Recommended online casinos

Thread Rating:

Wellbush
Wellbush
Wellbush
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 824
Joined: Mar 23, 2021
October 9th, 2021 at 9:41:49 AM permalink
Quote: lilredrooster

Quote: OnceDear

It's a struggle for us all, but I think he is learning, albeit grudgingly.




I usually agree with you but not in this case

he has stated that he has a science degree - he is an educated man

it wouldn't take an educated man this long to grasp this

the concepts being discussed here are not difficult or complex



IMO he is trolling



.
link to original post

and you're wrong!
All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
Wellbush
Wellbush
Wellbush
  • Threads: 11
  • Posts: 824
Joined: Mar 23, 2021
October 9th, 2021 at 9:46:02 AM permalink
Quote: OnceDear

Quote: Wellbush

Quote: lilredrooster

I usually agree with you but not in this case

he has stated that he has a science degree - he is an educated man

it wouldn't take an educated man this long to grasp this

the concepts being discussed here are not difficult or complex



IMO he is trolling



.

  • link to original post



    IMO, I am not trolling. Educated, smedgucated. Whatever. I am not committed to grasping things the way, and at a pace, you or anyone thinks I should. This enterprise (gambling) is, for me, part leisure, part business opportunity. Good luck.

    P.S. I still intend replying to earlier posters.
  • link to original post

    Gambling for business might not be your best idea.
    Have you grasped yet that exploiting the marketing departments of casinos (Advantage Playing) is far, far more lucrative than your proposed gambling with systems.
    Learn at your own pace, but trust in those of us naysayers that actually are trying to help you and are qualified to help you.
    link to original post

    I'm happy to discuss things and fly my own way. I'll adjust if I think it's necessary 🤷
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    OnceDear
    OnceDear
    OnceDear
    • Threads: 63
    • Posts: 7477
    Joined: Jun 1, 2014
    October 9th, 2021 at 9:51:27 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    i am happy to try my strategy, and I've already done so about 4 or 5 times at my local casino in Perth, western Australia! And I lost each time. But, I'm not convinced I can't eventually develop a winnable system. Sorry if that irks!😊

    I will probably try again! Geez, I'm REALLY pushing the dial now!!! The GALL of me!

    What's more, I don't even think I'm wasting my time discussing theory!!!! Now, after all that, is this post nuke-worthy???!!!
    link to original post


    Not nukeworthy at all. It's your time and money.
    As a courtesy to Wellbush, I'll send him a couple of links to forums and resources where systems are embraced, where they are proven to work, where they are exchanged and discussed, even traded and sold, and where naysayers barely get a look in. I'll send him links to places that naysayers seldom tread. Let him fill his boots with mumbo jumbo. Just don't bring it back here and expect to get it fact checked or to be congratulated.
    Once a naysayer establishes that the moon is not made of cheese, he really doesn't argue about what kind of cheese it isn't made of.
    Psalm 25:16 Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted. Proverbs 18:2 A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 9th, 2021 at 9:56:37 AM permalink
    Quote: OnceDear

    Quote: lilredrooster

    I usually agree with you but not in this case

    he has stated that he has a science degree - he is an educated man

    it wouldn't take an educated man this long to grasp this

    the concepts being discussed here are not difficult or complex



    IMO he is trolling



    .

  • link to original post

    My analysis of this as a perceived insult.


    LRR asserts that Wellbush is (by his own assertion) an educated man.
    No Insult there.
    LLR asserts that it wouldn't take an educated man this long to grasp this [By this, I assume the series of concepts presented to WellBush.
    That's LLR's opinion of 'an educated man' and may be correct or not. Of itself it is not an insult.
    LLR draws a conclusion based on those assumptions. He even admits that it is his opinion.
    As I see it, he has presented a logical hypothesis that leads to his opinion. I see no insult there.

    E,g. See these possibilities
    1.Wellbush is Educated but cannot grasp certain concepts that we consider rudimentary.
    2.Wellbush is Educated and can grasp certain concepts that we consider rudimentary, but chooses to troll the forum.

    wrong!
    Quote: OnceDear


    3.Wellbush is not as educated as he thinks he is or claims he is.


    4. Many posters here cannot see what Wellbush can.

    Quote: OnceDear

    All seem reasonable corollaries from the posts that Wellbush has made.

    LLR explored and opined #2
    LLR did not assert #3

    I see no insult.
    YMMV
    *Your Mileage May Vary.
    link to original post

    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    MrV
    MrV
    MrV
    • Threads: 364
    • Posts: 8158
    Joined: Feb 13, 2010
    October 9th, 2021 at 10:19:14 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    Many posters here cannot see what Wellbush can



    Hello, myopia!

    His vision blurry, the acolyte mistook Satan's hand for that of an angel..
    "What, me worry?"
    OnceDear
    OnceDear
    OnceDear
    • Threads: 63
    • Posts: 7477
    Joined: Jun 1, 2014
    October 9th, 2021 at 10:32:06 AM permalink
    Quote: MrV

    Quote: Wellbush

    Many posters here cannot see what Wellbush can



    Hello, myopia!

    His vision blurry, the acolyte mistook Satan's hand for that of an angel..
    link to original post

    I've opened his eyes in a PM. Plenty of fresh thinking 'believers' out there for him to learn from, including a few youtube posts from the guy that developed Martingale for the first time..... Yes. Lot's of those guys.
    I also found this
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLdleF_YbTU
    Psalm 25:16 Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted. Proverbs 18:2 A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 9th, 2021 at 10:33:20 AM permalink
    Quote: Dieter

    Quote: Wellbush

    Huh???
    link to original post



    The house edge is a way of expressing how likely to win or lose a player is.
    The house edge is a product of the rules of the game and the way that the winner is determined.

    Does betting more or less change the rules of the game?
    Does betting more or less change where the ball lands, where the wheel stops, how the dice land, or how the cards come out?

    If the answer is "No*", the house edge is intact.



    *The answer is usually no.
    link to original post

    I see it ALL now Dieter!!! Thankyou! BTW, if I were to GrandMarty and win on my 3rd, 4th, 5th, or whatever bet, I would be in profit, no? And none of my bets adjusted the house edge, or wheel, or dice, or cards! Amazing!
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    OnceDear
    OnceDear
    OnceDear
    • Threads: 63
    • Posts: 7477
    Joined: Jun 1, 2014
    Thanked by
    MichaelBluejay
    October 9th, 2021 at 10:39:19 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    I see it ALL now Dieter!!! Thankyou! BTW, if I were to GrandMarty and win on my 3rd, 4th, 5th, or whatever bet, I would be in profit, no? And none of my bets adjusted the house edge, or wheel, or dice, or cards! Amazing!
    link to original post


    True. Totally meaningless, but true.
    Psalm 25:16 Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted. Proverbs 18:2 A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
    MrV
    MrV
    MrV
    • Threads: 364
    • Posts: 8158
    Joined: Feb 13, 2010
    October 9th, 2021 at 10:57:33 AM permalink
    WB, I hope you do realize that a martingale only works until it doesn't, i.e. until you reach the maximum bet amount permitted.

    Keep doubling your bet and losing and eventually you'll hit that limit and experience a catastrophic loss.

    That is the danger of the martingale: you'll usually win, which can introduce feelings of invincibility, but when you hit that limit and lose you'll want to kick yourself.

    Not that you shouldn't ...
    "What, me worry?"
    OnceDear
    OnceDear
    OnceDear
    • Threads: 63
    • Posts: 7477
    Joined: Jun 1, 2014
    October 9th, 2021 at 11:03:34 AM permalink
    Quote: MrV

    WB, I hope you do realize that a martingale only works until it doesn't, i.e. until you reach the maximum bet amount permitted.

    link to original post


    MrV, You might be surprised to hear that he's had it explained to him many times. He surely does realise it by now. But he seems to find it amusing to call out we naysayers repeatedly.
    Just another 'Believer'
    Save your breath mate.
    Psalm 25:16 Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted. Proverbs 18:2 A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 9th, 2021 at 11:32:41 AM permalink
    Quote: MrV

    WB, I hope you do realize that a martingale only works until it doesn't, i.e. until you reach the maximum bet amount permitted.

    Keep doubling your bet and losing and eventually you'll hit that limit and experience a catastrophic loss.

    That is the danger of the martingale: you'll usually win, which can introduce feelings of invincibility, but when you hit that limit and lose you'll want to kick yourself.

    Not that you shouldn't ...
    link to original post

    Mr V. I am well and truly aware that the Marty is a pathetic type of negative progression to use to make money at any kind of casino. There are a number of much less risky negative progressions that may have merit. I only use the Marty to make my initial point.

    I cannot believe OD has such a primitive understanding of my posts. 🤷I feel like I'm talking to a wall!
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 9th, 2021 at 11:44:47 AM permalink
    Quote: OnceDear

    Quote: MrV

    Quote: Wellbush

    Many posters here cannot see what Wellbush can



    Hello, myopia!

    His vision blurry, the acolyte mistook Satan's hand for that of an angel..
    link to original post

    I've opened his eyes in a PM. Plenty of fresh thinking 'believers' out there for him to learn from, including a few youtube posts from the guy that developed Martingale for the first time..... Yes. Lot's of those guys.
    I also found this
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLdleF_YbTU
    link to original post

    I could easily make the argument OD, that you need to be shown the light. That's how glaring your ability NOT to understand me is🤷

    P.s. I don't need to be shown the light by you, of all people. That's not an insult. It's just my evaluation of how much you comprehend what I post about.

    Put it this way...if I were to assemble a group of scientists to evaluate WB's Paradox based on a debate between you and I, I am fairly sure I would win the debate.

    Also, know that making derisive-like comments about posters you disagree with, comes across as arrogant. Some may argue it is arrogant, but you have your name in green to protect you from a certain amount of repercussions.
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    OnceDear
    OnceDear
    OnceDear
    • Threads: 63
    • Posts: 7477
    Joined: Jun 1, 2014
    October 9th, 2021 at 11:46:12 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    I feel like I'm talking to a wall!
    link to original post

    I know the feeling.
    Psalm 25:16 Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted. Proverbs 18:2 A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 9th, 2021 at 11:50:47 AM permalink
    Quote: OnceDear

    Quote: Wellbush

    I feel like I'm talking to a wall!
    link to original post

    I know the feeling.
    link to original post

    that's a derisive comment that some may take as arrogance. Do you want me to remind you of each and every one of them? Or, are you gonna learn at what must be your lightning speed, unlike WB?
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    MrV
    MrV
    MrV
    • Threads: 364
    • Posts: 8158
    Joined: Feb 13, 2010
    Thanked by
    OnceDear
    October 9th, 2021 at 11:54:50 AM permalink
    It seems to me that the "soundest" , most logical (albeit least "fun") way to gamble would be to bet your entire bankroll at one time on single outcome, e.g. bet it all on player, or black, or PL.

    Win or lose and you're done for that session.

    But we want action, so logic takes a holiday.
    "What, me worry?"
    MichaelBluejay
    MichaelBluejay
    MichaelBluejay
    • Threads: 81
    • Posts: 1619
    Joined: Sep 17, 2010
    October 9th, 2021 at 12:01:06 PM permalink
    Quote: MrV

    It seems to me that the "soundest" , most logical (albeit least "fun") way to gamble would be to bet your entire bankroll at one time on single outcome, e.g. bet it all on player, or black, or PL.link to original post

    Old idea. See my Halfies Betting System.
    Presidential Election polls and odds: https://2605.me/p
    OnceDear
    OnceDear
    OnceDear
    • Threads: 63
    • Posts: 7477
    Joined: Jun 1, 2014
    October 9th, 2021 at 12:24:32 PM permalink
    Quote: MrV

    It seems to me that the "soundest" , most logical (albeit least "fun") way to gamble would be to bet your entire bankroll at one time on single outcome, e.g. bet it all on player, or black, or PL.

    Win or lose and you're done for that session.

    But we want action, so logic takes a holiday.
    link to original post

    On an even money bet, such as Red/Black at roulette, this not only gives you the best chance of doubling your money, but also the highest EV. Still negative, but you only expose your bankroll to the house edge one time. With many smaller bets, you are exposing the same funds to the house edge multiple times as your bankroll ebbs and flows, getting nibbled away repeatedly by that edge.
    Psalm 25:16 Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted. Proverbs 18:2 A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
    MichaelBluejay
    MichaelBluejay
    MichaelBluejay
    • Threads: 81
    • Posts: 1619
    Joined: Sep 17, 2010
    Thanked by
    OnceDear
    October 9th, 2021 at 12:53:54 PM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    So, at this point in time I do think it's possible to overcome the house edge using a negative progression sequence. link to original post

    Items #1 and 4 of Characteristics of a Betting System Believer.


    Quote: Wellbush

    4. Many posters here cannot see what Wellbush can. link to original post

    Quote: Wellbush

    I cannot believe OD has such a primitive understanding of my posts. 🤷I feel like I'm talking to a wall! link to original post

    Quote: Wellbush

    Furthermore, I've already seen enough retorts on WOV to know most posters don't have a clue about underlying theoretical constructs. link to original post

    Item #11 of Characteristics of a Betting System Believer.


    Quote: Wellbush

    Put it this way...if I were to assemble a group of scientists to evaluate WB's Paradox...link to original post

    Quote: Wellbush

    Why don't the forum community concentrate on the discussion, however hot it gets? That discussion being the scientific evaluation of WB's Paradox! link to original post

    Item #14 of Characteristics of a Betting System Believer.


    Quote: Wellbush

    I don't think my initial interest in Ion Saliu says anything about my intelligence or my willingness to learn. link to original post

    Items #15 and 16 of Characteristics of a Betting System Believer.


    Quote: Wellbush

    It wasn't too far back in this thread you tried to convince people that:

    1. People in Australia are allowed to gamble casino slots and table games online; and
    2. That the term 'race' doesn't include a person's nationality.

    This was despite clear evidence I provided to you showing otherwise! link to original post

    Items #15, 16, 17, 18, and 22 of Characteristics of a Betting System Believer. There is no law prohibiting Australians from gambling online (your source was both unreliable and wrong, already pointed out to you, and you haven't provided the cite of the supposed law outlawing online play by Australians, because you can't, because no such law exists.) On race, the traditional definition of "race" by most reliable sources does not include nationality.


    Quote: Wellbush

    Also, know that making derisive-like comments about posters you disagree with, comes across as arrogant. Some may argue it is arrogant, but you have your name in green to protect you from a certain amount of repercussions. link to original post

    Quote: Wellbush

    I suspect I'll be suspended on a technicality. link to original post

    Item #20 of Characteristics of a Betting System Believer.


    Quote: Wellbush

    I feel like I'm talking to a wall!

    Quote: OnceDear

    I know the feeling.

    Quote: Wellbush


    that's a derisive comment that some may take as arrogance. link to original post

    Items #20 and 21 of Characteristics of a Betting System Believer.


    Quote: Wellbush

    Just asking for some strategy to input into a computer, to prove whether a theory works, or not, tells me posters are in number heaven. link to original post

    Items #23 and 24 of Characteristics of a Betting System Believer.


    Quote: Wellbush

    Number crunching is pretty irrelevant for another glaring reason anyway. link to original post

    Item #26 of Characteristics of a Betting System Believer.


    Quote: Wellbush

    And that computer simulation may well give the person the answer it was 'programmed' to provide! link to original post

    Items #28 of Characteristics of a Betting System Believer.


    Quote: Wellbush

    if I were to assemble a group of scientists to evaluate WB's Paradox based on a debate between you and I, I am fairly sure I would win the debate link to original post

    Contradicts your oft-stated assertion that all the experts are wrong and can't comprehend your superior understanding.
    Presidential Election polls and odds: https://2605.me/p
    MDawg
    MDawg
    MDawg
    • Threads: 39
    • Posts: 7300
    Joined: Sep 27, 2018
    October 9th, 2021 at 1:21:59 PM permalink
    Wellbush, one of the pit bosses was once telling me about a player - who the pit boss said is a lifetime winner - who comes to the casino regularly, observes the Baccarat table for a period of time, sometimes long sometimes short, and then makes one larger bet (say, $5000.) per session, and then - win or lose, leaves until the next session.

    I actually observed someone very much like this years ago, who would buy in for about five grand, and then place anywhere from one to five bets per day, always on Player, for $500. each. If won one or two bets, would leave, or once was ahead one or two bets, would leave. Seemed to do all right.

    Of course, the casinos aren't going to comp someone like that much, but this player didn't seem to be there for comps.
    Last edited by: MDawg on Oct 9, 2021
    I tell you it’s wonderful to be here, man. I don’t give a damn who wins or loses. It’s just wonderful to be here with you people. https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/33908-the-adventures-of-mdawg/
    MDawg
    MDawg
    MDawg
    • Threads: 39
    • Posts: 7300
    Joined: Sep 27, 2018
    Thanked by
    Wellbush
    October 9th, 2021 at 1:24:58 PM permalink
    Wellbush, in reality, all of us have limited bankrolls, even the richest man in the world. And then also, no matter how high limits are raised at the casinos, still, they exist, and create a definite ceiling. Plus I don't like the idea of wagering a lot just to try to win a little, or any sort of mechanical progression based on nothing other than having lost the prior hand.

    If you'd like to research it, Terrance Watanabe somehow dumped $204,000,000. - more than he had, ending up broke - in one year in Vegas.
    https://www.pokerlistings.com/poker-s-all-time-greatest-whales-terrance-watanabe
    I assume he was betting all sorts of different ways and varying his bets. Certainly I can't see how he could have lost that much that quickly just flat betting.
    Last edited by: MDawg on Oct 9, 2021
    I tell you it’s wonderful to be here, man. I don’t give a damn who wins or loses. It’s just wonderful to be here with you people. https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/33908-the-adventures-of-mdawg/
    AxelWolf
    AxelWolf
    AxelWolf
    • Threads: 164
    • Posts: 22280
    Joined: Oct 10, 2012
    October 9th, 2021 at 5:58:08 PM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    Wellbush, you are wasting time debating all this. Instead, you could be on your way to making millions online with just a little investigation and a plane ticket. A plane ticket isn't needed but it certainly gets around your assumptions regarding the legality.

  • link to original post

    i'm quite comfy with the info that i've provided, showing casino gaming (not racing or sports betting or lottery) online in australia is illegal. what's wrong with the info that i provided? i would certainly be uncomfortable, as has been highlighted by your fellow american posters, to go against that info.

    it's kinda moot anyway, when i can just wander down to my local casino and gamble anytime i wish
  • link to original post

    I haven't seen anything other than it being illegal to operate and market online casinos and games that are restricted there. Perhaps I missed it. Please copy a law that specifically states it's illegal for players to gamble online(not racing or sports betting or lottery) at casinos that are located outside Australia.

    ?? I've already shown a post covering this detail. I would have to find the actual law, I think, to answer your request for that. I'm not in a hurry to do that, but if you want me to, I may or may not do it. It's a q of time and resources. The post did point out that Australians in Australia needed to use a site that had an Australian licence. It also said, no online australian gaming licence permitted casino games/slots. So any loopholes have effectively been scuttled.

    So how can an Australian, living in Australia, access an oversees (non-australian) gambling site legally? Australians can travel to an overseas jurisdiction, where it's legal to do so. There's no argument there. But that's not the scenario I'm referring to.

    Quote: AxelWolf

    It's not moot because you haven't proven to yourself that you can beat anything aside from online software. If you're confident your system will work at B&M's as well... let me rephrase.
    Wellbush, you are wasting time debating all this. Instead, you could be on your way to making millions by just wandering down to your local casino and gambling anytime you wish.
    link to original post

    i am happy to try my strategy, and I've already done so about 4 or 5 times at my local casino in Perth, western Australia! And I lost each time. But, I'm not convinced I can't eventually develop a winnable system. Sorry if that irks!😊

    I will probably try again! Geez, I'm REALLY pushing the dial now!!! The GALL of me!

    What's more, I don't even think I'm wasting my time discussing theory!!!! Now, after all that, is this post nuke-worthy???!!!
    link to original post

    Translation: I got nothing.
    ♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 10th, 2021 at 4:56:21 AM permalink
    Quote: AxelWolf

    Translation: I got nothing.
    link to original post

    sorry about that. It wasn't intended. There are limits to communication flow on online forums of any kind.
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 10th, 2021 at 5:02:27 AM permalink
    Quote: MDawg

    Wellbush, in reality, all of us have limited bankrolls, even the richest man in the world. And then also, no matter how high limits are raised at the casinos, still, they exist, and create a definite ceiling. Plus I don't like the idea of wagering a lot just to try to win a little, or any sort of mechanical progression based on nothing other than having lost the prior hand.

    If you'd like to research it, Terrance Watanabe somehow dumped $204,000,000. - more than he had, ending up broke - in one year in Vegas.
    https://www.pokerlistings.com/poker-s-all-time-greatest-whales-terrance-watanabe
    I assume he was betting all sorts of different ways and varying his bets. Certainly I can't see how he could have lost that much that quickly just flat betting.
    link to original post

    yes MD, there are probably some common behaviours that orchestrate both wins and losses for gamblers. There may be a progression strategy that can also beat the house.
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 10th, 2021 at 5:37:43 AM permalink
    Quote: Mission146

    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: unJon

    As the runs get longer, the probability of showing a profit gets smaller. At the limit of the run approaching infinite, the probability of showing a profit approaches zero. But that probability approach is always from a positive number so there’s always some (increasingly shrinking) probability of showing a profit.
    link to original post

    I don't quite get your comment here UJ. A gambler losing his first bet would be immediately in negative territory. So how can the probability approach be from a positive number?
    link to original post



    If I understood his post correctly, then he was saying that after n number of trials (including one trial as n can be one) that there will always be some non-zero probability of showing a profit, though it becomes an increasingly smaller probability as you approach infinity such that many calculators would even just call it zero.

    Think of Craps as an example, if I bet the Pass Line, then there is a .4929 or 49.29% probability that I will be showing a profit after one outcome.

    However, even if I lost, then the probability of my eventually showing a profit would still be a positive number. For example, I could immediately win two Pass Line bets in a row, in which event, I would be showing a profit.

    More simply put, an event cannot have a negative probability. The probability is either zero or something (however infinitesimal as infinity is approached) greater than zero.
    link to original post

    if that explains UJ's position, then it doesn't change the serious way WB's Paradox undermines the math of -EV when it comes to gambling.

    UJ saying that there is a chance that the gambler is in front, if he uses progressive betting, does not alter the fact that the math says that the MAJORITY of players will be in debt using progressive strategies over the long term.

    Therefore, it does NOT change the stark reality of WB's Paradox, but just confirms it.

    -EV would have no argument from me for flat betting. It has every argument from me if we're talking about progressive betting.

    Furthermore, I think OD knows it, and possibly the Wizard. OD's rebuttal of WB's Paradox is seriously lame. Why is it seriously lame? Because he can't rebutt it! He, and every other gambling mathematician on the planet for the last 400+ years, have got some answering to do, if they cannot logically rebutt Wellbush's Paradox.

    That's not pie in the sky thinking and it's not trolling. It's just the brutal reality of where the discussion ends up.
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 10th, 2021 at 5:51:15 AM permalink
    Quote: Dieter

    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: Dieter

    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: Dieter

    There are two limits to any progression.
    The first is your bankroll.
    The second is the table limit.

    If you cannot continue the sequence, you may not end in profit.
    link to original post

    yeah, I know that Dieter. What has one's bankroll and table limits got to do with the mathematical theory?

    I will get into the idea of creating a 'negative progression sequence' that is much less likely to hit table limits, and much less in need of a significant bankroll. For now, I'm looking at proven theory.
    link to original post



    Theories are generally more useful if they can be put into practice.
    link to original post

    yes, but if you're gonna put something into practice, as I am trying to do, isn't it good to know if it stacks up theoretically?

    I think it's possible to put the theory into practice. That's the second endgame here. Unfortunately, many seem to immediately think "Martingale! Martingale!" "Bankroll! Bankroll!" "Table limits! Table limits!" and the discussion is scuttled before any headway.

    So the first thing is getting people to accept the theory. Then we can make a start on the practicalities of WB's Paradox.
    link to original post



    Going into metaphor; if you've got a hammer, try to find a nail that isn't bent.
    link to original post

    and WB's Paradox is not a bent nail or hammer! The math of -EV might be?
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 10th, 2021 at 5:59:39 AM permalink
    Quote: OnceDear

    Quote: Wellbush

    I see it ALL now Dieter!!! Thankyou! BTW, if I were to GrandMarty and win on my 3rd, 4th, 5th, or whatever bet, I would be in profit, no? And none of my bets adjusted the house edge, or wheel, or dice, or cards! Amazing!
    link to original post


    True. Totally meaningless, but true.
    link to original post

    yes, totally meaningless for those who wanna sweep WB's Paradox under the carpet for their own obscure benefit!
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 10th, 2021 at 6:03:35 AM permalink
    Quote: OnceDear

    Quote: MrV

    WB, I hope you do realize that a martingale only works until it doesn't, i.e. until you reach the maximum bet amount permitted.

    link to original post


    MrV, You might be surprised to hear that he's had it explained to him many times. He surely does realise it by now. But he seems to find it amusing to call out we naysayers repeatedly.
    Just another 'Believer'
    Save your breath mate.
    link to original post

    and mrV, you may be surprised to know I've engaged in numerous discussions with OD over WB's Paradox. What has he learned? Probably very, very, little from the answers I've been getting.
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    lilredrooster
    lilredrooster
    lilredrooster
    • Threads: 232
    • Posts: 6572
    Joined: May 8, 2015
    October 10th, 2021 at 6:06:21 AM permalink
    ___________


    what is amazing is that so many come to this site with their betting system voodoo even though this is a site with so many knowledgeable people who will never accept their premise

    they have virtually zero chance of convincing those who know

    they provide no evidence or proof - just their anecdotes

    when if they could prove it was true they would have something that would win them the Nobel Prize

    why would they even care about convincing WOV experts?

    such as sad and hopeless waste of time

    rage on voodoo gamblers - those who respond only do so to protect newbies from their endless fountains of misinformation



    these voodoo promoters think they're much smarter than they really are - any math college professor would give their inane ramblings a great big "F"


    .
    Please don't feed the trolls
    AxelWolf
    AxelWolf
    AxelWolf
    • Threads: 164
    • Posts: 22280
    Joined: Oct 10, 2012
    October 10th, 2021 at 6:08:38 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    Translation: I got nothing.
    link to original post

    sorry about that. It wasn't intended. There are limits to communication flow on online forums of any kind.
    link to original post

    I guess the only flow that you truly have to worry about is card flow.

    Just let me know when you're ready to make your millions online. I'll show you how to do it 100% legally from the comfort of your own home. I don't even want you to take my word for it regarding the legality of what I would be proposing, just call up your Gaming jurisdictional Authority and ask. Better yet, email them and get it in writing.
    ♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 10th, 2021 at 6:19:52 AM permalink
    Quote: lilredrooster

    ___________


    what is amazing is that so many come to this site with their betting system voodoo even though this is a site with so many knowledgeable people who will never accept their premise

    they have virtually zero chance of convincing those who know

    I don't think I've been talking about any betting system in any detail here. If so, please point it out? If not, then why are you stating such?

    Quote: lilredrooster

    they provide no evidence or proof - just their anecdotes

    haven't you been reading this thread? I thought you were educated? That's not an insult. I just find your comments striking in the way you seem to think the information provided in this thread has had no meaning.

    Quote: lilredrooster

    when if they could prove it was true they would have something that would win them the Nobel Prize

    why would they even care about convincing WOV experts?

    such as sad and hopeless waste of time

    rage on voodoo gamblers - those who respond only do so to protect newbies from their endless fountains of misinformation



    these voodoo promoters think they're much smarter than they really are - any math college professor would give their ramblings a great big "F"


    .
    link to original post

    I seriously q whether you understand what I've been writing about in this thread.🤷
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 10th, 2021 at 6:22:17 AM permalink
    Quote: AxelWolf

    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    Translation: I got nothing.
    link to original post

    sorry about that. It wasn't intended. There are limits to communication flow on online forums of any kind.
    link to original post

    I guess the only flow that you truly have to worry about is card flow.

    Just let me know when you're ready to make your millions online. I'll show you how to do it 100% legally from the comfort of your own home. I don't even want you to take my word for it regarding the legality of what I would be proposing, just call up your Gaming jurisdictional Authority and ask. Better yet, email them and get it in writing.
    link to original post

    I don't need to 🤷. You obviously either don't believe what I've made pretty clear in the posts, or you don't understand it?
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    Dieter
    Administrator
    Dieter
    Dieter
    • Threads: 16
    • Posts: 5553
    Joined: Jul 23, 2014
    October 10th, 2021 at 6:22:33 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: Dieter


    Going into metaphor; if you've got a hammer, try to find a nail that isn't bent.
    link to original post

    and WB's Paradox is not a bent nail or hammer! The math of -EV might be?
    link to original post



    The EV math is intact.
    Your next wager on the wheel is still more likely to lose than win.

    Edited to fix a formatting omission.
    May the cards fall in your favor.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 10th, 2021 at 6:28:34 AM permalink
    Quote: Dieter

    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: Dieter


    Going into metaphor; if you've got a hammer, try to find a nail that isn't bent.
    link to original post

    and WB's Paradox is not a bent nail or hammer! The math of -EV might be?
    link to original post



    The EV math is intact.
    Your next wager on the wheel is still more likely to lose than win.

    Edited to fix a formatting omission.
    link to original post

    if you believe the math is correct when -EV is applied to gambling, yes
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    AxelWolf
    AxelWolf
    AxelWolf
    • Threads: 164
    • Posts: 22280
    Joined: Oct 10, 2012
    October 10th, 2021 at 6:30:53 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    Translation: I got nothing.
    link to original post

    sorry about that. It wasn't intended. There are limits to communication flow on online forums of any kind.
    link to original post

    I guess the only flow that you truly have to worry about is card flow.

    Just let me know when you're ready to make your millions online. I'll show you how to do it 100% legally from the comfort of your own home. I don't even want you to take my word for it regarding the legality of what I would be proposing, just call up your Gaming jurisdictional Authority and ask. Better yet, email them and get it in writing.
    link to original post

    I don't need to 🤷. You obviously either don't believe what I've made pretty clear in the posts, or you don't understand it?
    link to original post

    Please enlighten me as to what you have made clear.
    ♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
    lilredrooster
    lilredrooster
    lilredrooster
    • Threads: 232
    • Posts: 6572
    Joined: May 8, 2015
    October 10th, 2021 at 6:51:13 AM permalink
    Quote: AxelWolf



    Just let me know when you're ready to make your millions online. I'll show you how to do it 100% legally from the comfort of your own home.


    you have a better chance of winning the Powerball lottery 3 times in a row than there is of what you suggested above actually happening


    .
    Please don't feed the trolls
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 10th, 2021 at 7:04:14 AM permalink
    Quote: AxelWolf

    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    Translation: I got nothing.
    link to original post

    sorry about that. It wasn't intended. There are limits to communication flow on online forums of any kind.
    link to original post

    I guess the only flow that you truly have to worry about is card flow.

    Just let me know when you're ready to make your millions online. I'll show you how to do it 100% legally from the comfort of your own home. I don't even want you to take my word for it regarding the legality of what I would be proposing, just call up your Gaming jurisdictional Authority and ask. Better yet, email them and get it in writing.
    link to original post

    I don't need to 🤷. You obviously either don't believe what I've made pretty clear in the posts, or you don't understand it?
    link to original post

    Please enlighten me as to what you have made clear.
    link to original post

    if you haven't understood what I've already made clear AW, I don't think reiterating things is gonna help. I would need to talk to you in person.
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    OnceDear
    OnceDear
    OnceDear
    • Threads: 63
    • Posts: 7477
    Joined: Jun 1, 2014
    October 10th, 2021 at 7:34:40 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    ... I've engaged in numerous discussions with OD over WB's Paradox. What has he learned? Probably very, very, little from the answers I've been getting.
    link to original post

    Quote: OnceDear {think bubble}

    ... What has he learned? Probably very, very, little from the answers I've been Giving.

    Psalm 25:16 Turn to me and be gracious to me, for I am lonely and afflicted. Proverbs 18:2 A fool finds no satisfaction in trying to understand, for he would rather express his own opinion.
    AxelWolf
    AxelWolf
    AxelWolf
    • Threads: 164
    • Posts: 22280
    Joined: Oct 10, 2012
    October 10th, 2021 at 7:49:30 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    Translation: I got nothing.
    link to original post

    sorry about that. It wasn't intended. There are limits to communication flow on online forums of any kind.
    link to original post

    I guess the only flow that you truly have to worry about is card flow.

    Just let me know when you're ready to make your millions online. I'll show you how to do it 100% legally from the comfort of your own home. I don't even want you to take my word for it regarding the legality of what I would be proposing, just call up your Gaming jurisdictional Authority and ask. Better yet, email them and get it in writing.
    link to original post

    I don't need to 🤷. You obviously either don't believe what I've made pretty clear in the posts, or you don't understand it?
    link to original post

    Please enlighten me as to what you have made clear.
    link to original post

    if you haven't understood what I've already made clear AW, I don't think reiterating things is gonna help. I would need to talk to you in person.
    link to original post

    That might be true, but breifly humor me one last time please.
    ♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
    unJon
    unJon
    unJon
    • Threads: 14
    • Posts: 4602
    Joined: Jul 1, 2018
    Thanked by
    SOOPOO
    October 10th, 2021 at 8:07:26 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: Mission146

    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: unJon

    As the runs get longer, the probability of showing a profit gets smaller. At the limit of the run approaching infinite, the probability of showing a profit approaches zero. But that probability approach is always from a positive number so there’s always some (increasingly shrinking) probability of showing a profit.
    link to original post

    I don't quite get your comment here UJ. A gambler losing his first bet would be immediately in negative territory. So how can the probability approach be from a positive number?
    link to original post



    If I understood his post correctly, then he was saying that after n number of trials (including one trial as n can be one) that there will always be some non-zero probability of showing a profit, though it becomes an increasingly smaller probability as you approach infinity such that many calculators would even just call it zero.

    Think of Craps as an example, if I bet the Pass Line, then there is a .4929 or 49.29% probability that I will be showing a profit after one outcome.

    However, even if I lost, then the probability of my eventually showing a profit would still be a positive number. For example, I could immediately win two Pass Line bets in a row, in which event, I would be showing a profit.

    More simply put, an event cannot have a negative probability. The probability is either zero or something (however infinitesimal as infinity is approached) greater than zero.
    link to original post

    if that explains UJ's position, then it doesn't change the serious way WB's Paradox undermines the math of -EV when it comes to gambling.

    UJ saying that there is a chance that the gambler is in front, if he uses progressive betting, does not alter the fact that the math says that the MAJORITY of players will be in debt using progressive strategies over the long term.

    Therefore, it does NOT change the stark reality of WB's Paradox, but just confirms it.

    -EV would have no argument from me for flat betting. It has every argument from me if we're talking about progressive betting.

    Furthermore, I think OD knows it, and possibly the Wizard. OD's rebuttal of WB's Paradox is seriously lame. Why is it seriously lame? Because he can't rebutt it! He, and every other gambling mathematician on the planet for the last 400+ years, have got some answering to do, if they cannot logically rebutt Wellbush's Paradox.

    That's not pie in the sky thinking and it's not trolling. It's just the brutal reality of where the discussion ends up.
    link to original post



    I’m not trolling you back when I say I don’t see the paradox.

    The probability of losing approaches zero. And the loss if you lose approaches infinity. And the approach towards those two goals balance to equal the house edge times the average wager. The math works and the results do not sound absurd to me. So where’s the paradox?
    The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 10th, 2021 at 9:47:13 AM permalink
    Quote: unJon

    I’m not trolling you back when I say I don’t see the paradox.

    The probability of losing approaches zero.

    you're gonna have to bear with me UJ while I find out how the math vocab and thinking works.

    If "the probability of losing approaches zero," does that mean the longer a gambler plays, the less chance he will lose?link to original post

    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 10th, 2021 at 9:52:56 AM permalink
    Quote: AxelWolf

    That might be true, but breifly humor me one last time please.
    link to original post

    mods, can you do something about AW? With this post it's blatantly obvious that AW has been trolling me for weeks. Just follow the conversation back through that he's been having with me, constantly pretending that he hasn't understood me.
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    Dieter
    Administrator
    Dieter
    Dieter
    • Threads: 16
    • Posts: 5553
    Joined: Jul 23, 2014
    October 10th, 2021 at 9:55:09 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    That might be true, but breifly humor me one last time please.
    link to original post

    mods, can you do something about AW? With this post it's blatantly obvious that AW has been trolling me for weeks. Just follow the conversation back through that he's been having with me, constantly pretending that he hasn't understood me.
    link to original post



    I haven't understood you either.
    May the cards fall in your favor.
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 10th, 2021 at 9:59:51 AM permalink
    Quote: Dieter

    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    That might be true, but breifly humor me one last time please.
    link to original post

    mods, can you do something about AW? With this post it's blatantly obvious that AW has been trolling me for weeks. Just follow the conversation back through that he's been having with me, constantly pretending that he hasn't understood me.
    link to original post



    I haven't understood you either.
    link to original post

    your not understanding me about WB's Paradox is different to AW's not understanding me about why Australians cannot gamble with casino games online. If you read AW's posts with me, you should be able to see what I'm suggesting he's been doing.
    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    AxelWolf
    AxelWolf
    AxelWolf
    • Threads: 164
    • Posts: 22280
    Joined: Oct 10, 2012
    October 10th, 2021 at 10:16:31 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    That might be true, but breifly humor me one last time please.
    link to original post

    mods, can you do something about AW? With this post it's blatantly obvious that AW has been trolling me for weeks. Just follow the conversation back through that he's been having with me, constantly pretending that he hasn't understood me.
    link to original post

    How is It blatantly obvious that I've been trolling you for weeks? It's to my understanding that you believe there is a system that can beat -EV games. Basically, you said you had found the secret sauce to beat all online software.
    I pointed out if that's the case you can be making millions of dollars online. You came up with some mumbo jumbo about it being illegal to gamble online. I asked you to show me a law that states it's illegal for you to gamble online. You haven't been able to provide that, because it's just not true. I'm not the only one that pointed that out.

    I asked if you heard of planes, you said, "no"

    Fast forward: I said I will show you a way to use your system from the comfort of your own home legally, and that you could verify with your gaming authorities that it's not illegal what I would be proposing.

    I'm trying to help you make your millions. How is that trolling?
    ♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
    Mission146
    Mission146
    Mission146
    • Threads: 142
    • Posts: 16832
    Joined: May 15, 2012
    October 10th, 2021 at 10:29:02 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    if that explains UJ's position, then it doesn't change the serious way WB's Paradox undermines the math of -EV when it comes to gambling.

    UJ saying that there is a chance that the gambler is in front, if he uses progressive betting, does not alter the fact that the math says that the MAJORITY of players will be in debt using progressive strategies over the long term.

    Therefore, it does NOT change the stark reality of WB's Paradox, but just confirms it.

    -EV would have no argument from me for flat betting. It has every argument from me if we're talking about progressive betting.

    Furthermore, I think OD knows it, and possibly the Wizard. OD's rebuttal of WB's Paradox is seriously lame. Why is it seriously lame? Because he can't rebutt it! He, and every other gambling mathematician on the planet for the last 400+ years, have got some answering to do, if they cannot logically rebutt Wellbush's Paradox.

    That's not pie in the sky thinking and it's not trolling. It's just the brutal reality of where the discussion ends up.
    link to original post



    1.) You have failed to ever present an actual paradox.

    2.) Even if you had, it would do nothing vis-a-vis the concept of EV. You seem to be unable, at least in your posts, to separate the concept of expectation and what actually does or does not, in fact, happen to every single individual person on the planet.

    Beyond that, probability plays a role in virtually every aspect of our lives...including whether or not, for instance, I will suffer a massive coronary within the next five seconds. If nothing else, gambling has a more readily quantifiable expectation than most other things in life.
    https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
    Mission146
    Mission146
    Mission146
    • Threads: 142
    • Posts: 16832
    Joined: May 15, 2012
    October 10th, 2021 at 10:34:49 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    and WB's Paradox is not a bent nail or hammer! The math of -EV might be?
    link to original post



    The math of EV is often ridiculously simple.

    If you follow my discussions with TuttiGym at all, then you will see that he ends up backed into the same corner about once a week. If you won't play a game, with a fair coin, in which you pay me $1.00 if it lands heads and I pay you $0.10 if it lands tails, then you acknowledge that EV:

    A.) Exists

    AND:

    B.) Matters.

    While it wouldn't strictly be considered a Martingale anymore, you could design a system like the Grand Martingale with the goal of winning all previous losses on a trial (plus one unit) back, of course, it's only going to be a matter of time (and not all that much time) until a losing series screws you over.

    You would not play my coin-flipping game because it is unfair...which is the point of casino games. They are usually fundamentally mathematically, "Unfair," just some more than others.
    https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
    Mission146
    Mission146
    Mission146
    • Threads: 142
    • Posts: 16832
    Joined: May 15, 2012
    Thanked by
    OnceDear
    October 10th, 2021 at 10:35:42 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    and mrV, you may be surprised to know I've engaged in numerous discussions with OD over WB's Paradox. What has he learned? Probably very, very, little from the answers I've been getting.
    link to original post



    He and I have something in common; we both learned very, very, little from our discussions with you. I have no problem admitting that.
    https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
    AxelWolf
    AxelWolf
    AxelWolf
    • Threads: 164
    • Posts: 22280
    Joined: Oct 10, 2012
    October 10th, 2021 at 10:38:22 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: Dieter

    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: AxelWolf

    That might be true, but breifly humor me one last time please.
    link to original post

    mods, can you do something about AW? With this post it's blatantly obvious that AW has been trolling me for weeks. Just follow the conversation back through that he's been having with me, constantly pretending that he hasn't understood me.
    link to original post



    I haven't understood you either.
    link to original post

    your not understanding me about WB's Paradox is different to AW's not understanding me about why Australians cannot gamble with casino games online. If you read AW's posts with me, you should be able to see what I'm suggesting he's been doing.
    link to original post

    How can I understand something that isn't factual?

    Even so, I suggest you re-read what I said carefully. "Just let me know when you're ready to make your millions online. I'll show you how to do it 100% legally from the comfort of your own home. I don't even want you to take my word for it regarding the legality of what I would be proposing, just call up your Gaming jurisdictional Authority and ask. Better yet, email them and get it in writing."

    For the life of me, I can't figure out how if the gaming Authority tells you something isn't illegal how you could still insist it is?

    I think it's quite obvious that your resistance to any such thing is due to the fact that if I can prove a way to solve the problem, it would no longer give you any excuses, and this entire charade would be over.
    ♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    Wellbush
    • Threads: 11
    • Posts: 824
    Joined: Mar 23, 2021
    October 10th, 2021 at 10:59:29 AM permalink
    Quote: Mission146

    Quote: Wellbush

    ]okay UJ. i take it your serious then. if you sat on the believer's side of the fence, you may be sceptical of naysayer requests also.

    Wellbush paradox:

    1. negative progression sequences mean the gambler continuing along the sequence will always return to a profit (this is theoretical math. it does not take into account table minimums/maximums, nor the size of the player's bankroll).

    2. -EV says the gambler always loses.

    the above two statements cannot co-exist. it's a paradox.

  • link to original post



    Okay, you're getting the quick version of my counterarguments since you managed to offer a premise.

    1.) To your first point, I would like to discuss the following three things:

    A.) If we instead ground ourselves and have a discussion based on an actually possible reality, this argument is screwed. The reason why it is screwed is because you could pick any finite number of consecutive losing decisions that you want to, and that would eventually come to fruition.

    146, I'm walking back further in your historical post to this point. I will go through your post slowly and meticulously, so I understand you. If this isn't to your liking, you don't have to proceed with the discussion.

    I stopped at this point because I don't know what you mean when you say "you could pick any finite number of losing decisions that you want to, and that would eventually come to fruition." Are you talking about the gambler making decisions using a negative progression strategy, or something else?link to original post

    All persons reading my posts gamble at their own risk, as I do. I don't ordinarily dispute math. I may dispute math I don't understand, or if I think it's faulty. I am not a conspiracy theorist.
    unJon
    unJon
    unJon
    • Threads: 14
    • Posts: 4602
    Joined: Jul 1, 2018
    October 10th, 2021 at 11:34:41 AM permalink
    Quote: Wellbush

    Quote: unJon

    I’m not trolling you back when I say I don’t see the paradox.

    The probability of losing approaches zero.

    you're gonna have to bear with me UJ while I find out how the math vocab and thinking works.

    If "the probability of losing approaches zero," does that mean the longer a gambler plays, the less chance he will lose?link to original post


    link to original post



    No. I’m postulating an approaching infinity number of gamblers with approaching infinity bankrolls playing a game with an approaching infinity max bet. And they are all Marty or Grand Marty players. And they have some win stop when they never play again.

    And a number of them approaching 0% lose an amount approaching infinity. And all the rest (a number approaching 100%) are winners of the win stop amount.

    And the casino has won a number approaching infinity times the number of losing players (approaching 0%) minus all the win stops times the number of players approaching 100%. Which will mathematically be the house edge times the average bet (in the limit approaching all those infinities and zeros).
    The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
    RSS Feed
    • Jump to: