Quote:
Originally Posted by
tableplay
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rob.Singer
You haven't proven anything with your contrived and misrepresented "61%" guess. You have no idea what the correct data is to begin with. "$1 8/5 BP" all day long combined with "progressive betting (up or down or both??) means you "might win more sessions, but for me to feel good about this I have to add that you will have BIGGER losers too".
Then that dealer-turned-big-time-7 Stars AP, RS__, chimes in with his goofy support. Only critics like you two could talk yourselves into being mathematical analysts by guessing at what the data and parameters really are.
The Kane/Nestor bug was a major threat to casinos so Casinos disabled double-up on vulnerable machines even though only a small number of people knew about the bug. A small number of people know about your system, and yet -EV VP is still available to play all over the place - the casinos didn't decide to eliminate it. Gee I wonder why ? I already explained that denominational and theme switching is a composition of flat bet same-themed mini-"sessions" (that have no chance of an 85% win rate), which, when combined, form the overall "session" but naturally you ignored that point. You state a -EV betting and theme system can be profitable - the burden of proof is on you, not me.
The double up glitch was a real threat posed by anybody who came upon it. And in every case other than the two boisterous big mouths who got caught--IE, me--it was an unsustainable threat had it continued.
With a strategy such as mine, where discipline and ability are king and greed is a slave, it can go on with myself and others. I know of only one other player who plays it at my limits, and he's been successful for far more years than I played it. So no, there is no casino who sees it or would see it as a threat.
Two other points. First, your entire argument is based on a theory that has no practical application in the real world--even if it were correct, which it isn't. In aerospace applications for instance, math is used solely as GUIDANCE in many many instances but not all of course, while the true end product is provided by those that find a better way through creativity. For example, UHF radio transmission travels by line-of-sight. The math says that the strongest signal travels the shortest distance. However, aircraft have found that some of these signals propegate more efficiently and at an even greater distance if they're bounced off the ocean's waves. Not in every case, but some.
And that's exactly what my play strategy does, when it's played by someone like myself. If you're planting this bogus 61% into the ground, explain why the WoV math people would not bet me that I could win at least 8 out Of 10 sessions? In your world, wouldn't that be solidly +EV for them? But I expect you know why they walked away from it. They were smart enough to admit they couldn't accept a challenge where they did not know all that much about the data behind the strategy.
Math books and theory are great tools we use for basically everything we come across in life. But application reality sometimes requires much much more.