Evenbob's Roulette Thread
Quote: tuttigym
If you all would repeat after every post from EB with the possible exception of his food posts:
EB IS IRRELEVANT
EB IS WRONG
My guess EB might be gone.
tuttigym
link to original post
I'm not 100% sure but I believe doing that would be a violation of forum rules. Something about making redundant posts or something.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: tuttigym
If you all would repeat after every post from EB with the possible exception of his food posts:
EB IS IRRELEVANT
EB IS WRONG
My guess EB might be gone.
tuttigym
link to original post
I'm not 100% sure but I believe doing that would be a violation of forum rules. Something about making redundant posts or something.
link to original post
Come on. EB's posts are the definition of redundancy. He has posted the same things and responses to all of your redundancies.
tuttigym
Quote: tuttigymIf you all would repeat after every post from EB with the possible exception of his food posts:
EB IS IRRELEVANT
EB IS WRONG
My guess EB might be gone.
tuttigym
link to original post
That would not be tolerated by the moderators here, regardless of how profoundly true.
And we are not allowed to accuse anyone of Trolling or Bullspitting.
The only way to kill the thread is to starve it. Like a pernicious weed, the thread just needs a little bit of daylight to prosper. Even these dismissive posts keep it floating in the recent threads list.
DFTT
Hey EvenBob...... It must suck to be so desperate to be acknowledged, so I'll acknowledge your existence.
Quote: OnceDearQuote: tuttigymIf you all would repeat after every post from EB with the possible exception of his food posts:
EB IS IRRELEVANT
EB IS WRONG
My guess EB might be gone.
tuttigym
link to original post
That would not be tolerated by the moderators here, regardless of how profoundly true.
And we are not allowed to accuse anyone of Trolling or Bullspitting.
The only way to kill the thread is to starve it. Like a pernicious weed, the thread just needs a little bit of daylight to prosper. Even these dismissive posts keep it floating in the recent threads list.
DFTT
Hey EvenBob...... It must suck to be so desperate to be acknowledged, so I'll acknowledge your existence.
link to original post
Okey dokey Ramble on.
tuttigym
Quote: tuttigym
Come on. EB's posts are the definition of redundancy. He has posted the same things and responses to all of your redundancies.
tuttigym
link to original post
I agree 100%. But the powers-that-be have granted him special privileges, so he gets away with things that would get other people suspended or nuked.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: tuttigym
If you all would repeat after every post from EB with the possible exception of his food posts:
EB IS IRRELEVANT
EB IS WRONG
My guess EB might be gone.
tuttigym
link to original post
I'm not 100% sure but I believe doing that would be a violation of forum rules. Something about making redundant posts or something.
link to original post
So don't be redundant. Be creative. The more you argue, the more someone will post.
EvenBob has me blocked.
For any post that i make, he will see ...
Quote:[ A post by OnceDear has been blocked due to your settings | Show it to me anyway | View members I have blocked ]
It really splatters the screen.
But that's not all.... He will get that dialogue for any post that quotes me AND ANY POST THAT MENTIONS ME
I see comedy gold in the potential of that.
Want to send secret messages that only EB won't see? Just mention OnceDear in your post.
LOL. $:o)
Quote: TigerWu
Excuse me, it wasn't a "couple" pages ago, it was three. Bottom of page 5. ..
I'm referring to the hundreds of thousands of spins you have been involved with over your gambling career.
link to original post
Give me the permalink to the post you're talking about. And it's amusing that you think a couple hundred thousand spins is a lot. The bare bones minimum for analyzing roulette would be in the 10 to 12 million range and even that's low. Like I said before Mike has run a billion hands on baccarat shoes.
Quote: TigerWu
What exactly does the casino verify "every single time" you play?
link to original post
When I make a winning bet they pay me by moving money into my account.
Doh! You put a space in my user ID and broke it..... Anyway, to answer your question, i'll do a 'speriment.... Nope That doesn't workQuote: billryanIn response to OnceDears suggestion, does it work it if include "Once Dear" in my signature line?
link to original post
Quote: EvenBobQuote: AxelWolfYour entire claims are based on tricking/outsmarting/defying math
link to original post
Please please PLEASE tell me which math that I am tricking or outsmarting. I keep asking this question over and over and nobody ever answers it. You have no idea what math you're talking about because there is none. Certainly not the law of large numbers we've discussed that into the ground. And nice try changing the subject from a card counter beats the game of blackjack. He can sometimes beat the smallest portion of the shoe and that does not mean he 'beat' the game.
link to original post
The math that says any guess whether or not educated should be correct a certain percentage of the time: 18/37 on a single zero wheel and 18/38 on a double zero wheel.
Quote: billryanQuote: TigerWuQuote: tuttigym
If you all would repeat after every post from EB with the possible exception of his food posts:
EB IS IRRELEVANT
EB IS WRONG
My guess EB might be gone.
tuttigym
link to original post
I'm not 100% sure but I believe doing that would be a violation of forum rules. Something about making redundant posts or something.
link to original post
So don't be redundant. Be creative. The more you argue, the more someone will post.
link to original post
Hard to call it arguing.
Isn't it EvenBob.
Oh. I forgot, you have arranged not to see my content. How've you done that? A bit of masking tape on your monitor?
Quote: EvenBobQuote: TigerWu
What exactly does the casino verify "every single time" you play?
link to original post
When I make a winning bet they pay me by moving money into my account.
link to original post
So you win "every single time" you play?
Quote: EvenBobGive me the permalink to the post you're talking about.
E=P(W)⋅W−P(L)⋅L
Quote:And it's amusing that you think a couple hundred thousand spins is a lot. The bare bones minimum for analyzing roulette would be in the 10 to 12 million range and even that's low. Like I said before Mike has run a billion hands on baccarat shoes.
link to original post
Mike has also said this:
Quote:Show me someone who is winning at a fair game of roulette and I'll show you somebody who is just lucky, and will likely lose it all back.
Is he wrong?
Quote: unJonQuote: EvenBob
Please please PLEASE tell me which math that I am tricking or outsmarting. I keep asking this question over and over and nobody ever answers it. You have no idea what math you're talking about because there is none. Certainly not the law of large numbers we've discussed that into the ground. And nice try changing the subject from a card counter beats the game of blackjack. He can sometimes beat the smallest portion of the shoe and that does not mean he 'beat' the game.
link to original post
The math that says any guess whether or not educated should be correct a certain percentage of the time: 18/37 on a single zero wheel and 18/38 on a double zero wheel.
link to original post
Nicely put, but that doesn't (no it really doesn't) apply to a sample size of one or near to one.
LOL. 200k spins on roulette is going to come super close to the HA while flat betting. You especially don't even need close to that for even money bets.Quote: EvenBobQuote: TigerWu
Excuse me, it wasn't a "couple" pages ago, it was three. Bottom of page 5. ..
I'm referring to the hundreds of thousands of spins you have been involved with over your gambling career.
link to original post
Give me the permalink to the post you're talking about. And it's amusing that you think a couple hundred thousand spins is a lot. The bare bones minimum for analyzing roulette would be in the 10 to 12 million range and even that's low. Like I said before Mike has run a billion hands on baccarat shoes.
link to original post
Please refer to OnceDears sims. After 8k spins, flat betting you'll no doubt be in the red no matter what voodoo poopoo win and leave shenanigans you attempt.
LOL.Quote: OnceDearQuote: billryanQuote: TigerWuQuote: tuttigym
If you all would repeat after every post from EB with the possible exception of his food posts:
EB IS IRRELEVANT
EB IS WRONG
My guess EB might be gone.
tuttigym
link to original post
I'm not 100% sure but I believe doing that would be a violation of forum rules. Something about making redundant posts or something.
link to original post
So don't be redundant. Be creative. The more you argue, the more someone will post.
link to original post
Hard to call it arguing.
Isn't it EvenBob.
Oh. I forgot, you have arranged not to see my content. How've you done that? A bit of masking tape on your monitor?
link to original post
This thread reminds me of this.Quote: EvenBob
Quote: OnceDearQuote: unJonQuote: EvenBob
Please please PLEASE tell me which math that I am tricking or outsmarting. I keep asking this question over and over and nobody ever answers it. You have no idea what math you're talking about because there is none. Certainly not the law of large numbers we've discussed that into the ground. And nice try changing the subject from a card counter beats the game of blackjack. He can sometimes beat the smallest portion of the shoe and that does not mean he 'beat' the game.
link to original post
The math that says any guess whether or not educated should be correct a certain percentage of the time: 18/37 on a single zero wheel and 18/38 on a double zero wheel.
link to original post
Nicely put, but that doesn't (no it really doesn't) apply to a sample size of one or near to one.
link to original post
Sure it does. That’s the percentage chance of any single guess being correct. Now if you want to disprove that null hypothesis I agree you need multiple samples.
Quote: unJon
The math that says any guess whether or not educated should be correct a certain percentage of the time: 18/37 on a single zero wheel and 18/38 on a double zero wheel.
link to original post
That involves a random bet against random outcomes. I do not make random bets. Let's go back to the card counter example. Blackjack is a random game and a card counter is not making random bets, his bets are based on what he knows about the game and are not random. My bets are also based on what I know about the game and are not random.
Quote: EvenBobThat involves a random bet against random outcomes. I do not make random bets. Let's go back to the card counter example. Blackjack is a random game and a card counter is not making random bets, his bets are based on what he knows about the game and are not random. My bets are also based on what I know about the game and are not random.
link to original post
It doesn't matter how non-random your bets are when the outcomes of the game are still random.
Well. If EvenBob can repeat his assertion, then I have no qualms about calling it out as nonsense, yet again.Quote: EvenBobQuote: unJon
The math that says any guess whether or not educated should be correct a certain percentage of the time: 18/37 on a single zero wheel and 18/38 on a double zero wheel.
link to original post
That involves a random bet against random outcomes. I do not make random bets. Let's go back to the card counter example. Blackjack is a random game and a card counter is not making random bets, his bets are based on what he knows about the game and are not random. My bets are also based on what I know about the game and are not random.
link to original post
Nothing that EvenBob can know about the game can give him any insight into the result of the next spin.
Nothing! EvenBob has Nothing to go on. His educated guesses are worth NOTHING. This whole thread, post hijack, is worth less than nothing.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: EvenBobThat involves a random bet against random outcomes. I do not make random bets. Let's go back to the card counter example. Blackjack is a random game and a card counter is not making random bets, his bets are based on what he knows about the game and are not random. My bets are also based on what I know about the game and are not random.
link to original post
It doesn't matter how non-random your bets are when the outcomes of the game are still random.
link to original post
Great thing about the even money bets.
If you ALWAYS bet red, then 18/37 times you will be right.
If you ALWAYS bet black, then 18/37 times you will be right.
If you ALWAYS bet odd, then 18/37 times you will be right.
If you ALWAYS bet even, then 18/37 times you will be right.
If you ALWAYS bet first 18, then 18/37 times you will be right.
If you ALWAYS bet last 18, then 18/37 times you will be right.
If you ALWAYS toggle your bet red/black/red black. then 18/37 times you will be right.
If you ALWAYS bet [AS DICTATED BY SOME MYSTICAL INSIGHT], then 18/37 times you will be right.
Mumbo jumbo about being able to see patterns means nothing because any number can still come up. You've eliminated nothing and wishful thinking does not affect the math.
A good counter changes the odds in his favor. You , on the other hand, have changed nothing as far as your odds go.
Your reasoning is faulty, your logic is non-existent and the chance that you are being honest is negligible.
Quote: billryan
Your reasoning is faulty, your logic is non-existent and the chance that you are being honest is negligible.
link to original post
Reminds me of this quote from Ghostbusters, which is also extremely fitting:
Quote:Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable.
Quote: TigerWuQuote: billryan
Your reasoning is faulty, your logic is non-existent and the chance that you are being honest is negligible.
link to original post
Reminds me of this quote from Ghostbusters, which is also extremely fitting:Quote:Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable.
link to original post
Fitting? Didn’t the Ghostbusters theories turn out to be correct?
Quote: unJonQuote: TigerWuQuote: billryan
Your reasoning is faulty, your logic is non-existent and the chance that you are being honest is negligible.
link to original post
Reminds me of this quote from Ghostbusters, which is also extremely fitting:Quote:Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable.
link to original post
Fitting? Didn’t the Ghostbusters theories turn out to be correct?
link to original post
He didn't actually say their theories were wrong, he just said they were "popular tripe."
EB is wrong, though.
It's better set to music!Quote: AxelWolfThis thread reminds me of this.Quote: EvenBob
link to original post
Quote: TigerWu
It doesn't matter how non-random your bets are when the outcomes of the game are still random.
link to original post
Of course it makes a difference, stop being silly. Blackjack is a random game producing random outcomes. When a card counter waits till the count is in his favor and starts betting accordingly he's not making random bets, he's making it non-random bets against random outcomes. I'm wondering if you know what random is.
Quote: billryanA card counter knows which cards have been played and which remain. Once a card has been played, it can't be played again until the next shuffle. That is meaningful knowledge that changes the odds for the player.
link to original post
And it causes the card counter to make a non-random bet against a random outcome. The importance of this is inarguable. All the math that applies to Casino games is done by placing random bets against random outcomes. As soon as you start betting non randomly the math changes. As soon as you start betting non randomly because you've studied the game and know one to place the non-random bet, the math is now in your favor. You now have the edge over the casino for that brief moment. When I play roulette I'm the most dangerous person in the casino because I have the edge and they do not.
"Most of the estimates say that counting cards gives you an edge of 1% to 2%."
2% is pathetic, this is why they have so many losing sessions. My edge is far far higher than that. And it gets better all the time.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: TigerWu
It doesn't matter how non-random your bets are when the outcomes of the game are still random.
link to original post
Of course it makes a difference, stop being silly. Blackjack is a random game producing random outcomes. When a card counter waits till the count is in his favor and starts betting accordingly he's not making random bets, he's making it non-random bets against random outcomes. I'm wondering if you know what random is.
link to original post
And I'm wondering if you know anything at all about any casino game. Doesn't seem like it.
Forget blackjack. You're not playing blackjack. You're playing roulette. Card counting math doesn't apply.
It doesn't matter how non-random your bets are when the outcomes of the game are still random, as they are in roulette.
Quote: TigerWu
Forget blackjack. You're not playing blackjack. You're playing roulette. Card counting math doesn't apply.
It doesn't matter how non-random your bets are when the outcomes of the game are still random, as they are in roulette.
link to original post
I use blackjack as an example because it's one of the few casino games that's been proven that you can get an edge against.. And you're completely wrong that it doesn't matter how non random your bets are. Again just look at blackjack. The card counter can get a 2% edge because he is very much making non-random bets. Again, I don't think you know what random means. Do you think the card counter is just throwing random bets out there and winning by some kind of magic? Of course not. His bets are very deliberate and non-random when the count is in his favor.
Quote: billryanRepeating the same nonsense doesn't make it any more meaningful.
link to original post
None of it is nonsense. It's an absolute fact that a card counter has the edge over the casino of about 2%. And when he bets because the count is in his favor he's making a non random bet against random outcomes to get his 2%. This is inarguable.
When Edward Thorpe released his book in the 1960s on how to beat blackjack the casinos went absolutely insane, as we all know. They thought Blackjack was unbeatable, they had no idea. But in their midst the whole time were card counters, long before Edward Thorpe came along. He interviewed some of them for his book and they begged him not to write it because they said it was going to ruin what they did for a living. And it did. So Blackjack was at one time considered to be totally invulnerable and then somebody proved it could be exploited so now it's a given fact that you can get the edge over the casino in BJ.. Nobody has written such a book about roulette and so of course everybody believes that it's unexploitable. But there are those of us out there doing it, just like there were people counting cards long before Edward Thorpe.
Quote: EvenBob... studied the game and know one to place the non-random bet...
link to original post
It's 'know when' not 'know one'. Are you still using that speech to text app, EB? Were you getting excited and shouted at it?
.
.
.
Oh. And the entire rest of the post was just embarrassingly, ridiculous.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: billryanRepeating the same nonsense doesn't make it any more meaningful.
link to original post
None of it is nonsense. It's an absolute fact that a card counter has the edge over the casino of about 2%. And when he bets because the count is in his favor he's making a non random bet against random outcomes to get his 2%. This is inarguable.
When Edward Thorpe released his book in the 1960s on how to beat blackjack the casinos went absolutely insane, as we all know. They thought Blackjack was unbeatable, they had no idea. But in their midst the whole time were card counters, long before Edward Thorpe came along. He interviewed some of them for his book and they begged him not to write it because they said it was going to ruin what they did for a living. And it did. So Blackjack was at one time considered to be totally invulnerable and then somebody proved it could be exploited so now it's a given fact that you can get the edge over the casino in BJ.. Nobody has written such a book about roulette and so of course everybody believes that it's unexploitable. But there are those of us out there doing it, just like there were people counting cards long before Edward Thorpe.
link to original post
Adding new garbage to a rubbish heap just makes a bigger pile of doo-doo
Quote: billryanQuote: EvenBobQuote: billryanRepeating the same nonsense doesn't make it any more meaningful.
link to original post
None of it is nonsense. It's an absolute fact that a card counter has the edge over the casino of about 2%. And when he bets because the count is in his favor he's making a non random bet against random outcomes to get his 2%. This is inarguable.
When Edward Thorpe released his book in the 1960s on how to beat blackjack the casinos went absolutely insane, as we all know. They thought Blackjack was unbeatable, they had no idea. But in their midst the whole time were card counters, long before Edward Thorpe came along. He interviewed some of them for his book and they begged him not to write it because they said it was going to ruin what they did for a living. And it did. So Blackjack was at one time considered to be totally invulnerable and then somebody proved it could be exploited so now it's a given fact that you can get the edge over the casino in BJ.. Nobody has written such a book about roulette and so of course everybody believes that it's unexploitable. But there are those of us out there doing it, just like there were people counting cards long before Edward Thorpe.
link to original post
Adding new garbage to a rubbish heap just makes a bigger pile of doo-doo
link to original post
Never heard Edward Thorpe referred to as garbage before. You probably don't even know who he is.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: billryanQuote: EvenBobQuote: billryanRepeating the same nonsense doesn't make it any more meaningful.
link to original post
None of it is nonsense. It's an absolute fact that a card counter has the edge over the casino of about 2%. And when he bets because the count is in his favor he's making a non random bet against random outcomes to get his 2%. This is inarguable.
When Edward Thorpe released his book in the 1960s on how to beat blackjack the casinos went absolutely insane, as we all know. They thought Blackjack was unbeatable, they had no idea. But in their midst the whole time were card counters, long before Edward Thorpe came along. He interviewed some of them for his book and they begged him not to write it because they said it was going to ruin what they did for a living. And it did. So Blackjack was at one time considered to be totally invulnerable and then somebody proved it could be exploited so now it's a given fact that you can get the edge over the casino in BJ.. Nobody has written such a book about roulette and so of course everybody believes that it's unexploitable. But there are those of us out there doing it, just like there were people counting cards long before Edward Thorpe.
link to original post
Adding new garbage to a rubbish heap just makes a bigger pile of doo-doo
link to original post
Never heard Edward Thorpe referred to as garbage before. You probably don't even know who he is.
link to original post
You are correct. I've no idea who Ed Thorpe is. If you are referring to Ed Thorp, the hedge fund manager who wrote Beat The Dealer, I have a working knowledge of his book.
Trying to relate your crackpot system to anything based on real math is pitiful.
If you take a decent card counter and show him the first 50 cards out of a deck, he can tell you which two cards remain. Can you tell us what the 37th spin will be, based on the 36 before? Of course, you can't, which is why you attempting to compare your garbage with something actually based on math is laughable..
Quote: billryanCan you tell us what the 37th spin will be, based on the 36 before?
link to original post
I can make an educated guess just like a card counter makes an educated guess when he makes a bet when the count is in his favor. He cannot know for sure exactly what the next card will be but he can certainly make accurate guesses more often than not. Just like I can.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: billryanCan you tell us what the 37th spin will be, based on the 36 before?
link to original post
I can make an educated guess just like a card counter makes an educated guess when he makes a bet when the count is in his favor. He cannot know for sure exactly what the next card will be but he can certainly make accurate guesses more often than not. Just like I can.
link to original post
You have provided nothing credible to prove your claim of accurate guessing no one believes you, save it.
He has proven absolutely how effectively he can string along sane adults to discuss gibberish. Proof enough.Quote: rainmanQuote: EvenBobQuote: billryanCan you tell us what the 37th spin will be, based on the 36 before?
link to original post
I can make an educated guess just like a card counter makes an educated guess when he makes a bet when the count is in his favor. He cannot know for sure exactly what the next card will be but he can certainly make accurate guesses more often than not. Just like I can.
link to original post
You have provided nothing credible to prove your claim of accurate guessing no one believes you, save it.
link to original post
We'd have dismissed a flat earther of psychic ghost whisperer a decade ago, but EB pitches his BS just right.
He's not going to stop or change tack any time soon.
So, again..... DFTT.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: billryanCan you tell us what the 37th spin will be, based on the 36 before?
link to original post
I can make an educated guess just like a card counter makes an educated guess when he makes a bet when the count is in his favor. He cannot know for sure exactly what the next card will be but he can certainly make accurate guesses more often than not. Just like I can.
link to original post
I must ask...
If the ball lands on Red, does that make the next spin more or less likely to land Red?
(You may substitute "Even", "Low", or other.)
It's like a blind person with no taste buds trying to compare apples to oranges trying to convince us and explain how they look and taste the same.Quote: EvenBobQuote: billryanCan you tell us what the 37th spin will be, based on the 36 before?
link to original post
I can make an educated guess just like a card counter makes an educated guess when he makes a bet when the count is in his favor. He cannot know for sure exactly what the next card will be but he can certainly make accurate guesses more often than not. Just like I can.
link to original post
They did? We do? Can you provide evidence of this? If anything they went insane having to count all the profits from the newfound blackjack popularity. They implemented multiple decks, rule changes, and the early shuffle, etc. to combat that by increasing the HA.Quote: EvenBobQuote: billryanRepeating the same nonsense doesn't make it any more meaningful.
link to original post
None of it is nonsense. It's an absolute fact that a card counter has the edge over the casino of about 2%. And when he bets because the count is in his favor he's making a non random bet against random outcomes to get his 2%. This is inarguable.
When Edward Thorpe released his book in the 1960s on how to beat blackjack the casinos went absolutely insane, as we all know.
What you seem to be missing is the Math behind Card counting was always there, it was just hard to do without a computer.
The math on Roulette has been done a thousand times by humans and advanced Computers.
Contributed to Albert Einstein “No one can win at roulette unless he steals money from the table while the croupier isn't looking.”
Except for EvenBob.
Quote: EvenBobQuote: TigerWu
Forget blackjack. You're not playing blackjack. You're playing roulette. Card counting math doesn't apply.
It doesn't matter how non-random your bets are when the outcomes of the game are still random, as they are in roulette.
link to original post
I use blackjack as an example because it's one of the few casino games that's been proven that you can get an edge against.. And you're completely wrong that it doesn't matter how non random your bets are. Again just look at blackjack. The card counter can get a 2% edge because he is very much making non-random bets. Again, I don't think you know what random means. Do you think the card counter is just throwing random bets out there and winning by some kind of magic? Of course not. His bets are very deliberate and non-random when the count is in his favor.
link to original post
I know how card counting works. I know that card counters make non-random bets when the count is in their favor. What I don't know is why you keep bringing this up. Literally no one disputes the math behind card counting. Card counting does not apply to roulette. There is no "wheel counting" or "color counting" or "spin counting." The math is completely different and your blackjack explanation is completely irrelevant to it.
It doesn't matter how non-random your bets are when the outcomes of the game are still random, as they are in roulette. You don't have an edge.
Quote: EvenBob
"Most of the estimates say that counting cards gives you an edge of 1% to 2%."
2% is pathetic, this is why they have so many losing sessions. My edge is far far higher than that. And it gets better all the time.
link to original post
In case anyone needed any more proof that EB is trolling the forum, here it is.
Mods, Wizard... how long are you going to let EB get away with breaking the rules of the forum?
Suddenly, I realized it. Satori.
Quote: billryanI was watching some YouTube videos of a bunch of yahoos claiming, for whatever reason, they weren't subject to the same laws as everyone else.
Suddenly, I realized it. Satori.
link to original post
EvenBob is a Sovereign Citizen of the gambling world... the laws of math and statistics don't apply to him! LOL
