Consider issues of a square peg in a round hole. By inference, misshapen balls of Hi Opt users do not rest, or sit well on a well engineered golf tee. Therefore, by extension, utilization of dual control ball controls causes Hi Opt balls to slip and fall
Standard engineering theory.
aceside trolled as follows
No it’s not. You need to do something silly, like including other card ranks and then determine the composition of the remaining cards.I have thought about this again and found your conclusion is valid, but your math has some typo. Suppose we have a deck of cards that consists of 2s (2 of spades) and a 3s (3 of spades), and another deck of cards that consists of a 2d (2 of diamonds) and a 3d (3 of diamonds).
If we put these two decks together, the six total 2-card combinations are as follows:
2s3s, 2s2d, 2s3d, 3s2d, 3s3d, 2d3d
The odd of drawing a 2-card 2+3=5 combination is 4/6=67%. If we remove one deck off the top, the odd of a 2-card 2+3=5 is still 67% statistically.
And then he said
See aboveIf we have three such decks of cards: 2s, 3s; 2d, 3d; 2c, 3c, the odd of drawing a 2-card 2+3=5 combination is 9/15=60%. If we remove two decks off the top, the odd of a 2-card 2+3=5 is still 60% statistically.
Conclusion - flawed logic
No. Just difficult to draw lines some of the time. And false claims of trolling can be as bad. There is no rule against being wrong. Being wrong, in and of itself, is allowed. There are better ways of responding to people who are wrong. And sometimes, responding poorly, and repeatedly, to a perceived troll is trolling.
In Wikipedia, this can be handled with an IBan -- interaction ban. But, it's not very effective.
"I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
When written, who knows in advance what posts will or will not make it past the editorial board. Why, just the other day on a trip home from out of town, I had a tire blow at 70 mph. Needless to say, I was in somewhat of a foul mood, having survived what could have been a really not so nice occurrence. It was in this foul mood that I commented on a particular point.
Said post challenged a well known and respected poster (of whom I also respect) on a particular point. Not withstanding a couple comments, the worst being - Big fucking deal (which could have easily been redacted) - the post in its entirety was deleted by an unknown editor- a post which had professional relevance. Interestingly enough, I sometimes take screen shots of posts, of which this was one.
Now, here we have a constant stream of non stop dribble which is permitted, almost certainly from a sock account. Would be nice if Zee came back to entertain us with intelligent commentary. As for feeding the troll, why should I be any different, and for that matter, escape retribution from the censorship board.
I agree with you for the most part, but there is still something that needs clarification from you or anybody.
For HiLo, the insurance indexes are:
1Deck: +1.4
2Deck: +2.4
6Deck: +3.0
8Deck: +3.0.
For HiLo, the hand 9 vs 2 double-down indexes are:
1Deck: -1 or ?
2Deck: +1
6Deck: +1
8Deck: +1
Here is what bothers me the most. The basic strategy for the hand 9 vs 2 is double down, but the HiLo index is +1. Can anybody help explain this discrepancy?
Also, insurance and other blackjack indices come from different mechanisms. Can anybody explain a little more.
Can you give an example of indices affecting one another? The insurance index is independent and thus will not be affected by any others.
Also, I recently switched to a double-deck H17 game but still kept using the same 6-deck surrender indices of below:
16 vs 9, -0
16 vs 10, -3
15 vs 10, -0
15 vs A, -1
Not many people posted surrender indices for double-deck games. So, can you verify if these are good or not for me?
Bookmarks