Discussion in 'Roulette Forum' started by TurboGenius, Apr 21, 2018.
Posted for educational purposes.
Though the dice, the roulette wheel, and the cards ‘’have no memory’’, what they do have is a conscience, and this conscience is called a PROBABILITY MODEL. As most of you probably already know, there exists what are known as probability models for each of the games, and the various bets which make up the games. Where infinity (the long-run) is concerned, these probability models provide that there will be ‘’x’’ number of ‘’apples’’ to ‘’x’’ number of ‘’oranges’’. In general, 50 ‘’heads’’ for every 50 ‘’tails’’. With each game and each probability model, the most common occurrence of any particular event is the first one, or one. The next most common is the second, or two, the third or three, and so on.
However a glaring misconception occurs when considering the short-run in the same manner! Reality unquestionably evidences the existence of a second ‘’bi-polar’’ law, or what is probably more accurately identified as a ‘’counter-polar’’ law that governs the short-run. This phenomenon is witnessed by what we commonly describe as ‘’things don’t happen like they’re supposed to’’!
For if the law governing the long-run were truly duplicated in the short-run, casino table games would have been extinct long ago. The challenge would be simple because of obviously already knowing for example, that with every 100 spins of the roulette wheel, that there must be exactly 50 red numbers to the 50 black numbers within those specific 100 spins. Well it doesn’t quite work that way now does it?
Not only do we know that ‘’it doesn’t work that way’’, we can also accurately state that the law of the long-run isn’t dictated to prevail in the short-run, and it is in fact extremely rare that it does duplicate itself perfectly in the short-run. Hence, through actual observation of the short-run, the fact is established that the law governing the long-run IS NOT duplicated in the short-run. Therefore, the challenge of the games present this unique paradox: the short-run is inequitable to the long-run!
So when it comes to gaming relationships and probabilities, though the whole is still equal to the sum of its parts, the parts themselves are not simply abbreviated versions of that whole.
Though the Law of Disproportionate Occurrence doesn’t need to be academically justified or philosophically rationalized, it commands acknowledgement. There is nothing we can do to fight it or eliminate it. And why should we anyway? If we learn to exploit it instead of challenge it, the results will be greatly to our advantage! Furthermore, this is the same exact law that the casinos now worship to enjoy a ‘’take’’ of 15 to 20 percent plus, instead of just the miniscule 2+/- percent that the ‘’commission’’ would offer by itself. Therefore, once you acknowledge that the casino is nothing more than the host for the games, then and only then, will you be able to accept that the Law of Disproportionate Occurrence is absolutely the ‘’phenomenon’’ which will aid you in taking the casino’s money.
I think an example would make for a good case in point.
So let's take the coin flip example using the red and black on the Roulette wheel. Say you have acquired the skill to tell the difference between a swarm of singles, alternating red and black spins, and small streaks occurring in a the red and then the black. You notice that these traits tend to continue for a while. So if that is all true then it is a good thing. It's kind of like knowing that 50 blacks and 50 reds will happen in the next 100 spins. It's not magic either. Things either continue in forms or they don't feature any significance. Add to that the fact that seeing no features is something that is occurring too. The point is to identify anything that looks consistent or that continues. Once you have something to work with you can devise the logical strategy based on the assumption that speculating on it might work for you. Now if that works or not is also another layer of detail that should be a factor to take notice of. You have the coincidence of a things continuing and you have the ability to keep track of the randomness of your success with it as well. Most people like to play right through bad streaks by giving themselves the excuse that they will always be able to get back to even. There is the real house advantage to watch out for. People actually plan to lose. I don't recommend playing that trend to long.
With regards to the two videos, "a reversal is no more likely than a continuation." I find that to be the real truth. I'm glad that this researcher comes to that conclusion.
A conclusion might be that following streaks of singles or the continuing absence of singles is worthless because of the error of believing in the hot hand fallacy. But consider this. In order to win you must have more wins than losses in the 50/50 game. But what if you play a game where 10 to 15 sleeping dozens is a common occurrence? If you don't get in on it near the start then you miss out on the win streak. You can't get in on the start without losing about half of those starts too. But you smartly play a game that knowingly allows for losses. So a loss is a signal that you are not at the start of a win streak. Big deal. Live with it. It's a 50/50 game anyway. The point is to get in on the win streaks because they throw off the balance of the session to a great degree. Add to that staying out of the losing streaks if you can helps too. I'm saying that you can know when you are in a win streak and that you can know when you are in a losing streak. You really need to know how to live with both.
I don't see anything new in the videos.
I concur. Interesting videos but not sure what the take-away message is. Care to enlighten us, TG?
Separate names with a comma.