Author Topic: Long term fallacies  (Read 1489 times)

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1491
  • Thanked: 207 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #75 on: June 06, 2017, 09:02:36 AM »

BA
Nice example of Money Management  but  20 times the Bet is ,I think, sufficient .
Thanks again.

Most would consider it quite low, 33 times the base bet is insufficient for the majority because they don't have any edge over the game.

That's why they try to stay alive with hit n run and much more money than what they are hoping to win.

Just imagine them as ineffective generals who completely rely on sheer luck and numbers in order to survive...
 

MrPerfect.

  • Great Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 725
  • Thanked: 416 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #76 on: June 06, 2017, 12:01:09 PM »
 BA , if your edge do not come from VB, you are bias player , right? It's even more easy to see. I can send you data on bias wheel , so you create a model. Data will be on days with high atmospheric pressure and you are required to predict what gonna be on rainy days.
   Or even more easy. Show where your edge comes from. Bias players need data to play. You say you get more then 10k samples. Why wouldn't you send me one ?
   Something tells me that this challenge is "insignificant " as well...
   As you can see, l offered all reasonable ways to prove your tolk. What you gonna do?
 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1812
  • Thanked: 379 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #77 on: June 06, 2017, 01:12:09 PM »

Betting the way I do, Angel , I have found 20 times my bet sufficient - so far anyway. And I do play a version of Hit and Run .
Incidentally, the 20 times the bet  is the view of some in  Horse Race Betting circles .They also think that  we should not risk  any more than 5% of our bank on any one bet . Our Progression fraternity might like to ponder on that advice.   
Most Authorities think that you cannot create an Edge with Modern Wheels.   
IMO  you can only create an Edge by using an assumption so  this is only a perceived Edge . . We gamblers should be aware that the casino HAS an advantage that can only be overcome by us using assumptions but be aware that these assumptions are subject to the variance in spins  - AS  IS  THE  CASINO !
There is no Easy Money in gambling and newcomers (newbies ) should not be encouraged to think that there is..
First I knew that you were a Roulette Professional . Congrats !

 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1491
  • Thanked: 207 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #78 on: June 06, 2017, 04:28:10 PM »
@ mr Perfect, like I said before, you may assume whatever you want, whether it reflects reality it's another thing.

@ Scepticus,
Implementing sports betting techniques to roulette I consider it inappropriate because you have to take into account almost all those ''small things'' which make each gamble different from the rest.

There is no generic solution like ''one size fits all'', you've to specialize your method(s) according your knowledge and experience.
Consider in detail almost every characteristic of your game(s) and combine them in one unified strategy.

If you can do well with such compact budget then you are one of the very few who achieved it!
 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1812
  • Thanked: 379 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #79 on: June 06, 2017, 05:32:05 PM »

I am not "implementing sports techniques " . They are   " maths techniques " and these are transferable .. You obviously don't understand this so you shouldn't dismiss so lightly something you don't understand ,
Thanks for the compliment . If it was meant as a compliment  !
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1491
  • Thanked: 207 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #80 on: June 06, 2017, 08:54:40 PM »
Scep, you have to understand that the odds for horse races are not based on fixed odds such as on roulette.

The odds for horse racing are being influenced by a number of direct and indirect factors, which makes the whole situation more complicated.
Additionally, you don't have available horse races to bet on 24/7.
Therefore, what's good for sports betting doesn't make it good for roulette too and vice versa.

Now I'm going to make a bold claim which is against the traditional and mainstream math theory of roulette.

Fixed odds are based on the assumption that at any given time, any number has equal chance to hit.
If that was true then please explain me why everytime I play roulette a few numbers have 4 to 6 hits while a few others are missing for 111 plus spins, why?
Is it because every number have equal chance?
You might argue that every number eventually will balance, when exactly is going to happen ?
Even if we'd accept it as de facto, is it practical to wait if/when this would happen?

But who am I to argue with math professors and the whole history of the game, as the hardcore roulette physics lobby is preaching.
I'm noone, I know nothing, you should keep doing what you already doing without a glimmer of doubt.

Good luck!
 

MrPerfect.

  • Great Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 725
  • Thanked: 416 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #81 on: June 06, 2017, 10:45:20 PM »
BA, what's so bold about your statement?  Its a  banality. If numbers had same chance to hit at any given spin, AP wouldn't exist.
    It's one for these " long term fallacies" .
 
The following users thanked this post: BlueAngel

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1812
  • Thanked: 379 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #82 on: June 07, 2017, 12:54:58 AM »
Cheese and Rice,  Blue Angel. , you still don’t get it  !
Yes, the Nine Blocks and the 5 in 7 for Even Chances were designed for football but they are maths concepts .They  can be used in any situation involving 3 items and 2 items such as Dozens ( 3 ) , Columns(3 ) and the Even Chances (2 ) in roulette. They are not exclusive to sports .
As for  each  number not having an equal chance all that is meant here is that no one knows which number will hit and , in that sense , they all have an equal chance of occurring .
You don’t have to preach to me about blindly  accepting the Maths Guys claims of certainty. They don’t have much of a clue either as to what the next winning numbers will be.
Perhaps those unfortunates who lost house, home, marriages should sue the pontificators who smugly and arrogantly preach that they were likely to lose 2.7% of their money plus any winnings that they may have made.
We should all be aware that we may  lose all of our betting money and that there is no Easy Money in any gambling environment . .
Incidentally, what is your average weekly profit betting roulette  professionally ?
 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1812
  • Thanked: 379 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #83 on: June 07, 2017, 12:59:05 AM »

Mr. Perfect
You claimed that you  profited from betting roulette but you was not a professional  . What would you regard as an amount that would make anyone a roulette professional if they chose to do so
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1491
  • Thanked: 207 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #84 on: June 07, 2017, 11:04:55 AM »
Incidentally, what is your average weekly profit betting roulette  professionally ?

First let me get one thing straight, what we call a ''whale'' in gambling language is not a professional.
A ''whale'' is gambling large amounts of money without any advantage over the game, while a professional player makes his/her living solely by betting not necessarily huge amounts.

There is also a distinction between the one who is in positive balance over the long term but the profit cannot support his/her lifestyle because it's insufficient, this is what I call the part-timer.
Amateurs and part-timers make up for the 90% of all gamblers, while the rest 10% are the ''whales'' and the pros.

I'm aiming to win 100 up to 400 units per session, my bets have a net return from 3% up to 20% per session.
I play approximately 5 sessions per week and my average net profit is approximately 700 to 1000 units.
 

dobbelsteen

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1236
  • Thanked: 306 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #85 on: June 07, 2017, 11:10:11 AM »
There is a big difference between the chance and the occurrence of an event.  There is a  relation between the largeness of a variance and the number op spins.The features of the short run event is more interested than what happens in a one million event
 
The following users thanked this post: BlueAngel

MrPerfect.

  • Great Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 725
  • Thanked: 416 times
Re: Long term fallacies
« Reply #86 on: June 07, 2017, 04:47:57 PM »

Mr. Perfect
You claimed that you  profited from betting roulette but you was not a professional  . What would you regard as an amount that would make anyone a roulette professional if they chose to do so
If you get enough money to live from your work - you are professional.  Amount is personal,  some need more, some less. Normally people start to breathe free with 3 average wages. For UK 2k / week is acceptable.