Bitcoin jackpot 728x90

Author Topic: Long term fallacies  (Read 4303 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1571
  • Thanked: 239 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #45 on: June 03, 2017, 11:04:27 AM »
Congratulations Scepticus, I assume you can repeat this success over and over again, am I right?
However, you should know that RNG's are like slot machines and the only true test is from the wheels, that's the real deal!
You might win win consistently, I don't doubt about it because I know it's possible, but you are not winning with what you want us to believe, with what you claim that you win.
There is key for consistent profit and you already know it, it's a mathematical one.
 

MrPerfect.

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1376
  • Thanked: 795 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #46 on: June 03, 2017, 11:23:27 AM »

I am with Blue Angel  on this one Mr.P. You claim that no one other than an AP has posted anything interesting on this forum.  I think they have, It is just that you AP are not the least bit interested in anything other than AP.
Not really... lm genuinely interested to see how to explore negative situation, use triggers reasonably ( with proven clear reason)...ets.
    You never know what human mind may come up with, sometimes it can be useful. Did you ever hear the term " brain storm"? It's when people with different knolidge and backgrounds use their skills to cranch some problem together....
 

MrPerfect.

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1376
  • Thanked: 795 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #47 on: June 03, 2017, 11:48:46 AM »
Blue, of cause way to win consistent is mathematical! !! Ridge the game and provide it, that's what casinos do. And it's working; ). Who would argue about that ???
     But as a player, what relates to roulette, you would be better to find something physics/ stats based... Don't you think so?
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1571
  • Thanked: 239 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #48 on: June 03, 2017, 12:13:02 PM »
It's based on stats but not on physics.

If one argues that previous spins are useless then why assuming that the ball's and wheel's speed will be same or similar on next spins makes sense??
This is also related to past data, regardless it's under the physics context.
Don't you know that conditions change from day to day, from hour to hour, even from one spin to the next.

I understand that many discard mathematics because they equate it to house edge, but this is only half true.
HE means reduced payouts or reduced probability according the bet selection one might choose, but we could gain an advantage which is equal to the degree of deviations, then the HE it'd be just a minor inconvenience.

In other words, HE it's not an insurmountable obstacle, we could tackle it effectively by getting advantage the tendencies of the game, make deviations your friend, not your enemy!
« Last Edit: June 04, 2017, 10:35:28 PM by kav »
 

MrPerfect.

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1376
  • Thanked: 795 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #49 on: June 03, 2017, 12:31:34 PM »
 Blue, lm losted. .  You mention too many thing in one post, it's a pain to answer to each individual sentence..  too much qwoting required.
    Things change, it's normal- adjust. Some things do not change- focus on these.
   How would you separate past data from its physics context, if past data is physic context? If your past data do not include physics context, then it's useless and you should be taking as data something else, wich you could actually use later.
   Variance is limited with limiting degrees of freedom of the system. More freedom- more variance...
    If you do not adress HE directly by reversing odds ( with physics), how will you make variance your friend? Examples on the data please.
    I have shown how to do it step by step with example in my topic on " system players only" part. It's called " sequencing method". If you can produce something similar , l would be super curios to read. In this case you got my undevided attention. Looking forward for it ;).
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1571
  • Thanked: 239 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #50 on: June 03, 2017, 01:21:40 PM »
You may ask TurboGenius how he's doing it, he frequents another forum.
 

MrPerfect.

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1376
  • Thanked: 795 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #51 on: June 03, 2017, 01:32:14 PM »
Angel, it's not Turbo himself who wright your previous post. I don't think that after so many years on forums he doesn't consider physical context of data( l may be wrong on my assumptions as well , but...).
    I just wanted to realise if what you say is result of your experience or reading other people opinions. There is no shame in it either, many do it, unfortunately. 
« Last Edit: June 03, 2017, 01:34:08 PM by MrPerfect. »
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1571
  • Thanked: 239 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #52 on: June 03, 2017, 02:33:23 PM »
Based on my experiences, I've mentioned TG because his current philosophy regarding roulette is what I can identify myself for 90% approximately (gamewise).
There are others such as Ken, Kav, Rich, Vic (VLS) in whom I can identify my play 75% maximum.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2017, 04:25:48 PM by kav »
 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2078
  • Thanked: 434 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #53 on: June 03, 2017, 04:42:36 PM »

 BA  .It was”  live “ wheels with live dealers .( I know the wheel was live because it battered the ball about so much that it  stopped dead in a pocket ! )
The bets were stopped whenever the dealer spun the ball and even one  time the bets were stopped before the dealer spun the ball. I assume a Timer was involved.
Points I would emphasise are
That I left the table winning and that “I “ decide when to stop and start not the casino and not our critics.
We can use a 10 unit Table Bank and
That we don’t need  many Stats to decide what to bet - the previous 2 spin results are sufficient .
Nor do we need  to use long Progressions
As for repeating this the answer is no because I don’t normally bet this anymore .It just seemed to be the best bet when given a £20 bank. What would you have played if you were given a $20 bank ?
I have gone back to betting on the Layout because it is more satisfying and more profitable though it requires a 40 unit bank . ( 5 bets @ 8 chips per bet. )
I may be wrong but I think I detected a note of sarcasm in your post . If you think I don’t profit at roulette when I stick to  discipline you are mistaken.
 

MrPerfect.

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1376
  • Thanked: 795 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #54 on: June 04, 2017, 03:29:11 PM »
 Sceps,  congratulations on your win.
     No one play on the long run, excluding some of my friends from online play...
   Long run play is show off!!! Who will tolerate it from casino part? Imagine yourself on casino manager, pit boss or flow superviser place... you know that some fellow stay there and compromise properties bankroll playing every spin and winning.. day after day, your actions?
      Long run play is one of these " long term fallacies". Not always , but in most cases it is.
    Let's define what" long run" is itself:
  1. It's amount of spins required to make educated decision,  wich is statistically relevant.
  2. It's amount of spins/ bets placed wich produce nice win despite statistical fluctuations.
      As you can see, your personal long run will depend on your ability to make educated decisions  ( not gesses) and ability to choose target properly. It can be reduced by following means:
     1. Taking multiple variables during spin to reduce time required for profiling ( modeling)
     2. Choice of target wich is capable to produce profit more qweak.
     Sometimes it's just 15-30 spins and lm happy in my play, target achieved, money won , what to do there? Waiting for a " long run"?
      @ , Blue Angel, it's already very long list of people who supposedly are responsible to backup your posts. Real " expirience" is achieved when it's you and a game face to face, not when you are reading what others have to say.
   
 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2078
  • Thanked: 434 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #55 on: June 04, 2017, 05:19:51 PM »

Mr. Perfect.
Your interpretation of The Long Run is different from the usual definition which is that  things will more or less "even-out " the nearer you get to Infinity . Or, if you prefer , " Eventually ".
Your view that is the amount of spins needed to make an " educated decision " is vague if you cannot state the required amount needed.
You are still  confused about the word " Guess ". It CAN mean an " Educated Decision".
I don't accept the Term  " The Long Run", In my opinion the Long Run can only mean the number of bets  we make in our lifetime . As that must be personal then  no figure can be applied universally ,
I don't think that any statistician would agree with your view that 30 - 50 is an adequate figure for assessment .
Any way your assessment can  easily  be demolished by your " Intuition ". Your introduction of " Intuition " undermines your credibility .
 

MrPerfect.

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1376
  • Thanked: 795 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #56 on: June 04, 2017, 06:20:41 PM »
 Sceps, long run is one thing , center limit theorem is other. So ... who is confused?
    Where l told you that 30-50 " figure" ... ?
   I do not speak about "figures". It's your invention. Your twisting my words in attempt to undermine " my credibility " is laughable.   
 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2078
  • Thanked: 434 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #57 on: June 04, 2017, 08:47:19 PM »


Mr. Perfect  Earlier Today you wrote ,
 2. Choice of target wich is capable to produce profit more qweak.
     Sometimes it's just 15-30 spins and lm happy in my play, target achieved, money won , what to do there
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1571
  • Thanked: 239 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #58 on: June 04, 2017, 09:19:56 PM »
One of the most common mistakes a gambler can do (and does) is to set his session for a fixed amount of units/spins/time.
By predetermining an exact limit, sessions which are more favorable would be wasted/missed, while sessions which are very harsh will stretch the bankrolls to the stop loss limits.

While we can't do much about the second rather than limit the loss, we could do better on favorable sessions, thus improving the overall from accumulated sessions by increasing profits.
What I'm talking about here is the plateau concept which has inspired and applied successfully by Nick the Greek back on 60's.
I'm going to provide you an example about how you could utilize it.

Let's say my first plateau is 100 units net and I achieve it, now I set a second plateau which is from 50% to 67% of my current profit which means 50 to 70 units win or lose.
Let's assume for the example's sake that I win 60 more units, I'm setting a 3rd plateau on the top of the previous 2 and my new  limit becomes 40 units which is approximately 67% of 60 units.
Now let's say I'm losing 40 units, even so I quit the session with 120 units instead of 100.

Just imagine plateaus as a multilevel cake, you could build your way as high as circumstances allow.
The real failure is to stop trying because giving up is the easy solution for the faint at heart and the losers.
 
The following users thanked this post: MrPerfect.

MrPerfect.

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1376
  • Thanked: 795 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #59 on: June 04, 2017, 09:23:01 PM »
Scepticus,  .  As you yourself can see, first l was speaking about one thing, then l gave you example what can happen in my play. My play session often is very short. But it doesn't meen than l make decision on short samples of data. I even formated text specifically ... to signal start of example. There is nothing to be confused about there, just need to pay atention. 
« Last Edit: June 04, 2017, 09:25:33 PM by MrPerfect. »