobPatterns in roulette are like a mirage, they don't last very long. You cannot apply the laws of physics to something that doesn't really exist.
Here again, EvenBob draws similiarities to real things he knows nothing about.
A mirage is a naturally-occurring optical phenomenon in which light rays bend via refraction to produce a displaced image of distant objects or the sky.
Who, apart from EvenBob says that they are not real and do not last long and are not a direct consequence of the laws of physics?
Quote: EvenBobHowever this does not mean that these perceived patterns cannot be exploited in the extreme short term.
Complete nonsense. To be exploited they have to have predictive value. They have NO VALUE. THEY ARE MEANINGLESS. EvenBob is spouting more meaningless word soup.
Quote: EvenBobIt's a fact that in games like roulette and Baccarat one side or the other dominates sometimes and produces patterns and these patterns can be used to your advantage.
More complete and utter TOSH.
Yet more complete and utter TOSH.Quote: EvenBobThe reason is you are observing them in the extreme short term and exploiting them immediately as they happen. But like a mirage, it doesn't last very long and you have to move on and wait for another one. You have to be satisfied with making a very small number of units such as one or two.
Quote: EvenBobBy the way I calculated my edge over the casino when I use a certain method and it's 56%. On a single zero wheel. The casino's edge when betting randomly against random outcomes is just over 2%. My edge when betting non randomly is 56%. . Let the screaming, the hair pulling, and the eye rolling name calling begin.
link to original post
Screaming? Hair-pulling?
No. Just the calm statement of facts. EvenBob has no [expletive] clue. He is just an endless font of this kind of [expletive noun].
Quote: rxwineI don’t [know] why the site allows so many repetitions of the same nonsense in the name of free speech.
link to original post
Because Wizard is Wizard, with Wizard's perspective. Doesn't make life fair, or this forum useful.
Quote: EvenBobI don't know about you, but I never post nonsense. And in these threads on roulette, it takes two to tango. I don't remember a single time I've ever been talking to myself for very long. So many of you don't want these threads to exist, STOP POSTING IN THEM and they will go away.
link to original post
EvenBob ALWAYS posts the same nonsense. We should probably stop responding, but there is a certain entertainment value in his demonstrations of pathos. Certainly comedy value reading his alternative Math and creative use of the '%' sign.
So much complete and utter tosh in one paragraph. That is EvenBob's legacy to the world.
YOU calculated it? I am highly skeptical of that claim, but let's go with it. I seem to recall some mention of 56% before regarding this.Quote: EvenBobQuote: gordonm888EB's claims that he can exploit patterns in prior spins to predict outcomes of future spins fails this basic test of causality, and therefore cannot be part of the real universe.
link to original post
But the patterns produced by random outcomes are not real patterns.
"Each outcome is independent of previous ones, and there is no underlying order or pattern. However, when humans observe sequences of random events, we may perceive patterns because of a limited size sample."
Patterns in roulette are like a mirage, they don't last very long. You cannot apply the laws of physics to something that doesn't really exist. However this does not mean that these peceived patterns cannot be exploited in the extreme short term. It's a fact that in games like roulette and Baccarat one side or the other dominates sometimes and produces patterns and these patterns can be used to your advantage. The reason is you are observing them in the extreme short term and exploiting them immediately as they happen. But like a mirage, it doesn't last very long and you have to move on and wait for another one. You have to be satisfied with making a very small number of units such as one or two.
By the way I calculated my edge over the casino when I use a certain method and it's 56%. On a single zero wheel. The casino's edge when betting randomly against random outcomes is just over 2%. My edge when betting non randomly is 56%. . Let the screaming, the hair pulling, and the eye rolling name calling begin.
link to original post
How did you arrive at 56% "SHOW US THE MATHY"
Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkoz
You do realize that AI is neither a calculator nor a viable source of information, correct?
link to original post
Luckily I know enough about standard deviation to know that the number it came up with is fairly accurate. Contrary to popular belief I'm not a total idiot. People say the same thing about Wikipedia. You have to know how to read these things and not be a total gullible bystander.
link to original post
No, you dont understand the difference between Wikipedia and AI.
Wikipedia complaints were that humans might try to put incorrect information into articles. However the mass of humans who read and can correct Wikipedia has for the most part kept information on Wikipedia correct.
AI is a machine that gives you BACK WHAT YOU ASK. if I ask for the biological proof of a Unicorn physiological properties it will give that to me. This does not mean that Unicorns have now been proven to exist. What it means is that AI has created the very fiction it believed i was requesting.
Your math is already fiction so it's no surprise you are turning to AI to prove your claims.
What data did you enter to get between 4 and 5 SD's?Quote: EvenBobQuote: darkoz
You do realize that AI is neither a calculator nor a viable source of information, correct?
link to original post
Luckily I know enough about standard deviation to know that the number it came up with is fairly accurate. Contrary to popular belief I'm not a total idiot. People say the same thing about Wikipedia. You have to know how to read these things and not be a total gullible bystander.
link to original post
Do you understand the significance of 4.5 standard deviations?
If you can prove that you can go 4.5 standard deviation .... now you have something.
Also, how does someone calculate their standard deviation when they only consider the extreme short run .
Quote: gordonm888EB's claims that he can exploit patterns in prior spins to predict outcomes of future spins fails this basic test of causality, and therefore cannot be part of the real universe. He is claiming an effect without providing any possible cause. The laws of physics indicate that his claims cannot be true.
link to original post
"BuT ThE CaSiNoS PaY Me eVeRy dAmN DaY!!!!11!1"
If you are making stuff up, try to be entertaining and stop thinking so small. Dream big.
Quote: billryanOnly a 56% edge? Childs play. Please get back to me when you can double it. A guy with a loose relationship with reality can claim at least a 110% edge.
If you are making stuff up, try to be entertaining and stop thinking so small. Dream big.
link to original post
110% edge?
Is that like a suitcase we don't ask about, or getting paid to not play?
Quote: Dieter
110% edge?
Is that like a suitcase we don't ask about, or getting paid to not play?
link to original post
Give it another year or two and EB will come up with a story about how the online casinos are so scared of his system method that they're paying him some fee not to gamble there.
Quote: darkoz
No, you dont understand the difference between Wikipedia and AI.
link to original post
I made the comparison because the two have reputations for being completely unreliable. I should have known better, that you would pick pick pick it apart till there was nothing left of it.
Quote: AxelWolf
Do you understand the significance of 4.5 standard deviations?
link to original post
"A data point that is 4.5 standard deviations from the mean is highly unusual and significant in statistical terms. It suggests a level of deviation from the norm that is rarely observed and is often an indication of something noteworthy in the data."
Quote: TigerWuClaiming a 56% house edge is so over-the-top nonsensical as to be clearly trolling.
link to original post
Once again just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's trolling. And sometimes I wonder if there's anybody besides the mods on this forum who understands what trolling really is.
Quote: billryanOnly a 56% edge?
link to original post
That's the reason I can get in and get out so quickly. I have no desire to sit there and and play play play because I have some paltry edge of 10 or 12%. I've worked extremely hard to get this edge, you have no idea.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: TigerWuClaiming a 56% house edge is so over-the-top nonsensical as to be clearly trolling.
link to original post
Once again just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's trolling. And sometimes I wonder if there's anybody besides the mods on this forum who understands what trolling really is.
link to original post
Just because you type something, doesn't mean it is true, and calling out people for pointing out their lies isn't trolling.
I have no idea if you believe your own posts, but it doesn't really matter. No one else does., and it appears to have gotten to the point where people are willing to make a stand and call you out for the lying troll you are. It's about time.
Quote: billryan
I have no idea if you believe your own posts,
link to original post
If I didn't believe it I wouldn't post it, duh. There, now you have an idea..
Quote: billryanQuote: EvenBobQuote: TigerWuClaiming a 56% house edge is so over-the-top nonsensical as to be clearly trolling.
link to original post
Once again just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's trolling. And sometimes I wonder if there's anybody besides the mods on this forum who understands what trolling really is.
link to original post
Just because you type something, doesn't mean it is true, and calling out people for pointing out their lies isn't trolling.
I have no idea if you believe your own posts, but it doesn't really matter. No one else does., and it appears to have gotten to the point where people are willing to make a stand and call you out for the lying troll you are. It's about time.
link to original post
Personal insult.
3 days.
Quote: AxelWolf
How did you arrive at 56% "SHOW US THE MATHY"
link to original post
Edge = (Number of Correct Guesses - Number of Incorrect Guesses) / Total Number of Guesses
Quote: AxelWolfYOU calculated it? I am highly skeptical of that claim, but let's go with it. I seem to recall some mention of 56% before regarding this.Quote: EvenBob
By the way I calculated my edge over the casino when I use a certain method and it's 56%. On a single zero wheel. The casino's edge when betting randomly against random outcomes is just over 2%. My edge when betting non randomly is 56%.
link to original post
How did you arrive at 56% "SHOW US THE MATHY"
link to original post
Since there is Buck All chance that EvenBob will show any calculations, I WILL. I'll take EB's final answer as true and work back.
For an even money wager on single zero roulette without 'la partage' rule....
House Edge= -Player Edge = -(WinValue x Pwin - LoseValue x Plose)
and the answer with accepted probabilities is
0.027 = -(1 x 18/37 - 1 x 19/37)
But EvenBob claims that does not apply to him, with his CALCULATED PLAYER edge of 56% = 0.56
So we have to evaluate Pwin and Plose for EB.
Player Edge = 0.56 = -(-( WinValue x Pwin - LoseValue x Plose))
We know WinValue = LoseValue =1 so
0.56 = -(-( 1xPwin - 1xPlose))
0.56 = (Pwin-PLose)
and we KNOW 1-Pwin=Plose
So
0.56 = (Pwin - (1-Pwin))
0.56 = 2Pwin - 1
0.56 + 1 = 2Pwin
Pwin = (1.56)/2
Pwin = 0.78 = 78%
SO.
If EvenBob's claim of 56% Player Edge is true, he his winning 78% of his even money bets.
That's within spitting distance of the 80% hit rate that he falsely claims.
Let's work it forward from claimed hit rate of 80%
Player Edge = ( WinValue x Pwin - LoseValue x Plose)
Player Edge = 1x0.8 - 1x0.2 =0.6 = 60%
Therefore I conclude that EvenBob is backtracking a bit on his claimed 80% hit rate and only achieves 78% hit rate.
Now. He states the Standard Deviation on his 56% is about 4 or 5. I take it he means SD = 4% to 5% NOT that he is doing anything 4 or 5 standard deviations away from the mean.
I would LOVE to see how he derives SD of about 4% to 5%. If ever there was a challenge. That is it.
Footnote:
Everything about any of EvenBob's claims, numbers, or math is complete nonsense. I just did this exercise as a courtesy to AxelWolf who wanted to know how 56% could be arrived at.
EvenBob has no player advantage of 56%. EvenBob has no player advantage. PERIOD.
EvenBob has NOTHING. If he plays roulette, he has less than nothing.
ANYONE claiming a 56% player advantage over roulette should be called out as claiming the absurd. Such claims MUST not go unchallenged.
It's nonsense. Some say Bullspit and some say Lies or Delusions. EvenBob ( and only EvenBob ) says it's true.
DYOR.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolf
How did you arrive at 56% "SHOW US THE MATHY"
link to original post
Edge = (Number of Correct Guesses - Number of Incorrect Guesses) / Total Number of Guesses
link to original post
That's not the formula for house edge.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolf
How did you arrive at 56% "SHOW US THE MATHY"
link to original post
Edge = (Number of Correct Guesses - Number of Incorrect Guesses) / Total Number of Guesses
link to original post
That's not the formula for house edge.
link to original post
Of course it isn't. HOWEVER, the formula for EXPERIENCED player edge for a finite sample size DOES simplify down to that.
To EvenBob, only his experienced edge matters to him and the casino. He's not lying about the formula. He's just feeding in rubbish sample criteria. He's not a math guy, remember.
Remember EvenBob does not experience the same house edge as everyone else because his Probability of winning any even money wager is about 80%.
That that claim is UTTER TOSH is by the by. With any formula, garbage in = garbage out.
