Author Topic: Birthday Paradox  (Read 1406 times)

Sputnik

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 421
  • Thanked: 342 times
Birthday Paradox
« on: April 18, 2016, 06:11:25 PM »
I add two files for you to read if you want to join this discussion.
Will start this topic after some preperation, because i solve the betting march using this methodology.
Which non of the two Authors about the subject has.

Cheers


 
The following users thanked this post: kav, december

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1666
  • Thanked: 309 times
Re: Birthday Paradox
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2016, 11:40:20 PM »
I add two files for you to read if you want to join this discussion.
Will start this topic after some preperation, because i solve the betting march using this methodology.
Which non of the two Authors about the subject has.

Cheers

Sounds familiar, Sputnik LOL
 

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3025
  • Thanked: 812 times
Re: Birthday Paradox
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2016, 11:42:25 PM »
This post has been made elsewhere, I remember it clearly. ;D

AND THAR SHE BLOWS:

http://forum.roulette30.com/index.php?topic=485.0
« Last Edit: April 30, 2016, 08:35:35 PM by Reyth »
 

Sputnik

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 421
  • Thanked: 342 times
Re: Birthday Paradox
« Reply #3 on: April 19, 2016, 07:06:18 AM »
Here is one example where the assumption from both is wrong.
For example lets take this string of formations

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP

Now the assumption is that if you get PP next you can not match with PPB or PPP as both alredy has hit.
But this is wrong.

If you look at the sequense again you also see that all P combinations has hit.
So even if we would get PB we could not match with PBB or PBP as both alredy hit.

Here is the sequense again.

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP

Now you bet Before you have a result and you bet P once with one single bet and you cover all previos four patterns to have a chance to repeat once, no matter if you get PP or PB.

PPB PPP PBP  PBB BPP BBP P

Easy and it takes a total of five bets to cover all possibilitys from this position.
Assume you got a B result, then you can see above that we have BPP and BBP.
This means that if you get BP next you would bet P and if you got BB you would bet P next.

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BP
PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BB

But lest say you have a new situtaion similiar towards the PPB and PPP example where you can not bet both.
For example BPP and BPB where both begin with BP and you not match your next bet to cover the two possibilitys.

And again the solution is similiar as the first one.
You only have to wait for one B to show and bet P next to cath the begining of the formation BP.
One single bet.

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BPB BP
PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BPB BP

This work as a cancelation march where you then force for a non repating formation to show.
So we cover both situation with one single bet each.

Now to the final stage where you have seven formation and only one missing pattern to complete the hole cycle to alternate with no present repeats.

For example with following sequense:

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BBB
PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BPB

Then you have to bet up to Three times to cover all possibilitys.
Total five bets with the othe two bets.

And again we are using the cancelation term.
As all four formations with P patterns has a show, then the only way to cover all possibilitys to Catch one repat among the them is to bet P once.
If a loss you force the beginning of the last B pattern to show, which is missing or will repeat.

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BBB P
PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BPB B

Now assume we don't get a repeat of the previos P patterns and we get a B result.
Then we again face a situation where we have to patterns that begin with the same formation and end with two differen results, BPP BPB.
So our next bet after B show is for P once to cover the BP formation and cover both patterns BPP BPB to repeat once.

Now to the last final cancelation bet and we have lost four bets with no present repeat.

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BBB BB

Here you simply bet for BBB to repat once and if not then you have 8 uniq patterns show with no present repeat.

This might not improve the original or change any thing, but i just want to show have you cover all possibilitys to repeat once with placing a total of five bets.
As the autors of both Writings argue you can not cover a situation where two similiar patterns has a show, which is wrong.

Cheers

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BBB BBB
PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BBB BBP

« Last Edit: April 21, 2016, 07:04:11 AM by Sputnik »
 

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1666
  • Thanked: 309 times
Re: Birthday Paradox
« Reply #4 on: April 19, 2016, 10:24:37 AM »
If you " forecast "3 R/B then the chance of all 3 winning is only one in eight so is less likely than one of the other 7 . The problem is " Which One ? "
 

Sputnik

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 421
  • Thanked: 342 times
Re: Birthday Paradox
« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2016, 07:06:21 AM »

 To cover all possibilitys from scratch without trigger you have to Place 11 bets or less.
 This depends on which march you use.

 I find two ways:

 1) One mechanical approch
 2) One intiutive approch

 Cheers
 

MrBac

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 20
  • Thanked: 5 times
Re: Birthday Paradox
« Reply #6 on: April 24, 2016, 10:42:31 AM »
Birthday Paradox requires very deep pockets, it is a poor performing bet option.  I have used this extensively and without fail it loses more bets per shoe than which you win.

The win v loss ratio's are disgusting and there is no come back if you do not grab your winning pair or triplet in this case. Yes you might be "odd's on" to snare your win within a series of bets, but that is the problem with it.  You have to place many bets to win once and sometimes even that doesn't happen. 
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

Sputnik

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 421
  • Thanked: 342 times
Re: Birthday Paradox
« Reply #7 on: April 30, 2016, 05:22:31 AM »
I don't understand, because you have pretty good odds playing against the last six not to appear with my example above.
No matter if you play for a repeat or not the probability is 1.325% that you will lose five bets covering six attempts or 98.675% that you will win.

Some one could write down six attempts randomly and bet against them with the same odds.
But the feeling that at least one will repeat is greater, but the odds is the same.

Cheers

« Last Edit: April 30, 2016, 05:24:13 AM by Sputnik »
 

Sputnik

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 421
  • Thanked: 342 times
Re: Birthday Paradox
« Reply #8 on: May 05, 2016, 05:28:00 PM »

Some talk s*** because they get it all wrong, Nick did a simple code into excel where you track 6 uniq patterns of Three to show then bet there will be a repeat. I attach the excel file and you can click on F9 for ever without losing :-)

Cheers
 
The following users thanked this post: december

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3025
  • Thanked: 812 times
Re: Birthday Paradox
« Reply #9 on: May 05, 2016, 06:31:24 PM »

Some talk s*** because they get it all wrong, Nick did a simple code into excel where you track 6 uniq patterns of Three to show then bet there will be a repeat. I attach the excel file and you can click on F9 for ever without losing :-)

Cheers

Don't you mean no repeat?  Oh I get it, one of the uniques will NOT repeat which means there WILL be a repeat lol.

You are saying this is grailed?
 

Sputnik

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 421
  • Thanked: 342 times
Re: Birthday Paradox
« Reply #10 on: May 05, 2016, 07:03:29 PM »

I read forum members talking about that guy who walks into the casino and wait for hes trigger and bet Three to four times and win and walk out and get back next week.
They bet table limits.

One member mention this at betselection cc and i remember a member with the name Talesman at VIP Lounge gamling forum many years ago mention the same thing.
He saw a guy many times Walking into the casino and wait for a trigger and bet Three times the table limits and walk out.

What are they up to, they had to have a bet with high probability of winning, maybe greater then 98.5% who knows.
The thing is that you lower variance betting less and more.

Maybe use both Marty and Regression to look in profits long term.
And when sequense from hell comes with several different occasions you wagering to get half your bankroll back, i am just guessing, i have no clue what and how they did play, but they had to be pretty confedent with there bet selection.
 

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3025
  • Thanked: 812 times
Re: Birthday Paradox
« Reply #11 on: May 05, 2016, 08:59:50 PM »
Ya I think 98.5% would absolutely slaughter a person using that strategy and ESPECIALLY if they only use 1/2 of their debt back; I mean MAN 1.5% comes up frequently, WHEY too frequently!!

And if they are already betting table limits then they just might as well jump off the nearest bridge because that's practically what they are doing on the felt...

To have any kind of really reliable edge, I think you need something in the fractions of a percent and you need to bet small enough to allow for recovery in relation to your bankroll... ;)

Because I bet you didn't know that roulette was actually invented by Murphy:



But I am willing to bet with as close to 100% certainty as it is possible to get that you already know all of the above better than I do!
« Last Edit: May 05, 2016, 09:10:43 PM by Reyth »
 
The following users thanked this post: Sputnik

Sputnik

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 421
  • Thanked: 342 times
Re: Birthday Paradox
« Reply #12 on: May 06, 2016, 06:41:48 AM »
Does it exist a bet with higher probability for even money bets, lets say around 99% ???
Reyth i could buy a code for this and see how frequent the win ratio is or how would you like to see the code done, i pay for it.
I give the job to Nick who did the excel sheet above.
Maybe something like how many succesfull sessions and losing sessions?

EDIT:
I try the excell sheet and won 22 times once and 136 times once, but is boring doing the testing by hand.
I Think there will only be variance and fluctation and in the end the bet will hit 1 in 64.
So i skip this idea.

Cheers
« Last Edit: May 06, 2016, 07:17:23 AM by Sputnik »
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

kris

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 39
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Birthday Paradox
« Reply #13 on: May 30, 2016, 08:01:22 PM »
Reyth, oh yeah, Murphy was completely right about that, it will go wrong if it can anyway!!