Greasy John: I there a such thing as superstition?

[Greasy John]

I believe in math and am a blackjack advantage player. I also play craps, just the line or don't with odds. Has anyone else ever noticed that when a shooter throws the dice off the table, or when there's an argument, or someone placing a bet during a roll gets his big fat hand in the way of the dice, or when there's a strange quiteness to the table during the roll, or when there's a lot of money on the full table but there's no enthusiasm--when these things happen YOU WILL LOOSE YOUR MONEY MOST OF THE TIME! And if you pull down your odds the shooter will make the numbers you've just abandonded! No matter what you do you're screwed! Now before you all tell me about independent sequential events and the fallacy of luck and how superstition went out with voodoo doctors, etc., I remain entrenched in my beliefs. Come on, some of you believe that some shooters are just going to do good and some are going to do bad, some of the time. Ever noticed how when you just want to throw your point really bad you usually don't? Come on now be honest. Haven't you told the craps table, "Come on everybody, let's get rich!" If you feel they really want to loose, "seven out."

[Parker]

What you are describing is merely a combination of variance and selective memory. You tend to remember the times when events reinforced your beliefs, and forget the times when they did not.

If you kept careful records, you would discover that, in the long run, these things happen exactly as often as they are supposed to happen.

That's it. Nothing more. Nada.

Besides, it is bad luck to be superstitious.

[Ouchez]

> I believe in math and am a blackjack
> advantage player. I also play craps, just
> the line or don't with odds. Has anyone else
> ever noticed that when a shooter throws the
> dice off the table, or when there's an
> argument, or someone placing a bet during a
> roll gets his big fat hand in the way of the
> dice, or when there's a strange quiteness to
> the table during the roll, or when there's a
> lot of money on the full table but there's
> no enthusiasm--when these things happen YOU
> WILL LOOSE YOUR MONEY MOST OF THE TIME! And
> if you pull down your odds the shooter will
> make the numbers you've just abandonded! No
> matter what you do you're screwed! Now
> before you all tell me about independent
> sequential events and the fallacy of luck
> and how superstition went out with voodoo
> doctors, etc., I remain entrenched in my
> beliefs. Come on, some of you believe that
> some shooters are just going to do good and
> some are going to do bad, some of the time.
> Ever noticed how when you just want to throw
> your point really bad you usually don't?
> Come on now be honest. Haven't you told the
> craps table, "Come on everybody, let's
> get rich!" If you feel they really want
> to loose, "seven out."

things do seem to happen. I do think that the collective "Mental Power" of a highly positive or excited table may cause positive things to happen. I am a "Mystic".

Just my opinion, I may be wrong.
Ouchez.

[Norm Wattenberger]

every hand of craps or BJ that will ever be played is predetermined. The only problem is that a machine that could model the Universe and thereby determine the future would have to be larger than the Universe.

[sharmon]

And to defeat the butterfly effect would have to have evey single item as the tracked universe , even the hottie in the halter top playing 2 tables over and all the chips in Luxor1A. You , of course , would have to own this second universe which would negate any reason to test the first universe in the first place. So in the name of science and betterment of mankind I am regretibly asking everyone reading this to send me all your worldly possessions in order to perform this selfless deed.

> every hand of craps or BJ that will ever be
> played is predetermined. The only problem is
> that a machine that could model the Universe
> and thereby determine the future would have
> to be larger than the Universe.

[Ed Tice]

Craps is a negative EV game, so you will lose your money most of the time unless you use some dangerous negative progressions in which case you will wil money most of the time and then go bankrupt over the course of a few minutes.

Whenever the dice go off the table there is a 16% probability that a seven-out will occur on the next roll and you will lose all of your money.

The same voodoo is invoked if somebody says "seven" while the point is on.

If you are this person, you might find that you aren't very popular at the craps table.

Ed

> I believe in math and am a blackjack
> advantage player. I also play craps, just
> the line or don't with odds. Has anyone else
> ever noticed that when a shooter throws the
> dice off the table, or when there's an
> argument, or someone placing a bet during a
> roll gets his big fat hand in the way of the
> dice, or when there's a strange quiteness to
> the table during the roll, or when there's a
> lot of money on the full table but there's
> no enthusiasm--when these things happen YOU
> WILL LOOSE YOUR MONEY MOST OF THE TIME! And
> if you pull down your odds the shooter will
> make the numbers you've just abandonded! No
> matter what you do you're screwed! Now
> before you all tell me about independent
> sequential events and the fallacy of luck
> and how superstition went out with voodoo
> doctors, etc., I remain entrenched in my
> beliefs. Come on, some of you believe that
> some shooters are just going to do good and
> some are going to do bad, some of the time.
> Ever noticed how when you just want to throw
> your point really bad you usually don't?
> Come on now be honest. Haven't you told the
> craps table, "Come on everybody, let's
> get rich!" If you feel they really want
> to loose, "seven out."

[Norm Wattenberger]

I have the second universe in my lab. Only problem is I can't test it against the first universe without changing it and therefore invalidating the test.

> And to defeat the butterfly effect would
> have to have evey single item as the tracked
> universe , even the hottie in the halter top
> playing 2 tables over and all the chips in
> Luxor1A. You , of course , would have to own
> this second universe which would negate any
> reason to test the first universe in the
> first place. So in the name of science and
> betterment of mankind I am regretibly asking
> everyone reading this to send me all your
> worldly possessions in order to perform this
> selfless deed.

[John Lewis]

"Theoretically every hand of craps or BJ that will ever be played is predetermined."

Your statement is Newtonian physics. Quantum mechanics specifies otherwise.

"The only problem is that a machine that could model the Universe and thereby determine the future would have to be larger than the Universe."

I express this differently. Nothing less than the universe could model the universe. The universe models itself. The numbers are crunching every instant of time.

[Norm Wattenberger]

> I express this differently. Nothing less
> than the universe could model the universe.
> The universe models itself. The numbers are
> crunching every instant of time.

But, this still seems to suggest that all is predetermined.

[Kasey]

> "Theoretically every hand of craps or
> BJ that will ever be played is
> predetermined."

> Your statement is Newtonian physics. Quantum
> mechanics specifies otherwise.

John,

I'm not aware of any research that shows quantum uncertainity acting at the macro level, for example, on something the size of a deck of cards. If you know of any article or book that shows this to be true, please post it, I would be very interested (a guy has to have more than one hobby).

It may well be that every hand of blackjack is predetermined.

[John Lewis]

> I express this differently. Nothing less
> than the universe could model the universe.
> The universe models itself. The numbers are
> crunching every instant of time. -- JL

"But, this still seems to suggest that all is predetermined." -- NW

Norm

This thread is definitely fulfilling the Page title of "Las Vegas EVERYTHING," isn't it?

I agree that if the universe behaved "classically" (e.g., within the laws of Newtonian physics) that this number crunching would yield inevitable, precisely determinable outcomes. The future thus would indeed be predetermined by any of it's prior states.

Events in the quantum arena, governing the smallest, most basic constituents of the universe, are not, however, precisely determinable and predictable. This uncertainty is mathematically quantified, and constitutes a basic law of quantum mechanics. One can only describe possibility profiles (like in blackjack!), not future outcomes. Thus even the next instant* is not precisely calculable. Events in the distant future are not remotely calculable and are not, at least to conscious entities such as ourselves, precisely predictable or predetermined.

To state it another way, the numbers are indeed crunched, but they are crunched in the fundamentally inscrutable and unknowable manner of quantum indeterminacy.

_____________
*Time may indeed be quantitized, by the way , occurring in discrete instances. This smallest time unit, without looking it up, is approximately 10 -34th seconds, by current understanding.

[John Lewis]

"I'm not aware of any research that shows quantum uncertainty acting at the macro level, for example, on something the size of a deck of cards.
It may well be that every hand of blackjack is predetermined."

Kasey

I agree that quantum uncertainty would not affect a deck of cards that has already been shuffled.

But what about the next deck?

Shuffling of the next deck is dependent on human behavior -- precisely how the dealer shuffles the deck, and how the deck is cut. It is my prejudice (and the speculation of many others) that conscious decisions and activity are determined at the quantum level. The dealer reacts to the behavior of those around him, which would thus be quantum phenomena and thus not precisely calculable/predictable. And the dealer's own behavior would be determined at the quantum level.

This "next deck" argument is a weak one, however, compared to the "next year" or "next decade" argument. Certainly events in the macro world are ultimately determined by the cumulative events in the constituent micro world. And these micro world events are, as you indicate, ruled by quantum uncertainty.

[Dog Hand]

Guys,

Back when I was studying quantum mechanics, I came across an amusing poem concerning Schroedinger's Cat by Cecil Adams. Follow the link below.

Dog Hand

Schroedinger's cat