What about loss goals?

[arcimede$]

Arc, you did a good job of talking your way around what I said. But you never responded to my point which is that every individual can have actual results which can differ from the expected return of the game.

No, I addressed it specifically. It's called a bell curve.

It doesn't matter if it is after one hand, or ten hands or a million hands. And this is why you can beat a "negative return" game. You keep talking about odds of hands, and that is not an issue. You create issues that have nothing to do with the discussion about how leaving with a profit can help your bottom line.

Alan, I'm simply relating the facts to you. Your inability to understand them is the only problem.

For example, your latest contribution is this:

There is no difference in the expected future results after any particular hand. Every hand is independent.

Well, Arc, you're right. But what does that have to do with the price of tea in China OR if taking profits will help your bottom line over time? It has NOTHING to do with it. You keep raising silly issues and make comments about math that has nothing to do with our subject here.

No, I am explaining reality. You want to live in a fantasy world.

How about this statement of yours:

Notice how you stated in b. that keeping playing would result in losing a profit. But, since there's no difference between that point in time and the the next time you play, the odds are exactly the same that you would lose that profit the next time you decide to play. The odds are also exactly the same that you will win from that point in time as it is the next time you play.

Well, you did it again Arc. You talk about odds on the next hand. Well, Arc, no one is talking about odds on the next play. All we are talking about is the money showing on the meter, and the money you can take home with you. Why do you keep mixing up the issue here? As I said earlier, we're talking apples and you're talking oranges. We say look through the window and you're looking through the door. Are we communicating yet?

Alan, you are claiming that by taking money at that exact point in time you can do better than you will do if you keep playing. That's where the discussion of the next hand comes into play. Your next hand would either be played at that point in time or when you return to the casino. If the odds are exactly the same in both cases then quitting at that time can't possibly make a difference. You are just as likely to lose that win the next time you play as you are if you keep playing.

And then you throw in your bell curve. Wow, bell curves.

And yes, Arc, if there is a bell curve it means that someone is doing better than the expected return and someone is doing worse than the expected return. So the bell curve defeats your claim that you can't beat a negative expectation game.

I never claimed a negative game can not be beaten. I've claimed there is nothing you can do to change your own future results. If you get lucky and beat the game that is great, but your choices of when to stop playing had no control over it. You simply were luckier than most.

Unless of course your new claim is that the entire bell curve is a negative return bell curve. Is that what you're claiming now?

Bell curves are not positive or negative. They simply are a plot of the results one can expect from playing a game. They graphically demonstrate the points I've been making.

I can see you are making no attempt to understand the facts. You would rather live in a fantasy world.