Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alan Mendelson
Quote:
Originally Posted by
monet
Since you decided to not understand or accept my poker analogy I will try one more attempt with you. I am currently painting my walls and having a conversation with my wall that is pretty interesting so I will try to make this quick so I can get back to my wall.
Let us pretend for an example that you and I are going to flip a quarter every day and we can quit whenever we want each day. This will not be a trick quarter and no monkey business what so ever. It will just be you and I flipping a quarter and each time it lands on Heads I will pay you 110 dollars. Each time the quarter lands on Tails you will pay me 100 dollars. Now let us pretend for the first two weeks of the year you are beating me out of 8000 dollars. On day 15 you are having a really bad run and you have given back the 8000 dollars to me plus another 500 so you are down 500 for the year. Are you going to stop flipping this quarter with me because you are down 8500 for the day? I mean you have the edge every time we flip. Wouldn't you want to flip this quarter with me 24 hours a day 7 days a week until the end of time? The same goes for someone who is playing at an advantage in the Casino. No matter the fluctuations of being up or down each day we know that in the end we will make so much per hour, per month, per year. We also know the more we play the more we make in the way of all the extras go along.
Gosh, I hate to disappoint you but I wouldn't bet $100 on the flip of a coin. This is probably why I hate blackjack. I hate the idea of losing my bet based on the flip of a card. Ironically I'll accept the roll of two dice, but that's something I've grown to accept. I just hate coin flips and card flips, and $100 per decision is too much for me.
you know, I give monet credit.....he presented a perfect analogy. He covered all the bases of bogus coins, etc. But here alan comes up with the "I dont" retort.
so....why didnt tou bet even a dollar while the 18 yos were being thrown at a near empty table.....answer "i dont bet hardways"
and..."what about this coin flip analogy....do you see the valid point I am making".........answer..."i dont flit coins or cards"
THAT RESPONSE IS INTELLECTUALLY BANKRUPT.
The basis of the question was not whether YOU YOU YOU like to bet on flipped coins.....But was rather ....would a rational person who had simple high school education be able to see the advantage in a situation and want to continue. No one fucking cares if you personally like to bet on cards or coin flips. That obviously wasnt the point. You are smart enough to realize that.....and you are evasive enough, dishonest enough to turn the analogy into something it wasnt.
the "i dont" mantra is rather telling. It says that you are evasive and dishonest, and use the "i dont" mantra as a mommies skirt to hide behind when the other boys in town question your honesty.