Long term and short term

Forgive me if I'm asking an elementary question but I see in your discussions you use long term and short term.

My question: is there really a long term? Isn't most gambling nothing but short term decisions?

Example #1 Craps

The shooter throws the dice. No matter what the previous result was the shooter has, for example, a one in 36 chance of throwing 12. The previous roll has no impact on the current roll and the current roll has no impact on the roll to come. So isn't craps just a series of short term, one roll decisions?

Example #2 Video Poker

The electronic deck is reshuffled with each play. Each play has 52/53 cards. Since each hand is independent where is the long term?

Example #3 Six Deck Shoe in Blackjack

Here it's different. After each hand the remaining cards will have different totals. So as you approach the cut card for the reshuffle you could argue that you are nearing the long term because there is a finite number of cards available.

Help me out here.

.......................



quote - Andrew G - "is there really a long term? Isn't most gambling about short term decisions?"





there is no exact definition of what the long run is



gamblers who say they are playing only in the short term ignore one thing - all those short sessions combined usually come close to approaching what long term mathematical expectations would be

and I want to exclude video poker because the variance is over the top - it's much harder to analyze - so we'll go with your craps example

so, it can be calculated that if a guy makes the lowest house edge bets on a dice table the longer he plays the more likely his results will approach the true mathematical expectation for the long run

for example, it can be calculated if he rolls 100 outcomes there is maybe a 90% chance (I'm estimating) that his final result will be within 1% of the true expectation

but if he rolls 10,000 outcomes there may be (I'm estimating but this can be calculated exactly by a mathematician) a 99% chance that his final result will be within 1% of the true expectation

so a gambler who plays many short sessions and rationalizes by saying he is not in or near the long run is kidding himself




as to the question you posed to KJ - yes, certain things may not be impossible - but they are very, very unlikely and not worth betting on unless its purely for entertainment

Thank you Mr Half Smoke but in craps the odds of any result never change no matter how many rolls you have. On each and every roll of the dice you have, for example, 1/36 chance of rolling a hard six.

Where is there a long term in craps?

In video poker you have 1/629740 chance of being dealt a royal on each and every hand. Where is there a long term?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Thank you Mr Half Smoke but in craps the odds of any result never change no matter how many rolls you have. On each and every roll of the dice you have, for example, 1/36 chance of rolling a hard six.

Where is there a long term in craps?

In video poker you have 1/629740 chance of being dealt a royal on each and every hand. Where is there a long term?

---

I'm going to recommend that AndrewG, rather than surveying a bunch of anonymous forum posters, simply take the matter up with his local university's math professors. As I have said many times, and Andrew G is beginning to sound amazingly like "Singer" redux, if the matter has meaning to you, if it's important to tease out the reality of it, then it's worth the hundred dollars to buy a 20-session DVD probability course and also to consult your local math professionals.

Asking these questions on a forum is just silly. Go consult established name brand experts.

I argued this ad nauseum with Alan, and with all of his resources and contacts, he never bothered. If AndrewG can't be bothered, it must be because he really doesn't want to know the answer. If you don't want to know the answer, if you do not want to consult actual credentialed experts accepted by scholars everywhere, that's okay. People can believe in God, country, and that the moon is made of cheese. I have no issue with preferring to believe whatever you want to believe. Just please don't couch it in terms of some pseudo-objective questioning. If you want to actually know answers, it's not hard to go directly to experts who will answer them.

Yoda doesn't live on a forum.

It's that simple. Go ask someone who teaches probability at a university level. Not a difficult thing to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Thank you Mr Half Smoke but in craps the odds of any result never change no matter how many rolls you have. On each and every roll of the dice you have, for example, 1/36 chance of rolling a hard six.

Where is there a long term in craps?

---

if a gambler makes 10,000 bets on the pass line at craps - it may not meet a dictionary definition of the long run - but that gambler is very likely to lose very close to 1.41% of his action (all the money he has wagered) - which is the house edge on a pass line bet

if all of his bets are of an equal amount - if they are of different amounts the same would hold true but it would take much longer to approach the results of a long run

again, a mathematician could tell you exactly how likely it is that he would be within 1% of his expected dollar loss


again, I don't want to write about video poker because it is too complex for me to give a satisfactory explanation in a forum such as this - but the very same principles hold true

Learn N-zero

In one of the 2 books about the MIT blackjack team that I read (the books came out just as I was getting started, the movie about 3 years into my career), there was a reference made to the Law of Large Numbers. It was a loose reference to the long term. Getting to the point that the short term oddities that can occur, no longer matter and the math takes over. They placed this number at 50,000 rounds.

That is the only reference to Law of Large Numbers that I have seen in blackjack. More common is the term N0. That is N-zero, which is credited to Don Schlesinger. The N0 also represents a number of trials in which the short-term oddities of variance no longer matter and the math takes over and results fall in a range that the math says the will. Long-term. Now there is no set N0 for blackjack. The N0 varies according to rules and conditions. So N0 often is used in identifying better games. Games with a lower N0 are the better games.

So, my personal style of play really challenges the concept of N0 or Law of Large Numbers, because my play is not consistent. I use different bet spreads, different bet ramps and different Max bets for different games, or even almost identical games at different locations. For me these things are determined by what I call each casinos comfort or tolerance level, which is all about my top priority of longevity.

So I am almost intentionally increasing my N0, which I don't think any other player does, in the name of longevity. My bankroll can handle it....it is just a matter of increased variance, which I have learned to handle.

So my Law of Large Numbers, number is probably somewhat higher than that 50,000 number mentioned. Maybe my number is 75 or 80 thousand. Maybe closer to 100,000. And 80,000 rounds played is just about a years worth of play for me. I average between 80,000 and 85,000 rounds played. And while my results of 16 years are a very small sample size, they fall almost perfectly within what is to be expected by the math of Law of Large numbers or N0.

- I have had 5 different 5-6 month losing periods. That would 40,000 ish rounds or short of the LoLN or N0. But have never had a full losing year which would be the point that LoLN or N0 is achieved. Granted I had one year way below expectation, but generally that math works! The math always works! You get to the longrun, LoLN, or N0 and results are generally where the math says they should be.

Now lets switch from blackjack to video poker. In VP you have an occurrence, the Royal Flush which occurs every 40,000 trials or so. So that is going to play havoc and raise considerably the LoLN target, or what is needed to be considered longterm, to account for running several Royals ahead or behind expectation. That is variance. So the N0 (term not really used for VP) ot LOLN number will be higher....BUT there is still a number that constitutes longterm, where the math takes over and results fall with a range the math dictates. And Rob's claim results contradict this. Rob's claim contradicts the mathematics. He is talking about unusual short term results being repeated over and over but it just doesn't work that way. At some point (long-term) the math kicks in and cannot be defied.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Rob's claim contradicts the mathematics. He is talking about unusual short term results being repeated over and over but it just doesn't work that way. At some point (long-term) the math kicks in and cannot be defied.

---

The best example of this continues to be Roulette. While the math says Black should hit what 40-something % of the time (50% less the 1 or 2 green), it is very possible to walk in bet black 3 times and win 2 (67% win rate) or bet 5 times and win 3 or 4 (60 and 80% win rate) or even bet 10 times and win 7 (70% win rate).

Let's go with bet 5 and win 4. You would have some artificial above expectation short term win rate of 80% (4 out of 5 trials). I'll bet this happens every day in every casino. Maybe every hour. That is a short term result above expectation which is known as variance. But you simply cannot do this day after day for a hundred days. After 100 days and 500 trials you will not be hitting at 80%.

And this is exactly what Rob's claim is that he can defy the math and hit 4 out of 5, over and over and over. It simply defies the math.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

Learn N-zero

---

Damn jbjb. This reference was made while I was making my long post on the subject. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Thank you Mr Half Smoke but in craps the odds of any result never change no matter how many rolls you have. On each and every roll of the dice you have, for example, 1/36 chance of rolling a hard six.

Where is there a long term in craps?

In video poker you have 1/629740 chance of being dealt a royal on each and every hand. Where is there a long term?

---

I'm going to recommend that AndrewG, rather than surveying a bunch of anonymous forum posters, simply take the matter up with his local university's math professors. As I have said many times, and Andrew G is beginning to sound amazingly like "Singer" redux, if the matter has meaning to you, if it's important to tease out the reality of it, then it's worth the hundred dollars to buy a 20-session DVD probability course and also to consult your local math professionals.

Asking these questions on a forum is just silly. Go consult established name brand experts.

I argued this ad nauseum with Alan, and with all of his resources and contacts, he never bothered. If AndrewG can't be bothered, it must be because he really doesn't want to know the answer. If you don't want to know the answer, if you do not want to consult actual credentialed experts accepted by scholars everywhere, that's okay. People can believe in God, country, and that the moon is made of cheese. I have no issue with preferring to believe whatever you want to believe. Just please don't couch it in terms of some pseudo-objective questioning. If you want to actually know answers, it's not hard to go directly to experts who will answer them.

Yoda doesn't live on a forum.

It's that simple. Go ask someone who teaches probability at a university level. Not a difficult thing to do.

---

Weird. Just plain weird.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Rob's claim contradicts the mathematics. He is talking about unusual short term results being repeated over and over but it just doesn't work that way. At some point (long-term) the math kicks in and cannot be defied.

---

The best example of this continues to be Roulette. While the math says Black should hit what 40-something % of the time (50% less the 1 or 2 green), it is very possible to walk in bet black 3 times and win 2 (67% win rate) or bet 5 times and win 3 or 4 (60 and 80% win rate) or even bet 10 times and win 7 (70% win rate).

Let's go with bet 5 and win 4. You would have some artificial above expectation short term win rate of 80% (4 out of 5 trials). I'll bet this happens every day in every casino. Maybe every hour. That is a short term result above expectation which is known as variance. But you simply cannot do this day after day for a hundred days. After 100 days and 500 trials you will not be hitting at 80%.

And this is exactly what Rob's claim is that he can defy the math and hit 4 out of 5, over and over and over. It simply defies the math.

---

Again you lie and don't want to see it.

I never say I defy the math. You are the one who does that with your uneducated, closed mind.

What Andrew seems to be saying is that if one roll of the dice has a 1 in 6 chance of coming up with X, every subsequent and previous roll does also. He therefore deduces that this short term EV never changes no matter how many rolls occur and how much time has elapsed. A roll of the dice, a flip of the cards, the spin of a ball. That is, essentially, how the theoretical long term is reached. Most games fall into this category. Video poker, played the way I play it, does not.

Why not? Well, if you play vp the way most ap's approach it with that grind-away mentality, there absolutely is a long term somewhere down the long road ahead. No one can precisely define it, but I see it as the day a person stops playing forever. So it is a different amount of time and hands for everybody.

Not so with my play strategy....which irritates kew no end because he hasn't the capacity to figure it out. The "Law of Large Numbers" (which kew likes to present as his pet knowledge because he read it in some book somewhere) requires unaltered input on a continuous basis. The argument in such a case can be made for the math becoming predictable somewhere reasonable down the line.

In SPS videopoker with each and every session, the procedural changes, volatility changes, variance changes, and ER changes obliterate any chance of this type of play EVER entering anything remotely resembling the long term. No one in today's environment could live aslong or play as MN any hands as that would take, and even then, it's very possible and highly probable that the results would STILL be in the positive.

Read the right books kew, then come back with something other than agitation, theory, and emotion.

Can’t recall where I read it but thought this was very interesting.

Read that in a large, busy casino with a lot of players playing the long term is about 10 minutes from the casino’s perspective. So under 10 minutes the casinos results may be above or below expectation, but above 10 minutes the actual results will most often be very close to expectation.

Remember this would be for a large casino with hundreds of people playing all the different casino games simultaneously.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Rob's claim contradicts the mathematics. He is talking about unusual short term results being repeated over and over but it just doesn't work that way. At some point (long-term) the math kicks in and cannot be defied.

---

The best example of this continues to be Roulette. While the math says Black should hit what 40-something % of the time (50% less the 1 or 2 green), it is very possible to walk in bet black 3 times and win 2 (67% win rate) or bet 5 times and win 3 or 4 (60 and 80% win rate) or even bet 10 times and win 7 (70% win rate).

Let's go with bet 5 and win 4. You would have some artificial above expectation short term win rate of 80% (4 out of 5 trials). I'll bet this happens every day in every casino. Maybe every hour. That is a short term result above expectation which is known as variance. But you simply cannot do this day after day for a hundred days. After 100 days and 500 trials you will not be hitting at 80%.

And this is exactly what Rob's claim is that he can defy the math and hit 4 out of 5, over and over and over. It simply defies the math.

---

Again you lie and don't want to see it.

I never say I defy the math. You are the one who does that with your uneducated, closed mind.

What Andrew seems to be saying is that if one roll of the dice has a 1 in 6 chance of coming up with X, every subsequent and previous roll does also. He therefore deduces that this short term EV never changes no matter how many rolls occur and how much time has elapsed. A roll of the dice, a flip of the cards, the spin of a ball. That is, essentially, how the theoretical long term is reached. Most games fall into this category. Video poker, played the way I play it, does not.

Why not? Well, if you play vp the way most ap's approach it with that grind-away mentality, there absolutely is a long term somewhere down the long road ahead. No one can precisely define it, but I see it as the day a person stops playing forever. So it is a different amount of time and hands for everybody.

Not so with my play strategy....which irritates kew no end because he hasn't the capacity to figure it out. The "Law of Large Numbers" (which kew likes to present as his pet knowledge because he read it in some book somewhere) requires unaltered input on a continuous basis. The argument in such a case can be made for the math becoming predictable somewhere reasonable down the line.

In SPS videopoker with each and every session, the procedural changes, volatility changes, variance changes, and ER changes obliterate any chance of this type of play EVER entering anything remotely resembling the long term. No one in today's environment could live aslong or play as MN any hands as that would take, and even then, it's very possible and highly probable that the results would STILL be in the positive.

Read the right books kew, then come back with something other than agitation, theory, and emotion.

---

Good thing video poker "does not." Good thing "Singer" is the only dude who has figured it out. We are truly blessed.

What I suggest, AndrewG, is to print up the above and take it to your nearest university prof teaching probability. Ask him or her what they think. Should take a half hour to set up an appointment, and a half hour to an hour for the appointment.

It does appear to be that I'm the only one who has ever figured this out.

Red why don't you give out the names of these "university math professors" you habitually keep mentioning? You should know them personally--they're all libtards who just can't get over the fact that crooked Hillary and her pervert husband aren't in the White House :)....while the greatest president in our nation's history, is!

Mr Singer wrote this which accurately described my point in craps:

"What Andrew seems to be saying is that if one roll of the dice has a 1 in 6 chance of coming up with X, every subsequent and previous roll does also. He therefore deduces that this short term EV never changes no matter how many rolls occur and how much time has elapsed."

To Mr Redietz: I don't think I need a university professor for this -- just a craps dealer.

I posted my comment after a brief casino visit. A player walked up to the craps table and asked the dealer "when was the last field number?"

If you don't know the field numbers are 2,3,4,9,10,11,12.

At that point the dealer responded: it doesn't matter what the last roll was. The 12 (pays triple at this casino) has a one in 36 chance of showing on the next roll.

There was no comment about long term, only the next roll.

And since each new hand in video poker comes from a fresh shuffle and each spin of roulette has no influence from the previous spin aren't these also only short-term games?

It seems to me there is no long-term application.

Now, I do not know of this controversy regarding Mr Singer and please forgive me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Mr Singer wrote this which accurately described my point in craps:

"What Andrew seems to be saying is that if one roll of the dice has a 1 in 6 chance of coming up with X, every subsequent and previous roll does also. He therefore deduces that this short term EV never changes no matter how many rolls occur and how much time has elapsed."

To Mr Redietz: I don't think I need a university professor for this -- just a craps dealer.

I posted my comment after a brief casino visit. A player walked up to the craps table and asked the dealer "when was the last field number?"

If you don't know the field numbers are 2,3,4,9,10,11,12.

At that point the dealer responded: it doesn't matter what the last roll was. The 12 (pays triple at this casino) has a one in 36 chance of showing on the next roll.

There was no comment about long term, only the next roll.

And since each new hand in video poker comes from a fresh shuffle and each spin of roulette has no influence from the previous spin aren't these also only short-term games?

It seems to me there is no long-term application.

Now, I do not know of this controversy regarding Mr Singer and please forgive me.

---

I think you need a university professor for this. What possible reason would you have for not consulting one? It'd take two hours? A fear of professors? An odd proclivity to know the answers to questions you ask before you ask them? LOL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Half Smoke

again, a mathematician could tell you exactly how likely it is that he would be within 1% of his expected dollar loss

---

Here are the 99% confidence intervals (1% chance of being outside this confidence interval) of the house edge (-1.41%) as a function of the number of pass line (or come) bet resolutions:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Half Smoke

again, a mathematician could tell you exactly how likely it is that he would be within 1% of his expected dollar loss

---

Here are the 99% confidence intervals (1% chance of being outside this confidence interval) of the house edge (-1.41%) as a function of the number of pass line (or come) bet resolutions:

---

Thanks for this information but it has nothing to do with my question or my point. Don't the stats in the chart posted by Mr Tableplay relate to all "points"?

I'm simply saying that each roll of the dice is resolved with each roll, so there is no long term.

Set the point of 6 and you have a five out of six chance of winning on the next roll. It's that simple.

I'm starting to suspect that you are all very smart people who cannot look at the simple question and must report a complicated answer.

Ask an expert if it's raining and you'll get a dissertation on precipitation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Half Smoke

again, a mathematician could tell you exactly how likely it is that he would be within 1% of his expected dollar loss

---

Here are the 99% confidence intervals (1% chance of being outside this confidence interval) of the house edge (-1.41%) as a function of the number of pass line (or come) bet resolutions:

---

Thanks for this information but it has nothing to do with my question or my point. Don't the stats in the chart posted by Mr Tableplay relate to all "points"?

I'm simply saying that each roll of the dice is resolved with each roll, so there is no long term.

Set the point of 6 and you have a five out of six chance of winning on the next roll. It's that simple.

I'm starting to suspect that you are all very smart people who cannot look at the simple question and must report a complicated answer.

Ask an expert if it's raining and you'll get a dissertation on precipitation.

---

The long term is why casinos stay in business. If they did not have a long term advantage they would have to close their doors.

The short term is why people keep gambling. You can win against the house edge on a single roll of the dice, but the casino will always (99.99999999999999999999999999999999999% of the time) come out ahead over billions of rolls.

Honestly not sure what it is you are having trouble understanding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Thanks for this information but it has nothing to do with my question or my point. Don't the stats in the chart posted by Mr Tableplay relate to all "points"?

---

In a manner of speaking, yes - it is for the pass line/come bet as a whole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Set the point of 6 and you have a five out of six chance of winning on the next roll. It's that simple.

---

No, I'm afraid it's not that simple. The probability of making your point of 6 on the next roll is 5/36 not 5/6.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DGenBen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Here are the 99% confidence intervals (1% chance of being outside this confidence interval) of the house edge (-1.41%) as a function of the number of pass line (or come) bet resolutions:

---

Thanks for this information but it has nothing to do with my question or my point. Don't the stats in the chart posted by Mr Tableplay relate to all "points"?

I'm simply saying that each roll of the dice is resolved with each roll, so there is no long term.

Set the point of 6 and you have a five out of six chance of winning on the next roll. It's that simple.

I'm starting to suspect that you are all very smart people who cannot look at the simple question and must report a complicated answer.

Ask an expert if it's raining and you'll get a dissertation on precipitation.

---

The long term is why casinos stay in business. If they did not have a long term advantage they would have to close their doors.

The short term is why people keep gambling. You can win against the house edge on a single roll of the dice, but the casino will always (99.99999999999999999999999999999999999% of the time) come out ahead over billions of rolls.

Honestly not sure what it is you are having trouble understanding.

---

You don't understand.

In craps the casino has the edge on every right way roll. It has nothing to do with short term or long term.

The casino also has an edge on the first don't come or don't pass roll, and then the casino is compensated by paying less when odds are added to the DP or DC flat bet.

Long term or short term doesn't matter. The odds don't change whether it's one roll or 100,000 rolls.

What else do you argue about here?

And just in case craps is too complicated for you, when in the short term does a roulette player have an edge?

You are defining odds the same way as results.

The odds are the same on every roll yes but if you only make one roll the odds are not relevant to that single roll only the result is relevant and that is the difference.

You seem to be saying that the long term and the short term is the same because the long term results are made up of many short term results.

Yes this is true, but thats why we have the terms “Long Term and Short Term” to differentiate between short term events where skewed results are possible (and even likely) and long term where the results most closely match the odds.

Saying there is no difference between long term because the long term is made up of a series of short term events is like saying there is no difference between 4 billion people and an individual because a population of 4 billion people is made up of single individual people. Do you see the problem here?

So yes there is no long term if you combine all the short terms into one. You can call long term a series of short terms if you want but thats just semantics. Yes the odds are the same but the results from short term events will be much different than from long term events (or a series of short term events if thats what you wanna call it.)

It's clear AndrewG asked a question whose answer he had already decided he knew. Was there any answer that would have convinced AndrewG he was wrong? Not likely. Why will AndrewG not consult a professor? Probably because that would put him in a role where the other individual is an established authority and he is not. Therefore, if they disagree, it would be clear that AndrewG was wrong.

If you stay on anonymous terms on a forum debating other anonymous people, even those who have expertise, you are in a psychologically safe space where you can maintain the façade and self-illusion that you are not wrong. Anonymous posters lack credentials you are forced to respect.

People need to believe what they need to believe. No sense wasting time if nothing said is likely to convince them.

Red, if you claim to believe Andrew is anonymous, please explain how it is that you know he is not as much as or even more of an authority on this subject.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Red, if you claim to believe Andrew is anonymous, please explain how it is that you know he is not as much as or even more of an authority on this subject.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Set the point of 6 and you have a five out of six chance of winning on the next roll. It's that simple.

---

No, I'm afraid it's not that simple. The probability of making your point of 6 on the next roll is 5/36 not 5/6.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Set the point of 6 and you have a five out of six chance of winning on the next roll. It's that simple.

---

No, I'm afraid it's not that simple. The probability of making your point of 6 on the next roll is 5/36 not 5/6.

---

---

Here we have an example of someone who does not know how the game of craps is played.

If your point is six, on the next roll any combination showing six will be a winner. Those combinations are:

1,5
5,1
2,4
4,2
3,3

There are five winning combinations.

The six combinations that would make your bet on 6 lose are:

1,6
6,1
2,5
5,2
3,4
4,3

Any other number -- 2,3,4,5,8,9,10,11,12 -- would have no result on your bet on six.

As I suspected, a lack of knowledge of the game and just parroting what has been said before.

Mr Redietz, do these college professors play craps?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

No, I'm afraid it's not that simple. The probability of making your point of 6 on the next roll is 5/36 not 5/6.

---

---

Here we have an example of someone who does not know how the game of craps is played.

If your point is six, on the next roll any combination showing six will be a winner. Those combinations are:

1,5
5,1
2,4
4,2
3,3

There are five winning combinations.

The six combinations that would make your bet on 6 lose are:

1,6
6,1
2,5
5,2
3,4
4,3

Any other number -- 2,3,4,5,8,9,10,11,12 -- would have no result on your bet on six.

As I suspected, a lack of knowledge of the game and just parroting what has been said before.

Mr Redietz, do these college professors play craps?

---

Yes, but you wrote the probability of winning. Not the probability of not losing - it's right up there in red. You even listed the 5 out of 36 winning combinations yourself. You're a moron.

Now let's return to my basic and initial point: there is no long term in craps because each roll is a decision maker. The decision could be win, lose or "no decision." But nothing else changes.

Blackjack is different than craps and roulette and even video poker as the number and denomination of the draw cards will change as more cards are played from the shoe. In a shoe game of blackjack your odds of winning could improve or decline based on the cards already played. Therefore it seems to me the term "long term" has some kind of application.

But in games like craps and roulette and video poker, nothing changes for the next roll, spin or deal, does it? It's new. All new. With no effect from the previous play and no impact on the next play. THAT IS THE POINT I'M ASKING ABOUT.

Instead of a response to that point I'm getting the same old arguments, i.e., casinos win in the long term, passline bets face a 1.4% house edge, etc.

No wonder you all fight each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Now let's return to my basic and initial point

---

AndrewG, how come you wrote that the probability of hitting the point of six on the next roll is 5/6 when it is actually 5/36 ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

---

Here we have an example of someone who does not know how the game of craps is played.

If your point is six, on the next roll any combination showing six will be a winner. Those combinations are:

1,5
5,1
2,4
4,2
3,3

There are five winning combinations.

The six combinations that would make your bet on 6 lose are:

1,6
6,1
2,5
5,2
3,4
4,3

Any other number -- 2,3,4,5,8,9,10,11,12 -- would have no result on your bet on six.

As I suspected, a lack of knowledge of the game and just parroting what has been said before.

Mr Redietz, do these college professors play craps?

---

Yes, but you wrote the probability of winning. Not the probability of not losing - it's right up there in red. You even listed the 5 out of 36 winning combinations yourself. You're a moron.

---

You're the moron because when the point is 6 YOU DON'T LOSE WHEN A 2,3,4,5,8,9,10,11, OR 12 IS ROLLED.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Here we have an example of someone who does not know how the game of craps is played.

If your point is six, on the next roll any combination showing six will be a winner. Those combinations are:

1,5
5,1
2,4
4,2
3,3

There are five winning combinations.

The six combinations that would make your bet on 6 lose are:

1,6
6,1
2,5
5,2
3,4
4,3

Any other number -- 2,3,4,5,8,9,10,11,12 -- would have no result on your bet on six.

As I suspected, a lack of knowledge of the game and just parroting what has been said before.

Mr Redietz, do these college professors play craps?

---

Yes, but you wrote the probability of winning. Not the probability of not losing - it's right up there in red. You even listed the 5 out of 36 winning combinations yourself. You're a moron.

---

You're the moron because when the point is 6 YOU DON'T LOSE WHEN A 2,3,4,5,8,9,10,11, OR 12 IS ROLLED.

---

Here's what you wrote (https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...11#post94711): "Set the point of 6 and you have a five out of six chance of winning on the next roll. It's that simple. "
That's not true. It's 5/36.

AndrewG wrote:

"Forgive me if I'm asking an elementary question but I see in your discussions you use long term and short term.

My question: is there really a long term? Isn't most gambling nothing but short term decisions?

Example #1 Craps

The shooter throws the dice. No matter what the previous result was the shooter has, for example, a one in 36 chance of throwing 12. The previous roll has no impact on the current roll and the current roll has no impact on the roll to come. So isn't craps just a series of short term, one roll decisions?"

That last sentence that you wrote above the answer is yes, and every one of those one roll decisions is random acts 100% of the time. Meaning the odds of all those decision outcomes are already pre determined before hand and the bettor already hopefully knows that he/she is always at a disadvantage. Because the house always holds the edge in craps they relish the long term to pay the bills.

"Example #2 Video Poker

The electronic deck is reshuffled with each play. Each play has 52/53 cards. Since each hand is independent where is the long term?"

Since each and every hand is reshuffled the game is random. The paytables on the screen determine what the house/player edge is based on perfect play of every hand. Skillful players at video poker only play the best games that will give them the already upfront edge or play the games with the least house edge and make it up by using the comp game to put them over the top.

"Example #3 Six Deck Shoe in Blackjack

Here it's different. After each hand, the remaining cards will have different totals. So as you approach the cut card for the reshuffle you could argue that you are nearing the long term because there is a finite number of cards available.

Help me out here."

Based on the number of decks used in the game there is a finite number of cards available. You can correctly say that every hand played between shuffles is a game in itself, and starts a new game with every new shuffle. The house has a built in house edge which starts with the first hand of the shoe, then based on what composition of cards were played in that first hand the odds constantly change with every subsequently hand because the game is non random. Knowledgeable players who know the true count of the remaining unplayed cards will make bets accordingly and frequently are told to leave the casino and not come back.

When people ask where is the long run and hopefully balance things out, I say there are no guarantees. A human lifetime is too short of a time frame. The best you can hope for is to play a game that will give you the edge if you play skillfully. Casinos thrive on very small house edges, so can you. Although, there are still great players who end up on the wrong side of the bell curve lifetime just like anything else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Yes, but you wrote the probability of winning. Not the probability of not losing - it's right up there in red. You even listed the 5 out of 36 winning combinations yourself. You're a moron.

---

You're the moron because when the point is 6 YOU DON'T LOSE WHEN A 2,3,4,5,8,9,10,11, OR 12 IS ROLLED.

---

Here's what you wrote (https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...11#post94711): "Set the point of 6 and you have a five out of six chance of winning on the next roll. It's that simple. "
That's not true. It's 5/36.

---

Clearly you don't play craps. There is,a phrase "no harm, no foul" that applies to neutral numbers, most often craps numbers after the point is established. It also applies to other neutral numbers in the game.

Craps is a game that consists of either winning or losing the point with various side bets called place bets or horn bets or hard ways.

I will concede that to someone who doesn't undestand this that your statement can be viewed as correct.

But what does it have to do with the application of long term or short term? Nothing. You still haven't responded.

I'd simply like to know if the application of short term or long term to craps is valid. I've gotten every answer but.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoSox

AndrewG wrote:

"Forgive me if I'm asking an elementary question but I see in your discussions you use long term and short term.

My question: is there really a long term? Isn't most gambling nothing but short term decisions?

Example #1 Craps

The shooter throws the dice. No matter what the previous result was the shooter has, for example, a one in 36 chance of throwing 12. The previous roll has no impact on the current roll and the current roll has no impact on the roll to come. So isn't craps just a series of short term, one roll decisions?"

That last sentence that you wrote above the answer is yes, and every one of those one roll decisions is random acts 100% of the time. Meaning the odds of all those decision outcomes are already pre determined before hand and the bettor already hopefully knows that he/she is always at a disadvantage. Because the house always holds the edge in craps they relish the long term to pay the bills.

"Example #2 Video Poker

The electronic deck is reshuffled with each play. Each play has 52/53 cards. Since each hand is independent where is the long term?"

Since each and every hand is reshuffled the game is random. The paytables on the screen determine what the house/player edge is based on perfect play of every hand. Skillful players at video poker only play the best games that will give them the already upfront edge or play the games with the least house edge and make it up by using the comp game to put them over the top.

"Example #3 Six Deck Shoe in Blackjack

Here it's different. After each hand, the remaining cards will have different totals. So as you approach the cut card for the reshuffle you could argue that you are nearing the long term because there is a finite number of cards available.

Help me out here."

Based on the number of decks used in the game there is a finite number of cards available. You can correctly say that every hand played between shuffles is a game in itself, and starts a new game with every new shuffle. The house has a built in house edge which starts with the first hand of the shoe, then based on what composition of cards were played in that first hand the odds constantly change with every subsequently hand because the game is non random. Knowledgeable players who know the true count of the remaining unplayed cards will make bets accordingly and frequently are told to leave the casino and not come back.

When people ask where is the long run and hopefully balance things out, I say there are no guarantees. A human lifetime is too short of a time frame. The best you can hope for is to play a game that will give you the edge if you play skillfully. Casinos thrive on very small house edges, so can you. Although, there are still great players who end up on the wrong side of the bell curve lifetime just like anything else.

---

You too, Mr BoSox? I'm getting every response but an answer to my question.

I briefly read through this thread although I did read the OP.

Anyway, it doesn't seem like you're using the word "long term" correctly. The "long term" refers to how many rounds you have to play in order to have an X% chance of being at a certain result or better (if +EV) or being at a certain result or worse (if -EV). Generally that "certain result" is +/-$0. One might ask, "How long do I have to play before I have a 75% of being break even or ahead?" (on a +EV game)

If you want to see this live in action -- open up an excel spreadsheet. In cell A1, write in without quotes "=RANDBETWEEN(1,2)". In B1, write "=IF(A1=1, 0.95, -1)". In C1 write, "=B1" and in C2 write "=SUM(B2,C1)". Copy and paste A1, B1, and C2 all the way down to row 10,000. This simulates a coin flip where you lose $1 on tails but win $0.95 on heads. On average, you should lose 2.5c ($0.025) per flip. It's 10,000 flips.

You can scroll to the bottom and look at cell C10000. This would be your result after 10,000 flips on this game. It should be somewhere around -250. Is it positive (it's almost certainly not)? Refresh Excel and it'll come up with a new set of random numbers. See what in cell C10000. Still negative? Keep refreshing. Eventually, it should be clear this number is almost always going to be negative.

You can look at individual groups of 10, 20, 100, or however many sets of flips as you want. Sure, some will be positive, others will (obviously) be negative. You can even make a chart if you want. That probably will give the most descriptive view of this whole thing. Insert->Chart. Make it a "Line Chart" and for the range write "C1:C10000". You might have to write "=$C$1:$C$10000" depending on if you're using Excel, Google Sheets, or something else. You'll see some ups (and many downs). You'll win some sessions and you'll lose some sessions. But overall the trend is negative.


Sure, this is a very simple bet with little variance. But the same thing can be done with any bet that has a house edge and you'll notice the same thing -- a downward trend. Some bets have a higher N0 (or long term) while others have a smaller one. It doesn't matter if it's a 0.5% house edge or a 15% house edge -- the more hands you play the more likely you are to be behind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Red, if you claim to believe Andrew is anonymous, please explain how it is that you know he is not as much as or even more of an authority on this subject.

---

If you want me to put you in touch with a couple of professors who have taught or currently teach math at a university level, no problem, Mr. Singer. But if I'm going to give out their phone numbers to you, you must promise to call them.

Or you could visit them here. I live about half a mile from ETSU, and one of them lives half a block down the street. I'd be willing to video the Q&A for a podcast. I'm sure it would be hellaciously popular.

Hey, maybe Alan (thanks, anonymous tipster) could drop in, and the gang could all reassemble!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

I briefly read through this thread although I did read the OP.

Anyway, it doesn't seem like you're using the word "long term" correctly. The "long term" refers to how many rounds you have to play in order to have an X% chance of being at a certain result or better (if +EV) or being at a certain result or worse (if -EV). Generally that "certain result" is +/-$0. One might ask, "How long do I have to play before I have a 75% of being break even or ahead?" (on a +EV game)

If you want to see this live in action -- open up an excel spreadsheet. In cell A1, write in without quotes "=RANDBETWEEN(1,2)". In B1, write "=IF(A1=1, 0.95, -1)". In C1 write, "=B1" and in C2 write "=SUM(B2,C1)". Copy and paste A1, B1, and C2 all the way down to row 10,000. This simulates a coin flip where you lose $1 on tails but win $0.95 on heads. On average, you should lose 2.5c ($0.025) per flip. It's 10,000 flips.

You can scroll to the bottom and look at cell C10000. This would be your result after 10,000 flips on this game. It should be somewhere around -250. Is it positive (it's almost certainly not)? Refresh Excel and it'll come up with a new set of random numbers. See what in cell C10000. Still negative? Keep refreshing. Eventually, it should be clear this number is almost always going to be negative.

You can look at individual groups of 10, 20, 100, or however many sets of flips as you want. Sure, some will be positive, others will (obviously) be negative. You can even make a chart if you want. That probably will give the most descriptive view of this whole thing. Insert->Chart. Make it a "Line Chart" and for the range write "C1:C10000". You might have to write "=$C$1:$C$10000" depending on if you're using Excel, Google Sheets, or something else. You'll see some ups (and many downs). You'll win some sessions and you'll lose some sessions. But overall the trend is negative.


Sure, this is a very simple bet with little variance. But the same thing can be done with any bet that has a house edge and you'll notice the same thing -- a downward trend. Some bets have a higher N0 (or long term) while others have a smaller one. It doesn't matter if it's a 0.5% house edge or a 15% house edge -- the more hands you play the more likely you are to be behind.

---

Thank you Mr RS. Finally, someone responded with a meaningful answer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Clearly you don't play craps.

---

Yes, I have played craps both live and online (to meet wagering requirements). And have used bubble craps extensively to earn and churn free play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

There is,a phrase "no harm, no foul" that applies to neutral numbers, most often craps numbers after the point is established. It also applies to other neutral numbers in the game.

---

There are many phrases. Like the above phrase, these phrases have nothing to do with you incorrectly stating that you will win a pass line bet with a point of 6 on the next roll of the dice with a probability of 5/6. Of course, you then tried to obfuscate this with the probability of not losing a pass line bet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

But what does it have to do with the application of long term or short term? Nothing. You still haven't responded.
I'd simply like to know if the application of short term or long term to craps is valid. I've gotten every answer but.

---

I did respond Coach Belly. I showed the 99% confidence interval (that is a 1% chance of falling outside this range/interval) of the house edge for 10,000, and a number of higher pass line bet resolutions. The application of short term is valid for field,hop, and horn bets for example (one and done bets). The application of long term is valid for pass,don't pass,come, don't come,place, and lay bets for example. The application of long term is also valid for a sequence of one and done bets along with a sequence of long term bets as well. An aggregation of bets where the house has an edge will result in the casino making money.

Seems like a perfect time for a re-boot of this:

Quote:

---

You have two 6-sided dice in a cup. You shake the dice, and slam the cup down onto the table, hiding the result. Your partner peeks under the cup, and tells you, truthfully, "At least one of the dice is a 2."

What is the probability that both dice are showing a 2?

---

This should be good for another 30 pages of nothingness.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

I did respond Coach Belly.

---

Not my work, asshole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Forgive me if I'm asking an elementary question but I see in your discussions you use long term and short term.

My question: is there really a long term? Isn't most gambling nothing but short term decisions?

Example #1 Craps

The shooter throws the dice. No matter what the previous result was the shooter has, for example, a one in 36 chance of throwing 12. The previous roll has no impact on the current roll and the current roll has no impact on the roll to come. So isn't craps just a series of short term, one roll decisions?

Example #2 Video Poker

The electronic deck is reshuffled with each play. Each play has 52/53 cards. Since each hand is independent where is the long term?

Example #3 Six Deck Shoe in Blackjack

Here it's different. After each hand the remaining cards will have different totals. So as you approach the cut card for the reshuffle you could argue that you are nearing the long term because there is a finite number of cards available.

Help me out here.

---

Bumping this thread to tribute the VCT forum legend AndrewG. Hopefully he decides to reappear after a prolonged absence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozzy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Forgive me if I'm asking an elementary question but I see in your discussions you use long term and short term.

My question: is there really a long term? Isn't most gambling nothing but short term decisions?

Example #1 Craps

The shooter throws the dice. No matter what the previous result was the shooter has, for example, a one in 36 chance of throwing 12. The previous roll has no impact on the current roll and the current roll has no impact on the roll to come. So isn't craps just a series of short term, one roll decisions?

Example #2 Video Poker

The electronic deck is reshuffled with each play. Each play has 52/53 cards. Since each hand is independent where is the long term?

Example #3 Six Deck Shoe in Blackjack

Here it's different. After each hand the remaining cards will have different totals. So as you approach the cut card for the reshuffle you could argue that you are nearing the long term because there is a finite number of cards available.

Help me out here.

---

Bumping this thread to tribute the VCT forum legend AndrewG. Hopefully he decides to reappear after a prolonged absence.

---

I'm hoping the same for Teflon Ron.

There was an agreement some time ago that my attorney's assistant was not going to post here again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

There was an agreement some time ago that my attorney's assistant was not going to post here again.

---

Too bad; he had a lot to learn and what better place to learn how to flame, insult and debase one's fellow gamblers than here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

There was an agreement some time ago that my attorney's assistant was not going to post here again.

---

Too bad; he had a lot to learn and what better place to learn how to flame, insult and debase one's fellow gamblers than here?

---

You're starting to mellow. This is not the same V from rec.gambling.craps

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

You're starting to mellow. This is not the same V from rec.gambling.craps

---

Yeah, getting older and contracting prostate cancer (currently in remission) can cause unexpected consequences.

I no longer feel compelled to present myself as the "angry young man," a disputatious asshole who enjoyed flaming and stirring the pot; now it's more like "the mellow old hippy."

But I ain't a good boy: I still challenge and attack others, esp. at Diversity Tomorrow.

God bless you V.