Page 101 of 144 FirstFirst ... 5191979899100101102103104105111 ... LastLast
Results 2,001 to 2,020 of 2863

Thread: The WoV Thread

  1. #2001
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,215
    I can't speak for coach but I am not trolling you--nor have I ever. I don't have any problem believing in your card counting and the results that you have disclosed. Seems very believable to me. Maybe the problem is just that in espousing the Law of Large Numbers, you have over stated the benefit of the $8,000 loss.

    Tableplay has clearly explained and I am in agreement with everything else he has stated. But you have to overcome the loss and that means that you have to out perform the 51.5% for whatever time that takes based upon the size of your bets. I don't know the estimated time that will take and there is no guaranty.

    So while I understand there will be winning and losing sessions, I don't ever classify a losing session as a great day. Simple as that.

  2. #2002
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    608
    Using the Kelly criterion types of betting or money management, to inter-optimize the variables such as EV, you could do far worse than a simple one-day loss. And one that will takes months of continuous play, where that even possible, to recoup. (Kelly is meant for the stock markets, with millions of trades a month.)

    "Something for nothing" at the local casino sounds so easy, by the mathematics, but life doesn't work anything like that. Blackjack and slots aren't even games. More like glorified devices to suck up all of your money and/or time. Precursors to baloney, paranoia, and years of pent-up anger.

    Gambling forums should be about a release from all of that.
    True addicts are incredibly credible.

  3. #2003
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,935
    Originally Posted by regnis View Post
    Tableplay has clearly explained and I am in agreement with everything else he has stated. But you have to overcome the loss and that means that you have to out perform the 51.5% for whatever time that takes based upon the size of your bets. I don't know the estimated time that will take and there is no guaranty.
    Yes regnis, if you want to for whatever reason pull that small segment, in this case an $8800 loss out from the total, then yes the remaining segment would win at a greater that expectation rate. BUT why would you divorce that segment. It is part of the totality!!

    That would be like looking at a basketball player that shoots 90% foul shots and saying, if you separate out the 'missed shots, he shoots 100%.

    It is the totality and the missed shots are part of that totality just as the $8800 loss is part of the totality.

  4. #2004
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,215
    No disagreement. I just wouldn't categorize it as a great day. That's it. Simple disagreement as to that categorization. Nothing more. Nada.

  5. #2005
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,935
    Originally Posted by Bill Yung View Post
    Using the Kelly criterion types of betting or money management, to inter-optimize the variables such as EV, you could do far worse than a simple one-day loss. And one that will takes months of continuous play, where that even possible, to recoup.
    Been there. Done that! I have endured four (4) different losing cycles of 5 months or more. That is not losing every day for 5-6 months but just as you describe a loss and recoup. Usually a fairly significant loss and slower recoup or rebound.

    THIS is the nature of card counting! This is variance!

  6. #2006
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,935
    Originally Posted by regnis View Post
    No disagreement. I just wouldn't categorize it as a great day. That's it. Simple disagreement as to that categorization. Nothing more. Nada.
    If you are in it for the long haul, as I and most AP's are, then you no longer think in terms of short-term or daily wins or losses. You think long-term and that means you focus on the EV you are accumulating. And that particular day, I registered significant play, accumulating significant EV. That makes it a very good day.

    And now I am done posting from my phone for the day. Just too difficult.

  7. #2007
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,557
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    And that particular day, I registered significant play, accumulating significant EV. That makes it a very good day.
    I get it now, he considers it a very good day because he played for a long time.

    It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.

  8. #2008
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    206
    Originally Posted by coach belly View Post
    Originally Posted by Keystone View Post
    Why is it that you end almost every post with a question?....you sound like a fucking 12 yr old moron
    I'm trying to confirm information, so I ask questions.

    What's it to you, anyway?

    You continue to act like a deeply disturbed nothing,
    no doubt a mommy's basement-dwelling turd.
    Confirm or gather?....there is a difference...if itís indeed confirm, are you this sites policeman or officer in the name of truth?...as to your last statement, very original...a typical 6th grade retort, hereby confirming my previous statement

  9. #2009
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    3,651
    Originally Posted by regnis View Post
    No disagreement. I just wouldn't categorize it as a great day. That's it. Simple disagreement as to that categorization. Nothing more. Nada.
    It was a great day for EV. It ran above expectation. But the results didnt match up. Thats all he's saying.
    "The hard left poses a far greater danger to the American future than the hard right." Alan Dershowitz

  10. #2010
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    3,651
    Originally Posted by coach belly View Post
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    What's hard for me believe is that people accept the recipe for success that casinos use (house edge and a large sample size), but when the player applies the same recipe, they can't believe it works . . .
    Who doesn't believe it works? I believe it works.

    Back to the question at hand....

    If a loss is incurred after X hands, in order for results to meet expectation after mX hands,
    then the player must win at a rate above expectation for the remaining (m-1)X hands.

    Is this correct?
    If the count says you have a 1% edge and you hit a blackjack thats 50 times expectation. Will you now have to run 50 times lower in the next x number of hands? I'm just collecting information.
    "The hard left poses a far greater danger to the American future than the hard right." Alan Dershowitz

  11. #2011
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,557
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    It was a great day for EV. It ran above expectation.
    How does EV run above expectation?

    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    If the count says you have a 1% edge and you hit a blackjack thats 50 times expectation. Will you now have to run 50 times lower in the next x number of hands?
    If the game must converge to its expectation, then how else could that happen?

  12. #2012
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    452
    Originally Posted by coach belly View Post
    Originally Posted by coach belly View Post

    Back to the question at hand....

    If a loss is incurred after X hands, in order for results to meet expectation after mX hands,
    then the player must win at a rate above expectation for the remaining (m-1)X hands.

    Is this correct?
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    The answer to your question (by the central limit theorem) is yes
    And since the game must converge to to its expectation, then the player will win at a rate greater than expectation after a loss is incurred.

    Isn't that what you're claiming?
    I am claiming that the player will eventually converge to expectation if they keep playing. The player may lose after a loss or they may win. But if they keep playing the wins will become greater than the losses until the player converges to expectation. What happens in the short term is unknown, unless the probability of winning is 100%.

  13. #2013
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,557
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    I am claiming that the player will eventually converge to expectation if they keep playing.
    Players that report their results here are using years and partial years as their time parameters when discussing expectation, so they seem to think that there is significance to their results over that amount of time...

    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    I am right where I should be for the year, almost exactly (just a hair below) expectation at with an actual BJ win for the year of 24,637.50, vs expectation (accumulated EV) of $25,365.
    Say the player "runs cold" for the first X months of the year, and is down $60K.

    Since the game must converge to expectation for the year, will the player win at a rate greater than expectation for the next (12-X) months and reach or approach expectation for the year?

  14. #2014
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    452
    Originally Posted by coach belly View Post
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    I am claiming that the player will eventually converge to expectation if they keep playing.
    Players that report their results here are using years and partial years as their time parameters when discussing expectation, so they seem to think that there is significance to their results over that amount of time...

    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    I am right where I should be for the year, almost exactly (just a hair below) expectation at with an actual BJ win for the year of 24,637.50, vs expectation (accumulated EV) of $25,365.
    Say the player "runs cold" for the first X months of the year, and is down $60K.

    Since the game must converge to expectation for the year, will the player win at a rate greater than expectation for the next (12-X) months and reach or approach expectation for the year?
    Why must the game converge to expectation for the year ? The game will converge to expectation - when it will do so is unknown.

  15. #2015
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,557
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Why must the game converge to expectation for the year ?
    I don't know why.

    The players are reporting their results for a year, and comparing the results to expectation for the year.

    Above there's an example of results for 4 months, and expectation for 4 months.

    Is there no way to measure EV for a defined period of time?

    I'm trying to understand how, after a losing start to the year, the player knows he will win for the year.

    Does he know that since his results are well below expectation, that he will begin to win at a rate equally above expectation?

  16. #2016
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    452
    Originally Posted by coach belly View Post
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Why must the game converge to expectation for the year ?
    I don't know why.

    The players are reporting their results for a year, and comparing the results to expectation for the year.

    Above there's an example of results for 4 months, and expectation for 4 months.

    Is there no way to measure EV for a defined period of time?

    I'm trying to understand how, after a losing start to the year, the player knows he will win for the year.

    Does he know that since his results are well below expectation, that he will begin to win at a rate equally above expectation?
    The player doesn't know he or she will win for the year. He or she can only state a probability. In an earlier post, I showed the use of the binomial probability density function so that the likelihood of having a certain number of successes could be calculated given a known expectation. Unless a probability is zero or 1, you can only state a probability that you will have a certain number of winning sessions. The more sessions/hands you play the more likely you will converge to expectation, but there are no guarantees for probabilities which are not zero or 1.
    The player doesn't have to win at an equal rate to a loss rate - this is a random walk, not some tit-for-tat scenario. Through a series of random wins and losses, the player will get to the expectation.

  17. #2017
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,557
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    The player doesn't have to win at an equal rate to a loss rate - this is a random walk, not some tit-for-tat scenario. Through a series of random wins and losses, the player will get to the expectation.
    Whatever the incremental wins or losses may be, the overall rate can be determined for each period.

    Don't you use the sum of the series of random wins and losses over a period to determine the rate for that period?

    If the player has lost Y over a period of X months, then in order to meet expectation for the year the result must be a win of (Y + EV) for the next (12-X) months.

  18. #2018
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    3,651
    Originally Posted by Bill Yung View Post
    Using the Kelly criterion types of betting or money management, to inter-optimize the variables such as EV, you could do far worse than a simple one-day loss. And one that will takes months of continuous play, where that even possible, to recoup. (Kelly is meant for the stock markets, with millions of trades a month.)

    "Something for nothing" at the local casino sounds so easy, by the mathematics, but life doesn't work anything like that. Blackjack and slots aren't even games. More like glorified devices to suck up all of your money and/or time. Precursors to baloney, paranoia, and years of pent-up anger.

    Gambling forums should be about a release from all of that.
    Have you considered gambler's anonymous?
    "The hard left poses a far greater danger to the American future than the hard right." Alan Dershowitz

  19. #2019
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    3,651
    Originally Posted by coach belly View Post
    And since the game must converge to to its expectation, then the player will win at a rate greater than expectation after a loss is incurred. Isn't that what you're claiming?
    The above is about as stupid as it gets.
    "The hard left poses a far greater danger to the American future than the hard right." Alan Dershowitz

  20. #2020
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    3,651
    Originally Posted by coach belly View Post
    Originally Posted by tableplay View Post
    Why must the game converge to expectation for the year ?
    I don't know why.

    The players are reporting their results for a year, and comparing the results to expectation for the year.

    Above there's an example of results for 4 months, and expectation for 4 months.

    Is there no way to measure EV for a defined period of time?

    I'm trying to understand how, after a losing start to the year, the player knows he will win for the year.

    Does he know that since his results are well below expectation, that he will begin to win at a rate equally above expectation?
    You have to create positive expectation in order to have a chance to capture it. If you create $100,000 in expectation in a year's time you might finish as expected or you might finish a little below or way below, or you might finish a little ahead or way ahead. There is no such thing as "must win after a loss, or "must lose after a win."
    "The hard left poses a far greater danger to the American future than the hard right." Alan Dershowitz

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The Genealogy Thread
    By mickeycrimm in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 115
    Last Post: 04-27-2018, 05:29 AM
  2. Closed Thread
    By coach belly in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 01-30-2017, 06:29 PM
  3. Sportsbetting ONLY thread
    By LoneStarHorse in forum Sports & Sportsbetting
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 02-05-2016, 02:48 PM
  4. A thread for losses.
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-26-2014, 01:01 AM
  5. The Kicker Thread
    By Rob.Singer in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 01-12-2014, 12:24 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •