Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 14 to 26 of 27

Thread: newtobj: Ups and downs

  1. #14
    Brick
    Guest

    Brick: True for POS(then)must be true for NEG.

    Ok Norm,lets keep all the IF,BUT,AND out of the picture. If we have an absolute ev that will be mathematically achieved. Then the swings are predictable in either direction.

    EV=
    A)anticipated wins due to horrific negative swings will.. assure, B) anticipated losses due to tremendous positive swings.. which(both) ultimatlely arrives at expection=EV.

    Mathematics says it is impossible for A to be true and B not to be true or vice versa.

    Have I a new discovery here? No'it's only standard deviation. I know many enjoy using the word it's all meaningless this may be true for sessions but as we combine sessions as a whole and arrive ever so closer to *No.* then the word meaningless gradual turns into "meaningful"

    Brick

    > Well then it wouldn't be causal and would be
    > accurate. And would be in 100% agreement
    > with Parker's statement.

    > Take the boolean algebra statement 'If a
    > then b'

    > If a is known to be false, the statement
    > is true even if b is also false.
    > If a is known to be true, then the
    > statement is true only if b is known to be
    > true.
    > If a is unknown and b is always true, then
    > the statement is true.
    > In logic, no causal relationship is
    > implied. The problem is that in English,
    > statements that are logically true can imply
    > a causal relationship that is untrue.

  2. #15
    pat
    Guest

    pat: right and wrong

    > Unfortunately, it is all too real. We play
    > with a small edge and a large variance. This
    > means that we will experience large swings,
    > both positive and negative. In the long run,
    > we will earn our expectation, but the trip
    > there may be a wild ride indeed.

    > However, this does not mean that simply
    > because you have had several winning
    > sessions, you are now somehow
    > "due" to lose. There is no
    > "pattern" in that sense. The cards
    > have no memory; they have no mind at all.
    > You face exactly the same odds after each
    > shuffle, regardless of whether you have been
    > winning or losing.
    if your ev is 100 an hour and you win 10,000 in one hour,sure the cards dont have a memory of the last shoe BUT I DO.i remember always giving back big wins and always coming back from big losses.you cant expect to win 10,000 a day playing bj if your ev is 100.hence,you can and will give back some of your winnings.

  3. #16
    Magician
    Guest

    Magician: Infinity

    > EV=
    > A)anticipated wins due to horrific negative
    > swings will.. assure, B) anticipated losses
    > due to tremendous positive swings..
    > which(both) ultimatlely arrives at
    > expection=EV.

    > Mathematics says it is impossible for A to
    > be true and B not to be true or vice versa.

    No, it doesn't. Our results are guaranteed to converge to our EV only after an infinite number of hands. Regardless of how far ahead or behind we are after any finite number of hands, all it takes to put us "back on track" is an infinite number of hands at our EV. It is not necessary to have a swing in the opposite direction at all.

    Compared to the inifinite number of hands to come our current position, based on a finite number of hands, is absolutely meaningless.

  4. #17
    Magician
    Guest

    Magician: Re: Positive swings.

    > However these two statements seem at odds with each other and I am hoping you might try and clear it up -again.

    I tried to address this apparent contradiction in my post "Infinity" above.

    > I tend to see us collectively, as a group,
    > all under the bell curve "realizing the
    > expectation"
    > as opposed to all of the hands we each play
    > individually under our own private curve
    > trying to realize the expectation.

    The collective hands of all of us is simply a larger sample than the hands of one player, so it will more closely approximate the bell curve. If it helps you to think about this larger sample, go right ahead, but understand that the same laws apply to the smaller sample.

  5. #18
    Brick
    Guest

    Brick: Re: Infinity

    "all it takes to put us "back on track" is an infinite number of hands at our EV."

    Is that all? If this is the case we may never see EV. So I have to disagree.

    All it takes to get us back on track is having a big enough bankroll to ride out the negative swings before we go broke. Winning back losses due to bad variance are anticipated by us, as card counters. If not then we are playing to a negative EV.

    I stand by my logical opinion. Which is "When winnings are anticipated ,then losses must be anticipated also."

    Example: EV=$10 PER HOUR.

    After 50 or so hours of blackjack, you've managed to win $5,000 due to some good variance. Do you expect to keep winning at 10 times the EV? Of course not. Therefore losses are anticipated in the furure. The Phenomenon is we can NOT speculate when this will happen. Does this make sense to you or anybody? It certainly does to me.

    Brick

    > Compared to the inifinite number of hands to
    > come our current position, based on a finite
    > number of hands, is absolutely meaningless.

  6. #19
    Parker
    Guest

    Parker: Re: Infinity

    > "all it takes to put us "back on
    > track" is an infinite number of hands
    > at our EV."

    > Is that all? If this is the case we may
    > never see EV. So I have to disagree.

    > All it takes to get us back on track is
    > having a big enough bankroll to ride out the
    > negative swings before we go broke. Winning
    > back losses due to bad variance are
    > anticipated by us, as card counters. If not
    > then we are playing to a negative EV.

    > I stand by my logical opinion. Which is
    > "When winnings are anticipated ,then
    > losses must be anticipated also."

    > Example: EV=$10 PER HOUR.

    > After 50 or so hours of blackjack, you've
    > managed to win $5,000 due to some good
    > variance. Do you expect to keep winning at
    > 10 times the EV? Of course not. Therefore
    > losses are anticipated in the furure. The
    > Phenomenon is we can NOT speculate when this
    > will happen. Does this make sense to you or
    > anybody? It certainly does to me.

    No, we do not expect to keep winning at 10 times our EV. We expect wild swings in both directions.

    Which is exactly the same thing we should expect if, during those last 50 hours, we managed to lose 10 times EV.

    This is admittedly a difficult concept to grasp.

    I like to reduce it to its simplest terms, an unbiased coin toss. We know that if we toss the coin, say, a billion times, it will end up being heads 50% of the time. However, if, during those tosses, it comes up tails 20 times in a row, the outcome of the next toss (and all subsequent tosses) is still 50-50.

  7. #20
    Magician
    Guest

    Magician: Re: Infinity

    > Example: EV=$10 PER HOUR.

    Good idea. While we're at it, SD=$500 per hour.

    > After 50 or so hours of blackjack, you've
    > managed to win $5,000 due to some good
    > variance. Do you expect to keep winning at
    > 10 times the EV? Of course not. Therefore
    > losses are anticipated in the furure. The
    > Phenomenon is we can NOT speculate when this
    > will happen. Does this make sense to you or
    > anybody? It certainly does to me.

    After 50 hours I am $4500 ahead, or about 1.3 SDs above expectation.

    I expect to keep winning at $10 per hour. And I expect the same sorts of swings in both directions as I always did. After 500 hours I should have around $9500. I'll still be $4500 ahead, but it's now only 0.4 SDs above expectation.

    I do not expect to lose $4500 of the $5000 in short order because I didn't "deserve" it, nor do I expect to be stuck around $5000 for the next 450 hours just because I was lucky in the first 50.

    What do you expect?

  8. #21
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: Ahhh, infinity

    The big problem with 'infinity' is how do you manage to stay alive infinitely?

  9. #22
    humble
    Guest

    humble: Re: Ahhh, infinity

    > The big problem with 'infinity' is how do
    > you manage to stay alive infinitely?

    The answer is religion.
    As Blaise Pascal put it: the chance that God exists may be ever so small, but it is not zero; the reward for believing in God is infinite life; ergo infinite EV for a believer; mathematics says I'm a believer.

  10. #23
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: Paradox (no BJ)

    An interesting quote. A paradox has always bothered me. Assuming the Universe is four billion years old, the odds that you are alive at this particular moment are near zero. If time is infinite, the probability that you are alive is exactly zero, assuming no reincarnation. Nonetheless, it appears that you are alive. This is a paradox.

    Of course there exist many ways out of this paradox: reincarnation exists, all instances in time coexist, this instant in time is the only instant, the Universe is an illusion. But none of the solutions to the paradox are particularly satisfying.


  11. #24
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: Programmer's logic.

    I actually have a couple of "IF 1=2 THEN" statements in my code. An easy method of temporary exclusion. Impossible implications have purpose. (Politics is an obvious real-world example.)

  12. #25
    pillow
    Guest

    pillow: Re: Programmer's logic.

    > I actually have a couple of "IF 1=2
    > THEN" statements in my code. An easy
    > method of temporary exclusion. Impossible
    > implications have purpose. (Politics is an
    > obvious real-world example.)

    Not a particularly good advertisement for your programming

  13. #26
    Norm Wattenberger
    Guest

    Norm Wattenberger: On the contrary


    > Not a particularly good advertisement for
    > your programming

    There are always undocumented features in CV products. They are excluded from production copies until I'm comfortable that they are ready for distribution. (Most of the CVShuffle code was developed five years ago.) This is a safe method of temporary exclusion that is easy to change without any unwanted implications. The most important aspect of coding should always be maintainability.




Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.