Problem with your book - Page 2

master_hellmuth · #11 01-03-2006, 02:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
True, but you have to realize the long is infinity, not 20 spins of the wheel, or 50 hands of poker, or even 1 million flips of a coin. The long run is very long.
Don't take this the wrong way, but your belief in your theories are exactly why casinos make billions of dollars a year.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I understand this. I'm not saying that the history of the cards will allow you to predict the next evensts with 100 percent accuracy. You wouldn't be albe to do that till infinity or whatever. I'm just saying it makes it more likely that you can tell if a flush is goiing ot complete, etc. etc.

And casinos make billions of dollars a year because of dumb tourists who stand on 16's versus a dealer showing ten. Or who makke the sucker bets at craps.

loxxii · #12 01-03-2006, 03:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
smart roulette

[/ QUOTE ]

This reminds me of that commercial that says, "if you gamble for fun, you've already won!" I hate the way the casinos trick people into believing that you can lose money over the long run, but it is ok if you can play smart and have fun. I'm sorry, but to me long run losses equal not playing smart and not having fun.

Vuron00 · #13 01-03-2006, 03:07 PM

I was going to reply with reasoning but gave up because I don't think it matters.

I really hope this post is a troll. If not, you need to stop gambling.

john kane · #14 01-03-2006, 03:08 PM

the only skill to roulette is your maximising your utility.

you can decide how fast you want to lose money at roulette, and in general you that choice is based your utility function.

say i walk in with $1000. if i wanted, i could lose it while playing for days, just betting $1 every time.
but if i wanted i could always bet my stack.

id do whichever yielded more fun, as i know either way im leaving there without a dime if i carry on with either strategy.

(obviously this is very basic and ignoring opp.costs etc, but i think ive made my point)

you have so much to learn if you think the previous roulette results affect the next result.
if you spent time reading and studying, you will look back and think 'i cant believe i used to think that', probably like a lot of us do now.

master_hellmuth · #15 01-03-2006, 03:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
the only skill to roulette is your maximising your utility.

you can decide how fast you want to lose money at roulette, and in general you that choice is based your utility function.

say i walk in with $1000. if i wanted, i could lose it while playing for days, just betting $1 every time.
but if i wanted i could always bet my stack.

id do whichever yielded more fun, as i know either way im leaving there without a dime if i carry on with either strategy.

(obviously this is very basic and ignoring opp.costs etc, but i think ive made my point)

you have so much to learn if you think the previous roulette results affect the next result.
if you spent time reading and studying, you will look back and think 'i cant believe i used to think that', probably like a lot of us do now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Alright, enough about roulette, this is a poker board and obvisly you guys don't understand roulette. But I can't beleve you don't understand about probability.

lapoker17 · #16 01-03-2006, 03:12 PM

im a roulette guy myself. don't listen to these idiots.

master_hellmuth · #17 01-03-2006, 03:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]
im a roulette guy myself. don't listen to these idiots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank You.

Alk3 · #18 01-03-2006, 03:18 PM

See: gambler's fallacy.

danzasmack · #19 01-03-2006, 03:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
im a roulette guy myself. don't listen to these idiots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank You.

[/ QUOTE ]

The idea is that since you missed your last 19 flushes, it doesnt mean you REALLY should mad number 20.

The odds of missing 20 flushes in a row are small, but these are separate events and time is a factor.

Your arguments is basically saying "the odds are small that I will miss 20 flushes in a row." This is true. But the statemet "I should make a flush now because I have missed my last 19 and it's very rare to make 20 in a row" is very false.

I think I just got punked.

master_hellmuth · #20 01-03-2006, 03:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
im a roulette guy myself. don't listen to these idiots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank You.

[/ QUOTE ]

The idea is that since you missed your last 19 flushes, it doesnt mean you REALLY should mad number 20.

The odds of missing 20 flushes in a row are small, but these are separate events and time is a factor.

Your arguments is basically saying "the odds are small that I will miss 20 flushes in a row." This is true. But the statemet "I should make a flush now because I have missed my last 19 and it's very rare to make 20 in a row" is very false.

I think I just got punked. <font color="white">pwned, moran </font>

[/ QUOTE ]

How can you say one and not the tother? If things didn't even out then probability wouldn't work. Probability does work, things even out, therefore, it is more likely (I"M not saying definite, I'm not even saying VERY likely), just more likely, that something that hasn't happenned in a while, but shoudl have, will happen.