Thread Rating:

mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
September 2nd, 2010 at 12:15:43 AM permalink
Quote: chook


I think the problem is how frequently you could reasonably expect these abnormal events to occur.



But ay, there's the rub. By definition, abnormal events won't occur very frequently, so we'll lack a sufficient sample size to draw a definitive conclusion in time to save ourselves. An abnormal event occuring twice, or three times as often as it "should", isn't by itself cause for suspicion unless it's SO abnormal that its happening even a second time is suspect. If Jessica Alba comes up to me on the street, leaps on me, rips my clothes off, and rapes me right there on the sidewalk, that's a statistical aberration. If she does that next week to me in the same location, that's a strange coincidence. If she does it the next week too, something suspicious is DEFINITELY going on.

(Part of the value of my posts is the relevant, real-life examples I provide.)
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
scudder
scudder
Joined: Aug 30, 2010
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 23
September 2nd, 2010 at 12:22:14 AM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

Quote: chook


I think the problem is how frequently you could reasonably expect these abnormal events to occur.



But ay, there's the rub. By definition, abnormal events won't occur very frequently, so we'll lack a sufficient sample size to draw a definitive conclusion in time to save ourselves. An abnormal event occuring twice, or three times as often as it "should", isn't by itself cause for suspicion unless it's SO abnormal that its happening even a second time is suspect. If Jessica Alba comes up to me on the street, leaps on me, rips my clothes off, and rapes me right there on the sidewalk, that's a statistical aberration. If she does that next week to me in the same location, that's a strange coincidence. If she does it the next week too, something suspicious is DEFINITELY going on.

(Part of the value of my posts is the relevant, real-life examples I provide.)



I think you've (perhaps in passing :)) made another point. The fact that an unusual event is happening is not nearly as important as WHY it's happening, and for that you'd need to look outside of mathematics. Perhaps at the hidden camera in the breakroom :)
chook
chook
Joined: Jul 5, 2010
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 113
September 2nd, 2010 at 12:35:28 AM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

Quote: chook


I think the problem is how frequently you could reasonably expect these abnormal events to occur.



But ay, there's the rub. By definition, abnormal events won't occur very frequently, so we'll lack a sufficient sample size to draw a definitive conclusion in time to save ourselves. An abnormal event occuring twice, or three times as often as it "should", isn't by itself cause for suspicion unless it's SO abnormal that its happening even a second time is suspect. If Jessica Alba comes up to me on the street, leaps on me, rips my clothes off, and rapes me right there on the sidewalk, that's a statistical aberration. If she does that next week to me in the same location, that's a strange coincidence. If she does it the next week too, something suspicious is DEFINITELY going on.

(Part of the value of my posts is the relevant, real-life examples I provide.)




Without specific data it is all hypothetical, but if it is a regular occurrence, for a number of different players, you are entitled to be suspicious.

As for Jessica, and inappropriate touching, I wouldn't hold my breath. Paris or LiLo maybe.
You can't trust a dog to mind your food.
SanchoPanza
SanchoPanza
Joined: May 10, 2010
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 3489
September 2nd, 2010 at 7:49:56 AM permalink
Quote: superrick

I can tell you positively, that one of the manufacture of dice here in Vegas does not balance the dice before they are sold!



Thanks! That explains why I enjoy my results so thoroughly in Las Vegas. Not so much, though, in Atlantic City, where they spin the cubes before opening each table.
Headlock
Headlock
Joined: Feb 9, 2010
  • Threads: 22
  • Posts: 315
September 2nd, 2010 at 10:59:01 AM permalink
scudder, thank you. I think we share the same views in this regard, and you are one of the few who recognized that the question was whether or not gaming regulators are watching out for us, the gamblers.

I posted in another thread, that I have had some incredibly bad luck recently at craps. If I lose EVERY SINGLE BET I make, that's just bad luck. It can never be proven that a casino cheated even if I lose every single bet.

Last year, I lost almost $40,000. I'm not crying about it, or saying I was cheated. I can afford it, and for the most part I had some fun. But I play craps almost exclusively, with PL and 2 come bets with full odds, mostly 10x odds at the casino I frequent. The house edge in that case is .18%. If I pushed $10,000,000 across the felt (a not inconsiderable sum) over the course of a year, I should expect to lose about $18,000. So I have to ask, was I really, really, really unlucky, or is there something else to be considered?
teddys
teddys
Joined: Nov 14, 2009
  • Threads: 150
  • Posts: 5444
September 2nd, 2010 at 1:28:28 PM permalink
So you lost twice as much as expectation. That's not bad enough to justify cheating, in my opinion. A VP-playing friend played $10,000,000 worth of video poker on $1 Pick 'Em and lost $20,000 in one year. That's a 99.95% return game, with an expected loss of $5,000. The variance is 15. I don't know the variance of a pass line bet with 10X odds but I think it's around 3 or 4? I just think you hit the really bad end of the variance curve. But maybe they were cheated too...
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4
Headlock
Headlock
Joined: Feb 9, 2010
  • Threads: 22
  • Posts: 315
September 2nd, 2010 at 1:40:18 PM permalink
Quote: teddys

So you lost twice as much as expectation. That's not bad enough to justify cheating, in my opinion. A VP-playing friend played $10,000,000 worth of video poker on $1 Pick 'Em and lost $20,000 in one year. That's a 99.95% return game, with an expected loss of $5,000. The variance is 15. I don't know the variance of a pass line bet with 10X odds but I think it's around 3 or 4? I just think you hit the really bad end of the variance curve. But maybe they were cheated too...



Sorry I wasn't clear about the $10,000,000. I doubt that I wagered anywhere near $10,000,000. I don't know how to estimate the amount I actually wagered, but I was guessing it was much less than $10,000,000 - indicating my results were much worse than 2 times expectation.

And I would not cheat the casino in any event. Their countermeasures are much stronger than mine. ;)
Headlock
Headlock
Joined: Feb 9, 2010
  • Threads: 22
  • Posts: 315
September 2nd, 2010 at 2:53:29 PM permalink
I was thinking about this some more, and maybe $10,000,000 per year is possible. But compare to video poker: At $5 times 600 hands per hour, it would take 3,333 hours to run through $10,000,000. My gut feeling is that VP runs the dollars through much faster than craps. And I'm not bettting big $. Anyway, I was using $10,000,000 in my example as what I thought was a ridiculously high number.
scudder
scudder
Joined: Aug 30, 2010
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 23
September 2nd, 2010 at 3:16:46 PM permalink
Quote: Headlock

scudder, thank you. I think we share the same views in this regard, and you are one of the few who recognized that the question was whether or not gaming regulators are watching out for us, the gamblers.

I posted in another thread, that I have had some incredibly bad luck recently at craps. If I lose EVERY SINGLE BET I make, that's just bad luck. It can never be proven that a casino cheated even if I lose every single bet.

Last year, I lost almost $40,000. I'm not crying about it, or saying I was cheated. I can afford it, and for the most part I had some fun. But I play craps almost exclusively, with PL and 2 come bets with full odds, mostly 10x odds at the casino I frequent. The house edge in that case is .18%. If I pushed $10,000,000 across the felt (a not inconsiderable sum) over the course of a year, I should expect to lose about $18,000. So I have to ask, was I really, really, really unlucky, or is there something else to be considered?



If you wanted you could calculate exactly how probable losing $40,000 is given a known bet size and known house edge. Assuming your 0.18% edge is correct (not saying it isn't, I just don't know off the top of my head), then you also have to look at variance, which would increase as your bet size increased. Also remember that playing 10X odds increases your variance substantially as well.

Also, you've really piqued my interest in the whole oversight thing. I've always assumed someone was sorta-kinda watching over things, and I suspect that the NGC is pretty strict and well-run as they have some massive reputations to uphold, but I do wonder about my local "indian" casino and how effective their oversight is. In every case I can think of the oversight entities are funded either directly by the casinos themselves or indirectly through taxes, so of course there's at least the potential for a conflict of interest.

I have always believed (with absolutely no evidence to back it up) that Nevada and Las Vegas especially were special cases since massive corporations run the casinos there, for the most part. Especially now, massive banks are behind the corporations, and it simply wouldn't make sense for all these public companies to risk billions in profits by swiping an extra "quarter" off someone's stack or slipping in a loaded set of dice. The idea that a casino would see a worthwhile profit by doing either of these things is absurd to me. I've seen dealers make mistakes and correct them, and I've seen pit bosses pay patrons who swear they asked the stickman to put that hardway back up when everyone at the table knows damn well that they forgot. The fact is that no one person can do much to a casino's bottom line, unless you're playing at the highest levels. If casinos wanted to nickel and dime us to death they'd raise the room rates by $5 a night or bump the price of a slice of pizza up by 50 cents. No one would even notice.
Headlock
Headlock
Joined: Feb 9, 2010
  • Threads: 22
  • Posts: 315
September 2nd, 2010 at 7:34:36 PM permalink
Quote: scudder

If you wanted you could calculate exactly how probable losing $40,000 is given a known bet size and known house edge. Assuming your 0.18% edge is correct (not saying it isn't, I just don't know off the top of my head), then you also have to look at variance, which would increase as your bet size increased. Also remember that playing 10X odds increases your variance substantially as well.


I do want. I don't know how.

Quote: scudder

Also, you've really piqued my interest in the whole oversight thing. I've always assumed someone was sorta-kinda watching over things, and I suspect that the NGC is pretty strict and well-run as they have some massive reputations to uphold, but I do wonder about my local "indian" casino and how effective their oversight is. In every case I can think of the oversight entities are funded either directly by the casinos themselves or indirectly through taxes, so of course there's at least the potential for a conflict of interest.

I have always believed (with absolutely no evidence to back it up) that Nevada and Las Vegas especially were special cases since massive corporations run the casinos there, for the most part. Especially now, massive banks are behind the corporations, and it simply wouldn't make sense for all these public companies to risk billions in profits by swiping an extra "quarter" off someone's stack or slipping in a loaded set of dice. The idea that a casino would see a worthwhile profit by doing either of these things is absurd to me. I've seen dealers make mistakes and correct them, and I've seen pit bosses pay patrons who swear they asked the stickman to put that hardway back up when everyone at the table knows damn well that they forgot. The fact is that no one person can do much to a casino's bottom line, unless you're playing at the highest levels. If casinos wanted to nickel and dime us to death they'd raise the room rates by $5 a night or bump the price of a slice of pizza up by 50 cents. No one would even notice.



I'm not going to say casinos cheat, or would cheat if they had the opportunity, but I think if they could increase the edge on table games or slots just by a fraction of a percent, it would result in millions, not nickels and dimes.

  • Jump to: