#1
|
|||
|
|||
Magic and the Stabilizing Lose
Stabilizing Lose is my latest argument against science in favor of magic. This starts by winning an amount big enough and having the 'need' to stabilize it, that generally happens when one haven't been making much if any money during the couple sessions before that.
Now, the odds to get a stabilizing win is like 33%, and a stabilizing draw another 33%, there being just a 33% chance that one will lose something significant. But according to my observations it happens over 66% of the time that one loses (more one needs the stabilizing win the more often one loses). I can be even more accurate than that and say that the lose amount will be between 45% and 72.5% of the win amount that one wanted to get 'stable.' But time after time I will have to see a different type of formula, a formula that I am very familiar with as it's around 80% of the time the same, going the same patterns as one period, from the beginning to the ends of any period. That's not science but magic. The stabilizing lose being just one of the patterns and nothing of it is scientific; it's a magical pattern, and only in the long run the mathematical patters more or less get to the right score, but it's only because of magic. One thing I have accepted from much part is the magical pattern, that it's the only reality inside the long run statistics. Things that happen on the poker table are some of the time following statistics but one must get used to the magical shuffle as the true reality of life and play under its influence and trust that it will be finally leading to scientific end though the path haven't been more than partly scientific. I though do have my ways of playing at right times and change sites to avoid the bad magic, and it works like 50% and often more, so it may be mandatory, though then on the other hand I have seen that what I leave behind will try to catch me, so it's not fully possible, but this is one aspect where one may earn more than what's scientifically possible. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Magic and the Stabilizing Lose
how much time did you waste writing this post?
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Magic and the Stabilizing Lose
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Magic and the Stabilizing Lose
I'm not fussy, ship the good magic, thx.
|
|
|