The Wizard will bank this bet: 1/6 vs 1/11

[jbjb]

All Alan really needs to know is that the bet with the Wizard is a sucker bet and should be avoided!

[arcimede$]

We've got to remember .... Alan is the same person that thinks if you set a stop loss playing VP, you will do better the next time you play. Some folks are immune to logic no matter how simple it is.

[jbjb]

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. Whatever floats his boat.

[Alan Mendelson]

We've got to remember .... Alan is the same person that thinks if you set a stop loss playing VP, you will do better the next time you play. Some folks are immune to logic no matter how simple it is.

No, that is not what I said. Geesh.

[arcimede$]

No, that is not what I said. Geesh.

Yes, you did. You just didn't realize that was the logical result of your approach.

[arcimede$]

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. Whatever floats his boat.

My own variation on this is .... you can lead a man to knowledge but you can't make him think.

[regnis]

Arci has come out of his shell with a couple royals and these new WOV math geeks that think like him.

Maybe it's time for me to have another million hand VP simulation done that comes nowhere near the expected results.

That might push him over the edge.

[Rob.Singer]

Evidently language is less important than math. Who knew? I learn something new every day. Thanks, WoV.

In the real world red, it's completely opposite. I spent my working career keeping my engineers & accountants from talking to our customers without a Business Development Manager present, and even then I always had them rehearse thoroughly. The math people meant well, but most of the time they would either spill the beans or confuse the customers by coming in from an entirely different angle than what was strategized for. They were never THAT on-board with how and why the customers needed to hear something this way instead of that.

[redietz]

If I have to draw a perfect scheme with dots, commas ,conditions etc every time I want to say something on a forum, just to satisfy trolls like you and language nerds, I'd deprive myself from all the fun.

Whoever wants to understand will get the point easily. Whoever wants to troll and whine about commas will do it anyway.

Have fun.

This may be my favorite quote of all time. My ex-girlfriend, who is a fine editor, let me know what a comma-overusing, tense-misusing, participle-dangling mess I am, and now, somehow, I don't feel so bad. "Language nerd" sounds so cool.

I think Kewl meant "deprive myself OF all the fun, by the way.

[kewl]

This may be my favorite quote of all time. My ex-girlfriend, who is a fine editor, let me know what a comma-overusing, tense-misusing, participle-dangling mess I am, and now, somehow, I don't feel so bad. "Language nerd" sounds so cool.

I think Kewl meant "deprive myself OF all the fun, by the way.

lol, maybe I should've made it clear some time earlier in the thread, that I'm not American, nor British, nor am I from a country where English is used massively.
I've studied English basics as obligatory foreign language in high school for three seasons and that was it.
For someone who's native language is very different from English I'm pretty satisfied with my level - it gets my point across like 90% of the time w/o the need to rephrase or correct too much.

If I knew you guys here, are so strict on phrasing I'd have used dictionaries and grammar guides for every post just to make sure you won't get confused by my sentence structural genius

peace

[RS__]

This may be my favorite quote of all time. My ex-girlfriend, who is a fine editor, let me know what a comma-overusing, tense-misusing, participle-dangling mess I am, and now, somehow, I don't feel so bad. "Language nerd" sounds so cool.

I think Kewl meant "deprive myself OF all the fun, by the way.

Does this forum not show end quotation marks?

[redietz]

You've gotta pay extra for those. This is America.

P.S. Kewl, my apologies. If not your native language, it can be tough. The ex-girlfriend does a lot of dissertation editing for international students, so if you ever need a stellar English edit for an academic paper or resume, PM me and I'll put you in touch.

[Alan Mendelson]

You've gotta pay extra for those. This is America.

But on my Best Buys TV Show I can get it for you wholesale !!

[Alan Mendelson]

Indignant from the WOV forum, since you are still reading this forum I want you to know that I am still reading your nonsense on the WOV forum.

Here is one of your recent posts -- and are you really unable to see that you are using multiple rolls of two dice to come up with the 1/11 answer? Look, here's what you posted (in bold):

You can bet your sweet *** my video will start with both dice showing DEUCE :

The first half of the video will keep the right-hand side die (blue) frozen as a Frozen Blue Deuce. Then the left-hand side die (red), starting as a 2, will rotate to all the other red faces: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6.

The second half of the video will keep the left-hand side die (red) frozen as a Frozen Red Deuce. Then the right-hand side die (blue), starting as a 2, will rotate to all the other blue faces: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6.

There will be no "Mexican Jumping Deuces."

What you and the others in the 1/11 camp fail to acknowledge is that you can't figure the odds TWICE the way you want to in your video -- as described above. Yes, when you figure the odds TWICE by saying first one die is the 2, and then the other die is the 2, you do get the answer 1/11.

But when you roll the dice ONCE and only once the answer is 1/6.

Allow me to use your "first roll" which you describe as the first half of your video:

The first half of the video will keep the right-hand side die (blue) frozen as a Frozen Blue Deuce. Then the left-hand side die (red), starting as a 2, will rotate to all the other red faces: 1, 3, 4, 5, 6.

There is the answer to the question-- in that ONE roll.

There is no need to ask the question a second time -- and to come up with the 1/11 answer you have to ask the question a second time AND COMBINE THE TWO ANSWERS.

Remember: there are only 6 sides on a die. The Wizard knows.

[jbjb]

Alan Alan Alan. You have to quit comparing "setting a die on 2" to "rolling both dice and waiting until AT LEAST one die is a 2."

In your case, it's one in six. In the latter, it's one in eleven.

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan Alan Alan. You have to quit comparing "setting a die on 2" to "rolling both dice and waiting until AT LEAST one die is a 2."

In your case, it's one in six. In the latter, it's one in eleven.

No No No whatever your real name is. The original question is the same thing as setting one of two dice as a 2 and then examining the six sides on the other die. And I know you don't see it that way. It's just mind boggling why you don't?

[jbjb]

No No No whatever your real name is. The original question is the same thing as setting one of two dice as a 2 and then examining the six sides on the other die. And I know you don't see it that way. It's just mind boggling why you don't?

No it's not the same and nowhere close.

[jbjb]

You're letting the "cup" & "peeker" interfere with the correct thinking. Those two words is what makes this a trick question.

[jbjb]

When you set the die to a two, you eliminate the possibility of the other five numbers showing up. When you roll it, you don't eliminate them and that's where you get mixed up.

So tell us how rolling both in the open is different from doing it under a cup?

[OneHitWonder]

The Wizard's can't read; Alan's can't compute. Put them together, and you're left with people who can do neither but in an amusing manner. Television reporters, and gamblers who only talk about it.

Oh my! The bet will never happen. Good.