Thread Rating:

mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
February 20th, 2011 at 2:14:56 PM permalink
...someone who you would really like to understand it, as in, a close friend or family member? The question came to mind after reflecting on the totally fruitless discussions that arise from time to time here where some members make the quixotic and doomed effort to explain some (often, quite simple) gambling concepts to others.

If so, were you at all successful? And was the concept somewhat abstruse, such as variance and standard deviation, or was it fifth-grade algebra?

A few of my own experiences:

Trying to explain why the cost of a $110 Super Bowl bet was $10, regardless of the actual outcome. Explained to a live-in girlfriend; unsuccessful.
Trying to show why I needed a $5000 bankroll to play .25 fullpay deuces wild VP. Explained to a good friend; successful.
Trying to show why neither red nor black was "due" after red came up five times in a row. To a co-worker I was dating; completely unsuccessful.
Trying to explain why the fact that the dealer turned out to have a stiff hand (with a 10 up) didn't make the decision to hit hard 15 "wrong". Casual girlfriend (in the midst of a weekend trip to Tahoe); kind of sort of successful, but I don't think she was really convinced.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
JerryLogan
JerryLogan
Joined: Jun 28, 2010
  • Threads: 26
  • Posts: 1344
February 20th, 2011 at 2:24:05 PM permalink
1. Please provide evidence of you ever having a "live-in girlfriend".
2. Please provide evidence that you've ever in your life had $5000 for anything.
3. Please name that co-worker you were "dating".
4. Please identify this "casual girlfriend" in your tale.
5. If you are attempting to label yourself as some kind of stud here, please explain the reason for the obvious.

*psst...pictures will do
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
February 20th, 2011 at 2:29:00 PM permalink
Quote: JerryLogan

1. Please provide evidence of you ever having a "live-in girlfriend".
2. Please provide evidence that you've ever in your life had $5000 for anything.
3. Please name that co-worker you were "dating".
4. Please identify this "casual girlfriend" in your tale.
5. If you are attempting to label yourself as some kind of stud here, please explain the reason for the obvious.

*psst...pictures will do



Irrelevant to the discussion.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
JerryLogan
JerryLogan
Joined: Jun 28, 2010
  • Threads: 26
  • Posts: 1344
February 20th, 2011 at 2:30:31 PM permalink
Then so far, you're talking to yourself. I can feel your pain from here!
thecesspit
thecesspit
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
February 20th, 2011 at 4:25:33 PM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

...someone who you would really like to understand it, as in, a close friend or family member? The question came to mind after reflecting on the totally fruitless discussions that arise from time to time here where some members make the quixotic and doomed effort to explain some (often, quite simple) gambling concepts to others.

If so, were you at all successful? And was the concept somewhat abstruse, such as variance and standard deviation, or was it fifth-grade algebra?

A few of my own experiences:

Trying to explain why the cost of a $110 Super Bowl bet was $10, regardless of the actual outcome. Explained to a live-in girlfriend; unsuccessful.



Because the cost of the bet is $100 and it either wins $210 or nothing. The VALUE of the bet is -$10 (or the value of the ticket after purchase is $90 before it gets resolved).

Your either out $100 or not, so explaining it as costing $10, while I see where your going, isn't a good explanation to someone who doesn't live in your world.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
February 20th, 2011 at 4:42:43 PM permalink
Quote: thecesspit

Because the cost of the bet is $100 and it either wins $210 or nothing. The VALUE of the bet is -$10 (or the value of the ticket after purchase is $90 before it gets resolved).

Your either out $100 or not, so explaining it as costing $10, while I see where your going, isn't a good explanation to someone who doesn't live in your world.



I've never actually met anyone who doesn't live in "my" world, as in, Earth. Might be fun, though.

The cost of the bet is indeed $10. If there was no vig (the bet paid even money, not -110), then the cost of the bet would be zero. Look at it this way--the cost of the bet is equal to its expected profit to the house. If a $100 bet truly cost $100, then the house would make $100 from every such bet made--which they obviously don't.

The VALUE, as you put it, of the bet is MINUS $10 because you are exchanging $110 in cash for a bet with a mathematical value of $100. You have to look at it in this way--as in, BEFORE the actual outcome. Otherwise, you paddle up an existential creek. If you buy fire insurance, what's its value? Is it zero if your house never burns down? The value of a bet has to be expressed BEFORE the outcome, in terms of relative probabilities and the resultant payoff(s).
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 229
  • Posts: 12735
February 20th, 2011 at 4:52:30 PM permalink
I once spent haf a hour trying to explain to a CASINO DEALER (ok, she dealt poker but did deal BJ at the monte carlo nights, still!) that how she played at third base could not affect if the dealer would bust or not. Completely useless.

Later that night I had the same conversation with one of the walls in the room--better results as the wall didn't keep insisting it could affect the delaer busting.


I now try to avoid "explaining" anything about the math of gaming unless asked. I will discuss it for hours with others who know. To the rest I will let them think that the new 11:10 BJ at the Flamingo is better than 6:5 since 10 is more than 6 and over three times more than 3.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
crazyiam
crazyiam
Joined: Feb 5, 2010
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 44
February 20th, 2011 at 4:56:49 PM permalink
Quote: mkl654321



The cost of the bet is indeed $10. If there was no vig (the bet paid even money, not -110), then the cost of the bet would be zero. Look at it this way--the cost of the bet is equal to its expected profit to the house. If a $100 bet truly cost $100, then the house would make $100 from every such bet made--which they obviously don't.

The VALUE, as you put it, of the bet is MINUS $10 because you are exchanging $110 in cash for a bet with a mathematical value of $100. You have to look at it in this way--as in, BEFORE the actual outcome. Otherwise, you paddle up an existential creek. If you buy fire insurance, what's its value? Is it zero if your house never burns down? The value of a bet has to be expressed BEFORE the outcome, in terms of relative probabilities and the resultant payoff(s).



Unfortunately you are wrong while making a good point. The cost of the best is the EV of the bet. Half the time you lose $110 and half the time you win $100. So on average you bet $220 dollars and win $210. Over two bets you lose $10 making the cost per bet $5.
clarkacal
clarkacal
Joined: Sep 22, 2010
  • Threads: 42
  • Posts: 401
February 20th, 2011 at 5:36:50 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

To the rest I will let them think that the new 11:10 BJ at the Flamingo is better than 6:5 since 10 is more than 6 and over three times more than 3.



11:10 BJ ?! I didn't realize it had gotten that bad. Disgraceful.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 229
  • Posts: 12735
February 20th, 2011 at 6:05:54 PM permalink
Quote: clarkacal

11:10 BJ ?! I didn't realize it had gotten that bad. Disgraceful.



Sorry, I should have mentioned that was a joke.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others

  • Jump to: