Everyone please respond

[da pickle]

This is a request for information. This subject can die.

There is a site for a coin flip generator at the bottom of this post. It
will come up with a photo of the head/tail of a coin that the last
visitor flipped.

There is a one flip selected. [There are several other generators
available.]

Each time you push the button, it will flip the coin.

You are going to bet on heads. Push the button.

If it lands heads ... you win and you quit and post your result as 1
play. Get a piece of paper to list your play.

If it lands tails, play again because you are one behind. But put a
mark on your paper that you are -1. If it lands tails again, play
again because you are two behind and mark -2. If it lands heads, play
again because you are one behind and mark -1. If it lands heads, play
again because you are even, mark 0. If it lands heads, quit, count and
report your total flips.

If you never get ahead ... you report:

(1) your total number of tries/flips and
(2) the -X when you quit flipping and
(3) whether you ever got 0 (at flip number-s) along the way and
(4) your highest negative number behind

It took me 6 flips to win one bet. Maybe all of us might make a
reasonable group to just see if most of the time we get even or ahead if
we play a short time. Your results may vary, but that is the point of
this simple test.

[A friend on mine not on the list tried it and quit after 50 flips ...
he was down -4 ... never got down more than -8. Serious result, but he
started with four straight losses, one win, followed by a win and then
three straight losses ... he never got lower than -3 along the way and
finally quit at 50 tries ... down -4.]

Very interesting reminder that keeping playing is not any sort of
guarantee you will win one net bet. But it does show that if you do get
ahead one bet, you might consider quitting. How often do you start out
losing four straight ... but it does happen.

Play and report. Please I will stop talking about it if that is the
final vote. We can go back to all the other interesting topics.


https://randomwordgenerator.com/coin-flip.php

[C Mayhem]

This is a request for information. This subject can die.
There is a site for a coin flip generator at the bottom of this post. It
will come up with a photo of the head/tail of a coin that the last
visitor flipped.
There is a one flip selected. [There are several other generators
available.]
Each time you push the button, it will flip the coin.
You are going to bet on heads. Push the button.
If it lands heads ... you win and you quit and post your result as 1
play. Get a piece of paper to list your play.
If it lands tails, play again because you are one behind. But put a
mark on your paper that you are -1. If it lands tails again, play
again because you are two behind and mark -2. If it lands heads, play
again because you are one behind and mark -1. If it lands heads, play
again because you are even, mark 0. If it lands heads, quit, count and
report your total flips.
(1) your total number of tries/flips and
(2) the -X when you quit flipping and
(3) whether you ever got 0 (at flip number-s) along the way and
(4) your highest negative number behind
It took me 6 flips to win one bet. Maybe all of us might make a
reasonable group to just see if most of the time we get even or ahead if
we play a short time. Your results may vary, but that is the point of
this simple test.
[A friend on mine not on the list tried it and quit after 50 flips ...
he was down -4 ... never got down more than -8. Serious result, but he
started with four straight losses, one win, followed by a win and then
three straight losses ... he never got lower than -3 along the way and
finally quit at 50 tries ... down -4.]
Very interesting reminder that keeping playing is not any sort of
guarantee you will win one net bet. But it does show that if you do get
ahead one bet, you might consider quitting. How often do you start out
losing four straight ... but it does happen.
Play and report. Please I will stop talking about it if that is the
final vote. We can go back to all the other interesting topics.
https://randomwordgenerator.com/coin-flip.php

Coin flips are rigged.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/a45496407/coin-tosses-have-a-bias/

C

[da pickle]

Post by C Mayhem

This is a request for information. This subject can die.
There is a site for a coin flip generator at the bottom of this post. It
will come up with a photo of the head/tail of a coin that the last
visitor flipped.
There is a one flip selected. [There are several other generators
available.]
Each time you push the button, it will flip the coin.
You are going to bet on heads. Push the button.
If it lands heads ... you win and you quit and post your result as 1
play. Get a piece of paper to list your play.
If it lands tails, play again because you are one behind. But put a
mark on your paper that you are -1. If it lands tails again, play
again because you are two behind and mark -2. If it lands heads, play
again because you are one behind and mark -1. If it lands heads, play
again because you are even, mark 0. If it lands heads, quit, count and
report your total flips.
(1) your total number of tries/flips and
(2) the -X when you quit flipping and
(3) whether you ever got 0 (at flip number-s) along the way and
(4) your highest negative number behind
It took me 6 flips to win one bet. Maybe all of us might make a
reasonable group to just see if most of the time we get even or ahead if
we play a short time. Your results may vary, but that is the point of
this simple test.
[A friend on mine not on the list tried it and quit after 50 flips ...
he was down -4 ... never got down more than -8. Serious result, but he
started with four straight losses, one win, followed by a win and then
three straight losses ... he never got lower than -3 along the way and
finally quit at 50 tries ... down -4.]
Very interesting reminder that keeping playing is not any sort of
guarantee you will win one net bet. But it does show that if you do get
ahead one bet, you might consider quitting. How often do you start out
losing four straight ... but it does happen.
Play and report. Please I will stop talking about it if that is the
final vote. We can go back to all the other interesting topics.
https://randomwordgenerator.com/coin-flip.php

Coin flips are rigged.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/a45496407/coin-tosses-have-a-bias/
C

I think that is true. However, do you think the random generator is rigged?

Did you do it? Results?

[da pickle]

Post by C Mayhem

This is a request for information. This subject can die.
There is a site for a coin flip generator at the bottom of this post. It
will come up with a photo of the head/tail of a coin that the last
visitor flipped.
There is a one flip selected. [There are several other generators
available.]
Each time you push the button, it will flip the coin.
You are going to bet on heads. Push the button.
If it lands heads ... you win and you quit and post your result as 1
play. Get a piece of paper to list your play.
If it lands tails, play again because you are one behind. But put a
mark on your paper that you are -1. If it lands tails again, play
again because you are two behind and mark -2. If it lands heads, play
again because you are one behind and mark -1. If it lands heads, play
again because you are even, mark 0. If it lands heads, quit, count and
report your total flips.
(1) your total number of tries/flips and
(2) the -X when you quit flipping and
(3) whether you ever got 0 (at flip number-s) along the way and
(4) your highest negative number behind
It took me 6 flips to win one bet. Maybe all of us might make a
reasonable group to just see if most of the time we get even or ahead if
we play a short time. Your results may vary, but that is the point of
this simple test.
[A friend on mine not on the list tried it and quit after 50 flips ...
he was down -4 ... never got down more than -8. Serious result, but he
started with four straight losses, one win, followed by a win and then
three straight losses ... he never got lower than -3 along the way and
finally quit at 50 tries ... down -4.]
Very interesting reminder that keeping playing is not any sort of
guarantee you will win one net bet. But it does show that if you do get
ahead one bet, you might consider quitting. How often do you start out
losing four straight ... but it does happen.
Play and report. Please I will stop talking about it if that is the
final vote. We can go back to all the other interesting topics.
https://randomwordgenerator.com/coin-flip.php

Coin flips are rigged.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/a45496407/coin-tosses-have-a-bias/
C

I think that is true.  However, do you think the random generator is
rigged?
Did you do it?  Results?

I tried again ... had a three in a row loss along the way but after 24
flips, I won my one bet.

Why not try playing and report your win of one net bet (and how many
tries) or stopping number and how far behind.

[VegasJerry]

Post by C Mayhem

This is a request for information. This subject can die.
There is a site for a coin flip generator at the bottom of this post. It
will come up with a photo of the head/tail of a coin that the last
visitor flipped.
There is a one flip selected. [There are several other generators
available.]
Each time you push the button, it will flip the coin.
You are going to bet on heads. Push the button.
If it lands heads ... you win and you quit and post your result as 1
play. Get a piece of paper to list your play.
If it lands tails, play again because you are one behind. But put a
mark on your paper that you are -1. If it lands tails again, play
again because you are two behind and mark -2. If it lands heads, play
again because you are one behind and mark -1. If it lands heads, play
again because you are even, mark 0. If it lands heads, quit, count and
report your total flips.
(1) your total number of tries/flips and
(2) the -X when you quit flipping and
(3) whether you ever got 0 (at flip number-s) along the way and
(4) your highest negative number behind
It took me 6 flips to win one bet. Maybe all of us might make a
reasonable group to just see if most of the time we get even or ahead if
we play a short time. Your results may vary, but that is the point of
this simple test.
[A friend on mine not on the list tried it and quit after 50 flips ...
he was down -4 ... never got down more than -8. Serious result, but he
started with four straight losses, one win, followed by a win and then
three straight losses ... he never got lower than -3 along the way and
finally quit at 50 tries ... down -4.]
Very interesting reminder that keeping playing is not any sort of
guarantee you will win one net bet. But it does show that if you do get
ahead one bet, you might consider quitting. How often do you start out
losing four straight ... but it does happen.
Play and report. Please I will stop talking about it if that is the
final vote. We can go back to all the other interesting topics.
https://randomwordgenerator.com/coin-flip.php

Coin flips are rigged.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/a45496407/coin-tosses-have-a-bias/
C

.

Post by C Mayhem
"Bartos says that may not seem like powerful evidence."

It doesn't. Especially when they showed it could be fixed to 100%.

[da pickle]

Post by VegasJerry
It doesn't. Especially when they showed it could be fixed to 100%.

Jerry, you really believe that on line random number generators are rigged?

[VegasJerry]

"Everyone please respond"

Funny, coming from a guy famous for not responding, linking, showing or answering...

[Bradley K. Sherman]

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write nonsense.

You might as well say, "If you don't win, don't report."

--bks

[da pickle]

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write nonsense.
You might as well say, "If you don't win, don't report."
--bks

My friend quit after 50 tries ... down 4 ... never down more than 8.

His attempt started with 4 straight losses followed soon by 3 straight
losses.

Interesting information.

There is no limit on attempts ... it is over in seconds, not minutes ...
unless you are impatient.

Half will likely win on the first try.

Others may misreport just to prove their idea of what is "correct" ...
others may simple do what you do here. Not even try it to see what
happens to you.

If my friend was me and the machine was YOU, you would have won $400.

Why not take that chance?

[Bradley K. Sherman]

Post by da pickle

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write nonsense.

...
My friend quit after 50 tries ... down 4 ... never down more than 8.

I downloaded 10,000 flips from random.org (a file of 1's and
0's) and ran a Perl script against it that doesn't quit. I
got a maximum run of 85 straight losses.

--bks

[Bill Vanek]

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

Post by da pickle

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write nonsense.

...
My friend quit after 50 tries ... down 4 ... never down more than 8.

I downloaded 10,000 flips from random.org (a file of 1's and
0's) and ran a Perl script against it that doesn't quit. I
got a maximum run of 85 straight losses.
--bks

You confused me. If there are 10k flips, and the perl script doesn’t quit,
it must be reusing numbers, which would mean it must be randomly picking
flips from the downloaded file, which means it must use perl’s prng. If
that’s the case, and I know I might be misunderstanding what you’re
saying, why bother with the download, and why not just use the perl prng to
generate the flips? Or did you mean it doesn’t quit until it reaches 10k?

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

Post by da pickle

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write nonsense.

...
My friend quit after 50 tries ... down 4 ... never down more than 8.

I downloaded 10,000 flips from random.org (a file of 1's and
0's) and ran a Perl script against it that doesn't quit. I
got a maximum run of 85 straight losses.
--bks

You confused me. If there are 10k flips, and the perl script doesn’t quit,
it must be reusing numbers, which would mean it must be randomly picking
flips from the downloaded file, which means it must use perl’s prng. If
that’s the case, and I know I might be misunderstanding what you’re
saying, why bother with the download, and why not just use the perl prng to
generate the flips? Or did you mean it doesn’t quit until it reaches 10k?

I replied to Brad before I saw your post. I really do not understand
any of what either of you are talking about ... you guys are quite smart.

Have you tried the flips just one time and can you post your results?

Again, it does not prove anything. I am interested in your result.

[Bill Vanek]

Post by da pickle
Have you tried the flips just one time and can you post your results?
Again, it does not prove anything. I am interested in your result.

Why?

[da pickle]

Post by da pickle
Have you tried the flips just one time and can you post your results?
Again, it does not prove anything. I am interested in your result.

Why?

I just want to have your single result. I am crazy for asking for such a
time consuming act, but it is interesting that no one ... not one ...
has actually tried it. Why?

[Bill Vanek]

Post by da pickle

Post by da pickle
Have you tried the flips just one time and can you post your results?
Again, it does not prove anything. I am interested in your result.

Why?

I just want to have your single result. I am crazy for asking for such a
time consuming act, but it is interesting that no one ... not one ...
has actually tried it. Why?

You keep asking people to do pointless things, and then ask why they won’t
do them. You are no longer making any sense. Considering the obvious
extremely high opinion of yourself you have always shown, it would be
pointless to bother commenting that you have no self-awareness. So there - I
sort of fulfilled your request by doing something pointless, even if it’s
not exactly what you asked for.

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by da pickle
Have you tried the flips just one time and can you post your results?
Again, it does not prove anything. I am interested in your result.

Why?

I just want to have your single result. I am crazy for asking for such a
time consuming act, but it is interesting that no one ... not one ...
has actually tried it. Why?

You keep asking people to do pointless things, and then ask why they won’t
do them. You are no longer making any sense. Considering the obvious
extremely high opinion of yourself you have always shown, it would be
pointless to bother commenting that you have no self-awareness. So there - I
sort of fulfilled your request by doing something pointless, even if it’s
not exactly what you asked for.

Thanks for completing the circle.

I am glad that everyone agrees that anyone has an advantage in a true
(or even very close) 50/50 game if they quit while they are ahead one
bet but their opponent cannot quit when he/she is ahead. Often, it only
takes one time.

And that no one wants to play because it is pointless to play just to
lose one bet (even though they could win a whole lot of bets) ...
especially if that one bet is "significant". For everyone so far ...
$100 seems too big a bet, so they will not play.

[Bill Vanek]

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by da pickle
Have you tried the flips just one time and can you post your results?
Again, it does not prove anything. I am interested in your result.

Why?

I just want to have your single result. I am crazy for asking for such a
time consuming act, but it is interesting that no one ... not one ...
has actually tried it. Why?

You keep asking people to do pointless things, and then ask why they won’t
do them. You are no longer making any sense. Considering the obvious
extremely high opinion of yourself you have always shown, it would be
pointless to bother commenting that you have no self-awareness. So there - I
sort of fulfilled your request by doing something pointless, even if it’s
not exactly what you asked for.

Thanks for completing the circle.
I am glad that everyone agrees that anyone has an advantage in a true
(or even very close) 50/50 game if they quit while they are ahead one
bet but their opponent cannot quit when he/she is ahead. Often, it only
takes one time.
And that no one wants to play because it is pointless to play just to
lose one bet (even though they could win a whole lot of bets) ...
especially if that one bet is "significant". For everyone so far ...
$100 seems too big a bet, so they will not play.

I’’ll try this once more: define the word “advantage”, as you are
using it. And I don’t mean to write two paragraphs like last time, simply
repeating your bet. You need to define the word itself in a generic way that
it can be applied to any situation at all to test that proposed situation for
an advantage by your definition. I am very sure you either can’t or simply
won’t do it, so I probably just wasted some more time.

[Bill Vanek]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by da pickle
Have you tried the flips just one time and can you post your results?
Again, it does not prove anything. I am interested in your result.

Why?

I just want to have your single result. I am crazy for asking for such a
time consuming act, but it is interesting that no one ... not one ...
has actually tried it. Why?

You keep asking people to do pointless things, and then ask why they won’t
do them. You are no longer making any sense. Considering the obvious
extremely high opinion of yourself you have always shown, it would be
pointless to bother commenting that you have no self-awareness. So there - I
sort of fulfilled your request by doing something pointless, even if it’s
not exactly what you asked for.

Thanks for completing the circle.
I am glad that everyone agrees that anyone has an advantage in a true
(or even very close) 50/50 game if they quit while they are ahead one
bet but their opponent cannot quit when he/she is ahead. Often, it only
takes one time.
And that no one wants to play because it is pointless to play just to
lose one bet (even though they could win a whole lot of bets) ...
especially if that one bet is "significant". For everyone so far ...
$100 seems too big a bet, so they will not play.

I’’ll try this once more: define the word “advantage”, as you are
using it. And I don’t mean to write two paragraphs like last time, simply
repeating your bet. You need to define the word itself in a generic way that
it can be applied to any situation at all to test that proposed situation for
an advantage by your definition. I am very sure you either can’t or simply
won’t do it, so I probably just wasted some more time.

BTW, you are clearly claiming this advantage in a true 50/50 game, so that
would be in the coin tosses. Your definition, to be valid, has to apply to
every single coin toss. If it does not, then you are not betting on the coin
toss, you are betting on the outcome of a series of tosses with its own
rules, and therefore not a true 50/50 game by any stretch. So go ahead, teach
us all something.

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by da pickle
Have you tried the flips just one time and can you post your results?
Again, it does not prove anything. I am interested in your result.

Why?

I just want to have your single result. I am crazy for asking for such a
time consuming act, but it is interesting that no one ... not one ...
has actually tried it. Why?

You keep asking people to do pointless things, and then ask why they won’t
do them. You are no longer making any sense. Considering the obvious
extremely high opinion of yourself you have always shown, it would be
pointless to bother commenting that you have no self-awareness. So there - I
sort of fulfilled your request by doing something pointless, even if it’s
not exactly what you asked for.

Thanks for completing the circle.
I am glad that everyone agrees that anyone has an advantage in a true
(or even very close) 50/50 game if they quit while they are ahead one
bet but their opponent cannot quit when he/she is ahead. Often, it only
takes one time.
And that no one wants to play because it is pointless to play just to
lose one bet (even though they could win a whole lot of bets) ...
especially if that one bet is "significant". For everyone so far ...
$100 seems too big a bet, so they will not play.

I’’ll try this once more: define the word “advantage”, as you are
using it. And I don’t mean to write two paragraphs like last time, simply
repeating your bet. You need to define the word itself in a generic way that
it can be applied to any situation at all to test that proposed situation for
an advantage by your definition. I am very sure you either can’t or simply
won’t do it, so I probably just wasted some more time.

BTW, you are clearly claiming this advantage in a true 50/50 game, so that
would be in the coin tosses. Your definition, to be valid, has to apply to
every single coin toss. If it does not, then you are not betting on the coin
toss, you are betting on the outcome of a series of tosses with its own
rules, and therefore not a true 50/50 game by any stretch. So go ahead, teach
us all something.

No, it does not apply to every single coin toss. The game is a series
of coin tosses. Each toss is a new bet. If I win the first toss ... I
quit. If I lose the first toss, I toss until I get ahead one bet and I
quit. If I tire, I quit while I am "behind" and you win all those bets
you have accumulated. Why do I have to continue to correct you.

Tim will not play for $100 chips because he admitted I have the
advantage of stopping while I am one chip ahead ... and that I am likely
to get ahead one chip before I tire out. Or I tire out while I am even
again and just walk away.

Why won't you try to play just one time on the simulator and tell us all
how it went for you. Just one series of playing. You might win the
first flip.

[Bill Vanek]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by da pickle
Have you tried the flips just one time and can you post your results?
Again, it does not prove anything. I am interested in your result.

Why?

I just want to have your single result. I am crazy for asking for such a
time consuming act, but it is interesting that no one ... not one ...
has actually tried it. Why?

You keep asking people to do pointless things, and then ask why they
won’t
do them. You are no longer making any sense. Considering the obvious
extremely high opinion of yourself you have always shown, it would be
pointless to bother commenting that you have no self-awareness. So there
-
I
sort of fulfilled your request by doing something pointless, even if it’s
not exactly what you asked for.

Thanks for completing the circle.
I am glad that everyone agrees that anyone has an advantage in a true
(or even very close) 50/50 game if they quit while they are ahead one
bet but their opponent cannot quit when he/she is ahead. Often, it only
takes one time.
And that no one wants to play because it is pointless to play just to
lose one bet (even though they could win a whole lot of bets) ...
especially if that one bet is "significant". For everyone so far ...
$100 seems too big a bet, so they will not play.

I’’ll try this once more: define the word “advantage”, as you are
using it. And I don’t mean to write two paragraphs like last time, simply
repeating your bet. You need to define the word itself in a generic way that
it can be applied to any situation at all to test that proposed situation for
an advantage by your definition. I am very sure you either can’t or simply
won’t do it, so I probably just wasted some more time.

BTW, you are clearly claiming this advantage in a true 50/50 game, so that
would be in the coin tosses. Your definition, to be valid, has to apply to
every single coin toss. If it does not, then you are not betting on the coin
toss, you are betting on the outcome of a series of tosses with its own
rules, and therefore not a true 50/50 game by any stretch. So go ahead, teach
us all something.

No, it does not apply to every single coin toss. The game is a series
of coin tosses. Each toss is a new bet. If I win the first toss ... I
quit. If I lose the first toss, I toss until I get ahead one bet and I
quit. If I tire, I quit while I am "behind" and you win all those bets
you have accumulated. Why do I have to continue to correct you.

You can correct me once and for all right now. I think you’ll agree that
you do not have an advantage on the first toss, right? So when exactly does
that advantage form? The second toss, 3d, 4th? Just tell me exactly when, and
then maybe I’ll understand. Keep me laughing.

BTW, ever heard the term, “magical thinking”?

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by da pickle
Have you tried the flips just one time and can you post your results?
Again, it does not prove anything. I am interested in your result.

Why?

I just want to have your single result. I am crazy for asking for such a
time consuming act, but it is interesting that no one ... not one ...
has actually tried it. Why?

You keep asking people to do pointless things, and then ask why they won’t
do them. You are no longer making any sense. Considering the obvious
extremely high opinion of yourself you have always shown, it would be
pointless to bother commenting that you have no self-awareness. So there
-
I
sort of fulfilled your request by doing something pointless, even if it’s
not exactly what you asked for.

Thanks for completing the circle.
I am glad that everyone agrees that anyone has an advantage in a true
(or even very close) 50/50 game if they quit while they are ahead one
bet but their opponent cannot quit when he/she is ahead. Often, it only
takes one time.
And that no one wants to play because it is pointless to play just to
lose one bet (even though they could win a whole lot of bets) ...
especially if that one bet is "significant". For everyone so far ...
$100 seems too big a bet, so they will not play.

I’’ll try this once more: define the word “advantage”, as you are
using it. And I don’t mean to write two paragraphs like last time, simply
repeating your bet. You need to define the word itself in a generic way that
it can be applied to any situation at all to test that proposed situation for
an advantage by your definition. I am very sure you either can’t or simply
won’t do it, so I probably just wasted some more time.

BTW, you are clearly claiming this advantage in a true 50/50 game, so that
would be in the coin tosses. Your definition, to be valid, has to apply to
every single coin toss. If it does not, then you are not betting on the coin
toss, you are betting on the outcome of a series of tosses with its own
rules, and therefore not a true 50/50 game by any stretch. So go ahead, teach
us all something.

No, it does not apply to every single coin toss. The game is a series
of coin tosses. Each toss is a new bet. If I win the first toss ... I
quit. If I lose the first toss, I toss until I get ahead one bet and I
quit. If I tire, I quit while I am "behind" and you win all those bets
you have accumulated. Why do I have to continue to correct you.

You can correct me once and for all right now. I think you’ll agree that
you do not have an advantage on the first toss, right? So when exactly does
that advantage form? The second toss, 3d, 4th? Just tell me exactly when, and
then maybe I’ll understand. Keep me laughing.
BTW, ever heard the term, “magical thinking”?

I have answered your other questions in my first post.

I agree that I have a 50/50 chance on the first toss ... no advantage.
That has nothing to do with the "bet" proposed.

Repeated 50/50 tosses in a series go back and forth in a 50/50 result on
"every" try. If you leave when you win the first try ... your opponent
on the other side cannot try to get even (50/50) on the next toss. There
is no series in this case.

You mathematicians show me the series where both sides do NOT trade
being even or one side ahead one net bet "ever" during the series. Only
ONE side "stays" one net bet or more ahead forever (and that side did
NOT win the first bet).

I did not limit the loss side, but you might start with the number of
times only ONE side gets behind 100 net bets (but that side did not win
the first toss).

No magical thinking required. Just don't change the bet.

[Bill Vanek]

Post by da pickle
I did not limit the loss side, but you might start with the number of
times only ONE side gets behind 100 net bets (but that side did not win
the first toss).

Please explain clearly to me how that is not a risk of ruin situation. One
side has 100 bets, and the other has one bet to lose, all in a series of even
money bets, and you want to know the chances of one side or the other losing
all his bets. I’m waiting. BTW, that question has been answered. Are you
just oblivious to that? You are suggesting that we “start with the number
of timesonly ONE side gets behind 100 net bets... “, something that Tim did
start with, long, long ago.

[da pickle]

Again ... you cut my post

I have answered your other questions in my first post.

I agree that I have a 50/50 chance on the first toss ... no advantage.
That has nothing to do with the "bet" proposed.

Repeated 50/50 tosses in a series go back and forth in a 50/50 result on
"every" try. If you leave when you win the first try ... your opponent
on the other side cannot try to get even (50/50) on the next toss. There
is no series in this case.

You mathematicians show me the series where both sides do NOT trade
being even or one side ahead one net bet "ever" during the series. Only
ONE side "stays" one net bet or more ahead forever (and that side did
NOT win the first bet).

I did not limit the loss side, but you might start with the number of
times only ONE side gets behind 100 net bets (but that side did not win
the first toss).

No magical thinking required. Just don't change the bet.

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
I did not limit the loss side, but you might start with the number of
times only ONE side gets behind 100 net bets (but that side did not win
the first toss).

Please explain clearly to me how that is not a risk of ruin situation. One
side has 100 bets, and the other has one bet to lose, all in a series of even
money bets, and you want to know the chances of one side or the other losing
all his bets. I’m waiting. BTW, that question has been answered. Are you
just oblivious to that? You are suggesting that we “start with the number
of timesonly ONE side gets behind 100 net bets... “, something that Tim did
start with, long, long ago.

This is a risk of ruin situation. Address my post.

No magical thinking required.

[Bill Vanek]

Post by da pickle
Again ... you cut my post
I have answered your other questions in my first post.
I agree that I have a 50/50 chance on the first toss ... no advantage.
That has nothing to do with the "bet" proposed.
Repeated 50/50 tosses in a series go back and forth in a 50/50 result on
"every" try. If you leave when you win the first try ... your opponent
on the other side cannot try to get even (50/50) on the next toss. There
is no series in this case.
You mathematicians show me the series where both sides do NOT trade
being even or one side ahead one net bet "ever" during the series. Only
ONE side "stays" one net bet or more ahead forever (and that side did
NOT win the first bet).
I did not limit the loss side, but you might start with the number of
times only ONE side gets behind 100 net bets (but that side did not win
the first toss).
No magical thinking required. Just don't change the bet.

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
I did not limit the loss side, but you might start with the number of
times only ONE side gets behind 100 net bets (but that side did not win
the first toss).

Please explain clearly to me how that is not a risk of ruin situation. One
side has 100 bets, and the other has one bet to lose, all in a series of even
money bets, and you want to know the chances of one side or the other losing
all his bets. I’m waiting. BTW, that question has been answered. Are you
just oblivious to that? You are suggesting that we “start with the number
of timesonly ONE side gets behind 100 net bets... “, something that Tim did
start with, long, long ago.

This is a risk of ruin situation. Address my post.

Oh my god. Am I reading this right? You are saying this *is* a risk of ruin
bet? Is that correct? You are saying that the bet you have been talking about
all along really is a risk of ruin bet? About time.

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
Again ... you cut my post
I have answered your other questions in my first post.
I agree that I have a 50/50 chance on the first toss ... no advantage.
That has nothing to do with the "bet" proposed.
Repeated 50/50 tosses in a series go back and forth in a 50/50 result on
"every" try. If you leave when you win the first try ... your opponent
on the other side cannot try to get even (50/50) on the next toss. There
is no series in this case.
You mathematicians show me the series where both sides do NOT trade
being even or one side ahead one net bet "ever" during the series. Only
ONE side "stays" one net bet or more ahead forever (and that side did
NOT win the first bet).
I did not limit the loss side, but you might start with the number of
times only ONE side gets behind 100 net bets (but that side did not win
the first toss).
No magical thinking required. Just don't change the bet.

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
I did not limit the loss side, but you might start with the number of
times only ONE side gets behind 100 net bets (but that side did not win
the first toss).

Please explain clearly to me how that is not a risk of ruin situation. One
side has 100 bets, and the other has one bet to lose, all in a series of even
money bets, and you want to know the chances of one side or the other losing
all his bets. I’m waiting. BTW, that question has been answered. Are you
just oblivious to that? You are suggesting that we “start with the number
of timesonly ONE side gets behind 100 net bets... “, something that Tim did
start with, long, long ago.

This is a risk of ruin situation. Address my post.

Oh my god. Am I reading this right? You are saying this *is* a risk of ruin
bet? Is that correct? You are saying that the bet you have been talking about
all along really is a risk of ruin bet? About time.

Still running, eh!

[Bill Vanek]

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
Again ... you cut my post
I have answered your other questions in my first post.
I agree that I have a 50/50 chance on the first toss ... no advantage.
That has nothing to do with the "bet" proposed.
Repeated 50/50 tosses in a series go back and forth in a 50/50 result on
"every" try. If you leave when you win the first try ... your opponent
on the other side cannot try to get even (50/50) on the next toss. There
is no series in this case.
You mathematicians show me the series where both sides do NOT trade
being even or one side ahead one net bet "ever" during the series. Only
ONE side "stays" one net bet or more ahead forever (and that side did
NOT win the first bet).
I did not limit the loss side, but you might start with the number of
times only ONE side gets behind 100 net bets (but that side did not win
the first toss).
No magical thinking required. Just don't change the bet.

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
I did not limit the loss side, but you might start with the number of
times only ONE side gets behind 100 net bets (but that side did not win
the first toss).

Please explain clearly to me how that is not a risk of ruin situation. One
side has 100 bets, and the other has one bet to lose, all in a series of even
money bets, and you want to know the chances of one side or the other losing
all his bets. I’m waiting. BTW, that question has been answered. Are you
just oblivious to that? You are suggesting that we “start with the number
of timesonly ONE side gets behind 100 net bets... “, something that Tim did
start with, long, long ago.

This is a risk of ruin situation. Address my post.

Oh my god. Am I reading this right? You are saying this *is* a risk of ruin
bet? Is that correct? You are saying that the bet you have been talking about
all along really is a risk of ruin bet? About time.

Still running, eh!

What does that mean? Are you now saying it’s *not* risk of ruin? Even
though your exact words are that it is?

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
Still running, eh!

What does that mean? Are you now saying it’s *not* risk of ruin? Even
though your exact words are that it is?

[I cleaned up you clipped and re-clipped stuff.]

Two bets under discussion. One is indeed a risk of ruin. The other
that you continue to run from may not be ...

You still will not stick to the actual conversation.

I think that in a true unbiased 50/50 game repeated over and over ...
that the one net bet will pass back and forth between the two
participants. I am not "sure" but it might be "possible" that one side
(or the other) might at sometime along the long, long, long time ...
get "a large number of net bets ahead" of the "other" side. But that
"other" side might have quit on the first bet because it won.

You have not convinced anyone that you have proved anything.

[RichD]

The game is a series of coin tosses. Each toss is a new bet.
If I win the first toss ... I quit. If I lose the first toss, I toss until
I get ahead one bet and I quit.

You'll never play again? Forever?

--
Rich

[da pickle]

Post by RichD

The game is a series of coin tosses. Each toss is a new bet.
If I win the first toss ... I quit. If I lose the first toss, I toss until
I get ahead one bet and I quit.

You'll never play again? Forever?
--
Rich

Rich ... there have been eight more comments in this thread.

Rich ... I will play until I win ONE TIME ... one net bet.

I do not think I will win every flip ... I only want to win one net bet.

I think if two people use an unbiased 50/50 coin flipping machine ...
only one of the two will "win" the whole thing on the first flip ... if
"I" do not win on the first flip, I think "we" will each get back to
even net wins (zero) along the way and it will be like a "new" game.

If we each start off with 100 bets ... the smart guys might find that
either side might win that first bet ... it is 50/50. The game is over
if "my" side wins that first bet. The "other" side lost.

I hope they have considered that in their programs ... one said there
were 85 straight losses ... but that was not explained very well. I
want to know how often the "one net loss" passes back and forth between
the two participants. I think it happens more often than not.

I think it is an interesting question.

[RichD]

Post by da pickle

The game is a series of coin tosses. Each toss is a new bet.
If I win the first toss ... I quit. If I lose the first toss, I toss until
I get ahead one bet and I quit.

You'll never play again? Forever?

I will play until I win ONE TIME ... one net bet.
I think if two people use an unbiased 50/50 coin flipping machine ...
only one of the two will "win" the whole thing on the first flip ... if
"I" do not win on the first flip, I think "we" will each get back to
even net wins (zero) along the way and it will be like a "new" game.
If we each start off with 100 bets ... the smart guys might find that
either side might win that first bet ... it is 50/50. The game is over
if "my" side wins that first bet. The "other" side lost.

You said you'll quit if you gain a profit of one bet.
Will you play the game again the next day, or will
you REALLY AND TRULY quit?

Of course you miss the point of the question, as your
confusion is ineducable.

Sklansky wrote that the notion of poker as a sequence of separate
sessions is an illusion. All poker sessions, until they cover you in
dirt, is actually one long session. That's the same point, which
you also miss.

--
Rich

[da pickle]

Post by RichD

Post by da pickle

The game is a series of coin tosses. Each toss is a new bet.
If I win the first toss ... I quit. If I lose the first toss, I toss until
I get ahead one bet and I quit.

You'll never play again? Forever?

I will play until I win ONE TIME ... one net bet.
I think if two people use an unbiased 50/50 coin flipping machine ...
only one of the two will "win" the whole thing on the first flip ... if
"I" do not win on the first flip, I think "we" will each get back to
even net wins (zero) along the way and it will be like a "new" game.
If we each start off with 100 bets ... the smart guys might find that
either side might win that first bet ... it is 50/50. The game is over
if "my" side wins that first bet. The "other" side lost.

You said you'll quit if you gain a profit of one bet.
Will you play the game again the next day, or will
you REALLY AND TRULY quit?
Of course you miss the point of the question, as your
confusion is ineducable.
Sklansky wrote that the notion of poker as a sequence of separate
sessions is an illusion. All poker sessions, until they cover you in
dirt, is actually one long session. That's the same point, which
you also miss.
--
Rich

Poker is not a 50/50 flip.

The idea of poker being one long session is certainly interesting, but
it works just like a regular "single" session if the people change seats
or leave and are replaced with new players and you get tired for keeping
up with the tells that might "vary" you thoughts of the odds on every
single hand and board or players left.

I do not think it is the "same point" at all.

I say the person than quits while ahead one net bet in a coin flipping
game has the advantage. [It is a different idea ... and if the one net
bet is "worth it" ... it would be a "good bet" to try sometime.]

I do not play roulette because I do not feel like I will get "lucky".

[da pickle]

Post by da pickle

Post by RichD

Post by da pickle

The game is a series of coin tosses. Each toss is a new bet.
If I win the first toss ... I quit. If I lose the first toss, I toss until
I get ahead one bet and I quit.

You'll never play again? Forever?

I will play until I win ONE TIME ... one net bet.
I think if two people use an unbiased 50/50 coin flipping machine ...
only one of the two will "win" the whole thing on the first flip ... if
"I" do not win on the first flip, I think "we" will each get back to
even net wins (zero) along the way and it will be like a "new" game.
If we each start off with 100 bets ... the smart guys might find that
either side might win that first bet ... it is 50/50. The game is over
if "my" side wins that first bet. The "other" side lost.

You said you'll quit if you gain a profit of one bet.
Will you play the game again the next day, or will
you REALLY AND TRULY  quit?
Of course you miss the point of the question, as your
confusion is ineducable.
Sklansky wrote that the notion of poker as a sequence of separate
sessions is an illusion.  All poker sessions, until they cover you in
dirt, is actually one long session.  That's the same point, which
you also miss.
--
Rich

Poker is not a 50/50 flip.
The idea of poker being one long session is certainly interesting, but
it works just like a regular "single" session if the people change seats
or leave and are replaced with new players and you get tired for keeping
up with the tells that might "vary" you thoughts of the odds on every
single hand and board or players left.
I do not think it is the "same point" at all.
I say the person than quits while ahead one net bet in a coin flipping
game has the advantage.  [It is a different idea ... and if the one net
bet is "worth it" ... it would be a "good bet" to try sometime.]
I do not play roulette because I do not feel like I will get "lucky".

You still disappear when your "change the bet and the discussion" is
revealed.

If you want to "win" a true 50/50 betting session, quit when you are one
net bet ahead. It has nothing to do with "this being your lucky day" stuff.

It is the reason that you do NOT play roulette in a casino and stick to
poker where there are more variables available to come out ahead in the
long run. [Even if you want that long run to be your whole life.]

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by da pickle
Have you tried the flips just one time and can you post your results?
Again, it does not prove anything. I am interested in your result.

Why?

I just want to have your single result. I am crazy for asking for such a
time consuming act, but it is interesting that no one ... not one ...
has actually tried it. Why?

You keep asking people to do pointless things, and then ask why they won’t
do them. You are no longer making any sense. Considering the obvious
extremely high opinion of yourself you have always shown, it would be
pointless to bother commenting that you have no self-awareness. So there - I
sort of fulfilled your request by doing something pointless, even if it’s
not exactly what you asked for.

Thanks for completing the circle.
I am glad that everyone agrees that anyone has an advantage in a true
(or even very close) 50/50 game if they quit while they are ahead one
bet but their opponent cannot quit when he/she is ahead. Often, it only
takes one time.
And that no one wants to play because it is pointless to play just to
lose one bet (even though they could win a whole lot of bets) ...
especially if that one bet is "significant". For everyone so far ...
$100 seems too big a bet, so they will not play.

I’’ll try this once more: define the word “advantage”, as you are
using it. And I don’t mean to write two paragraphs like last time, simply
repeating your bet. You need to define the word itself in a generic way that
it can be applied to any situation at all to test that proposed situation for
an advantage by your definition. I am very sure you either can’t or simply
won’t do it, so I probably just wasted some more time.

I think I will get ahead one bet on a series of 50/50 tosses (maybe the
first toss) before I give up along the way. That is my advantage ...
you cannot quit.

[It has been "defined" for you from the first post.]

[Bill Vanek]

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by da pickle
Have you tried the flips just one time and can you post your results?
Again, it does not prove anything. I am interested in your result.

Why?

I just want to have your single result. I am crazy for asking for such a
time consuming act, but it is interesting that no one ... not one ...
has actually tried it. Why?

You keep asking people to do pointless things, and then ask why they won’t
do them. You are no longer making any sense. Considering the obvious
extremely high opinion of yourself you have always shown, it would be
pointless to bother commenting that you have no self-awareness. So there - I
sort of fulfilled your request by doing something pointless, even if it’s
not exactly what you asked for.

Thanks for completing the circle.
I am glad that everyone agrees that anyone has an advantage in a true
(or even very close) 50/50 game if they quit while they are ahead one
bet but their opponent cannot quit when he/she is ahead. Often, it only
takes one time.
And that no one wants to play because it is pointless to play just to
lose one bet (even though they could win a whole lot of bets) ...
especially if that one bet is "significant". For everyone so far ...
$100 seems too big a bet, so they will not play.

I’’ll try this once more: define the word “advantage”, as you are
using it. And I don’t mean to write two paragraphs like last time, simply
repeating your bet. You need to define the word itself in a generic way that
it can be applied to any situation at all to test that proposed situation for
an advantage by your definition. I am very sure you either can’t or simply
won’t do it, so I probably just wasted some more time.

I think I will get ahead one bet on a series of 50/50 tosses (maybe the
first toss) before I give up along the way. That is my advantage ...
you cannot quit.
[It has been "defined" for you from the first post.]

You were a lawyer? Whew! You define “advantage” on a group that traffics
in math and probability as, “you ’think’ that you will get ahead one
bet on some undefined series of coin tosses" - could be a thousand, maybe ten
million, maybe one, whatever, eh? Well that is certainly some rigid logical
thinking. I hope you practiced exclusively in front of a judge whose thinking
was based on the same mush as yours.

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by da pickle
Have you tried the flips just one time and can you post your results?
Again, it does not prove anything. I am interested in your result.

Why?

I just want to have your single result. I am crazy for asking for such a
time consuming act, but it is interesting that no one ... not one ...
has actually tried it. Why?

You keep asking people to do pointless things, and then ask why they won’t
do them. You are no longer making any sense. Considering the obvious
extremely high opinion of yourself you have always shown, it would be
pointless to bother commenting that you have no self-awareness. So there - I
sort of fulfilled your request by doing something pointless, even if it’s
not exactly what you asked for.

Thanks for completing the circle.
I am glad that everyone agrees that anyone has an advantage in a true
(or even very close) 50/50 game if they quit while they are ahead one
bet but their opponent cannot quit when he/she is ahead. Often, it only
takes one time.
And that no one wants to play because it is pointless to play just to
lose one bet (even though they could win a whole lot of bets) ...
especially if that one bet is "significant". For everyone so far ...
$100 seems too big a bet, so they will not play.

I’’ll try this once more: define the word “advantage”, as you are
using it. And I don’t mean to write two paragraphs like last time, simply
repeating your bet. You need to define the word itself in a generic way that
it can be applied to any situation at all to test that proposed situation for
an advantage by your definition. I am very sure you either can’t or simply
won’t do it, so I probably just wasted some more time.

I think I will get ahead one bet on a series of 50/50 tosses (maybe the
first toss) before I give up along the way. That is my advantage ...
you cannot quit.
[It has been "defined" for you from the first post.]

You were a lawyer? Whew! You define “advantage” on a group that traffics
in math and probability as, “you ’think’ that you will get ahead one
bet on some undefined series of coin tosses" - could be a thousand, maybe ten
million, maybe one, whatever, eh? Well that is certainly some rigid logical
thinking. I hope you practiced exclusively in front of a judge whose thinking
was based on the same mush as yours.

You ask me a question and I answer your question.

I ask you a question and you do not answer my question.

I propose a "bet" on a gambling site ... and not one person will take my
bet. I suggest I have an "advantage" (in the gambling sense) and that
is why no one will take my offer to bet.

Most say I do not have an "advantage" but eventually one smart guy
eventually says I do have an "advantage" in a 50/50 series of bet that
only I can stop. But it is not a "guarantee" ... I want folks to try
and see if they might try a series of betting to see if they would "win"
a net one bet.

Then, it leaves the gambling group and starts in on mathematics
questions that are not relevant to a simple bet offer on a gambling site.

Does the house have an "advantage" on every bet you make on a roulette
wheel?

[Bill Vanek]

Post by da pickle
I ask you a question and you do not answer my question.

You are identical to Jerry. All of your questions have been answered over and
over by more than one person, and you claim to have never seen them. “Knew
you couldn’t show.” “Run and hide now.” Fucking insanity.

Post by da pickle
Does the house have an "advantage" on every bet you make on a roulette
wheel?

Why don’t you tell us? You fancy yourself the expert on this sort of thing.
And I need another laugh.

[da pickle]

This is the original post:

I ask you a question and you do not answer my question.

I propose a "bet" on a gambling site ... and not one person will take my
bet. I suggest I have an "advantage" (in the gambling sense) and that
is why no one will take my offer to bet.

Most say I do not have an "advantage" but eventually one smart guy
eventually says I do have an "advantage" in a 50/50 series of bet that
only I can stop. But it is not a "guarantee" ... I want folks to try
and see if they might try a series of betting to see if they would "win"
a net one bet.

Then, it leaves the gambling group and starts in on mathematics
questions that are not relevant to a simple bet offer on a gambling site.

Does the house have an "advantage" on every bet you make on a roulette
wheel?


Why did you cut it? That IS Jerry.

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
I ask you a question and you do not answer my question.

You are identical to Jerry. All of your questions have been answered over and
over by more than one person, and you claim to have never seen them. “Knew
you couldn’t show.” “Run and hide now.” Fucking insanity.

You just cut and blab.

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
Does the house have an "advantage" on every bet you make on a roulette
wheel?

Why don’t you tell us? You fancy yourself the expert on this sort of thing.
And I need another laugh.

I know the answer. Why do you just not answer a simple question?

YOU keep cutting and changing the "bet".

All your dodges are really getting obvious.

Apparently, not many people are threading the posts and the replies. It
would be obvious to anyone who is threading.

My proposed bet that you keep changing is one sided ... it does not
apply to anyone but the person who can QUIT when one net bet ahead. And
it MATTERS if you do not account for the win on the first try.

[Bill Vanek]

Post by da pickle
I ask you a question and you do not answer my question.
I propose a "bet" on a gambling site ... and not one person will take my
bet. I suggest I have an "advantage" (in the gambling sense) and that
is why no one will take my offer to bet.
Most say I do not have an "advantage" but eventually one smart guy
eventually says I do have an "advantage" in a 50/50 series of bet that
only I can stop. But it is not a "guarantee" ... I want folks to try
and see if they might try a series of betting to see if they would "win"
a net one bet.
Then, it leaves the gambling group and starts in on mathematics
questions that are not relevant to a simple bet offer on a gambling site.
Does the house have an "advantage" on every bet you make on a roulette
wheel?
Why did you cut it? That IS Jerry.

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
I ask you a question and you do not answer my question.

You are identical to Jerry. All of your questions have been answered over and
over by more than one person, and you claim to have never seen them. “Knew
you couldn’t show.” “Run and hide now.” Fucking insanity.

You just cut and blab.

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
Does the house have an "advantage" on every bet you make on a roulette
wheel?

Why don’t you tell us? You fancy yourself the expert on this sort of thing.
And I need another laugh.

I know the answer. Why do you just not answer a simple question?
YOU keep cutting and changing the "bet".
All your dodges are really getting obvious.
Apparently, not many people are threading the posts and the replies. It
would be obvious to anyone who is threading.
My proposed bet that you keep changing is one sided ... it does not
apply to anyone but the person who can QUIT when one net bet ahead. And
it MATTERS if you do not account for the win on the first try.

Crazy. One sided? When your player wins, who is he winning from - himself? Do
you understand what “zero-sum” means? Tell me how your bet is not zero
sum? Can you win without someone losing?

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
I ask you a question and you do not answer my question.
I propose a "bet" on a gambling site ... and not one person will take my
bet. I suggest I have an "advantage" (in the gambling sense) and that
is why no one will take my offer to bet.
Most say I do not have an "advantage" but eventually one smart guy
eventually says I do have an "advantage" in a 50/50 series of bet that
only I can stop. But it is not a "guarantee" ... I want folks to try
and see if they might try a series of betting to see if they would "win"
a net one bet.
Then, it leaves the gambling group and starts in on mathematics
questions that are not relevant to a simple bet offer on a gambling site.
Does the house have an "advantage" on every bet you make on a roulette
wheel?
Why did you cut it? That IS Jerry.

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
I ask you a question and you do not answer my question.

You are identical to Jerry. All of your questions have been answered over and
over by more than one person, and you claim to have never seen them. “Knew
you couldn’t show.” “Run and hide now.” Fucking insanity.

You just cut and blab.

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
Does the house have an "advantage" on every bet you make on a roulette
wheel?

Why don’t you tell us? You fancy yourself the expert on this sort of thing.
And I need another laugh.

I know the answer. Why do you just not answer a simple question?
YOU keep cutting and changing the "bet".
All your dodges are really getting obvious.
Apparently, not many people are threading the posts and the replies. It
would be obvious to anyone who is threading.
My proposed bet that you keep changing is one sided ... it does not
apply to anyone but the person who can QUIT when one net bet ahead. And
it MATTERS if you do not account for the win on the first try.

Crazy. One sided? When your player wins, who is he winning from - himself? Do
you understand what “zero-sum” means? Tell me how your bet is not zero
sum? Can you win without someone losing?

You did it again ... cut the post ... you are not a nice person.

Well, you ( and Jerry) can be content with that sort of internet behavior.

If you cannot answer simple questions, just delete them.

[VegasJerry]

Post by da pickle
I ask you a question and you do not answer my question.
I propose a "bet" on a gambling site ... and not one person will take my
bet. I suggest I have an "advantage" (in the gambling sense) and that
is why no one will take my offer to bet.
Most say I do not have an "advantage" but eventually one smart guy
eventually says I do have an "advantage" in a 50/50 series of bet that
only I can stop. But it is not a "guarantee" ... I want folks to try
and see if they might try a series of betting to see if they would "win"
a net one bet.
Then, it leaves the gambling group and starts in on mathematics
questions that are not relevant to a simple bet offer on a gambling site.
Does the house have an "advantage" on every bet you make on a roulette
wheel?
Why did you cut it? That IS Jerry.

.

And I have proved it is not.
And you "Can't show" that you have.
.
.

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
I ask you a question and you do not answer my question.

You are identical to Jerry. All of your questions have been answered over and
over by more than one person, and you claim to have never seen them. “Knew
you couldn’t show.” “Run and hide now.” Fucking insanity.

You just cut and blab.

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
Does the house have an "advantage" on every bet you make on a roulette
wheel?

Why don’t you tell us? You fancy yourself the expert on this sort of thing.
And I need another laugh.

I know the answer. Why do you just not answer a simple question?
YOU keep cutting and changing the "bet".
All your dodges are really getting obvious.
Apparently, not many people are threading the posts and the replies. It
would be obvious to anyone who is threading.
My proposed bet that you keep changing is one sided ... it does not
apply to anyone but the person who can QUIT when one net bet ahead. And
it MATTERS if you do not account for the win on the first try.

[da pickle]

Post by VegasJerry

Post by da pickle
I ask you a question and you do not answer my question.
I propose a "bet" on a gambling site ... and not one person will take my
bet. I suggest I have an "advantage" (in the gambling sense) and that
is why no one will take my offer to bet.
Most say I do not have an "advantage" but eventually one smart guy
eventually says I do have an "advantage" in a 50/50 series of bet that
only I can stop. But it is not a "guarantee" ... I want folks to try
and see if they might try a series of betting to see if they would "win"
a net one bet.
Then, it leaves the gambling group and starts in on mathematics
questions that are not relevant to a simple bet offer on a gambling site.
Does the house have an "advantage" on every bet you make on a roulette
wheel?
Why did you cut it? That IS Jerry.

.
And I have proved it is not.
And you "Can't show" that you have.

Well, Jerry, you do sometimes cut some of the stuff from the post you
are replying to ... but I am glad you know why I have the advantage in
my proposed bet.

This is a gambling group. Did you try (one time) to see if you could win?

[VegasJerry]

Post by da pickle

Post by VegasJerry

Post by da pickle
I ask you a question and you do not answer my question.
I propose a "bet" on a gambling site ... and not one person will take my
bet. I suggest I have an "advantage" (in the gambling sense) and that
is why no one will take my offer to bet.
Most say I do not have an "advantage" but eventually one smart guy
eventually says I do have an "advantage" in a 50/50 series of bet that
only I can stop. But it is not a "guarantee" ... I want folks to try
and see if they might try a series of betting to see if they would "win"
a net one bet.
Then, it leaves the gambling group and starts in on mathematics
questions that are not relevant to a simple bet offer on a gambling site.
Does the house have an "advantage" on every bet you make on a roulette
wheel?
Why did you cut it? That IS Jerry.

.

.

Post by da pickle

Post by VegasJerry
And I have proved it is not.
And you "Can't show" that you have.

.

Post by da pickle
Well, Jerry, you do sometimes cut some of the stuff from the post you
are replying to ...

.

*** Knew you couldn't show ***

(You ARE learning to lose.....)
.
.
.
.
.





but I am glad you know why I have the advantage in

Post by da pickle
my proposed bet.
This is a gambling group. Did you try (one time) to see if you could win?

[VegasJerry]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
I ask you a question and you do not answer my question.

.

Post by Bill Vanek
You are identical to Jerry. All of your questions have been answered over and
over by more than one person, and you claim to have never seen them.

.
.
.

As much as I enjoy watching and reading you dolts dodge and Bicker & Bitch, back and forth,
I fail to understand your continued desperate dodge to me. Using me as some sort of foil for
your failures.
.
No, my questions were NOT answered (“over and over”). That was my point. They were not
answered at all. That is the point of asking tough (embarrassing) direct questions. It’s taught at
POST. (Ask a direct question. Require an answer). It’s what prosecutors do. (It’s what brought
Rudy Giuliani his ruin. Prosecutor: “Your Honor, please direct the defendant to answer the question.”
Away from FOX a judge directed him to “Answer.” To which he had to reply, “No, I don’t have any
proof or evidence.” And the Bar took away his license.)

I return you to your Dodge & Weave ceremony.

(And, yes. Pickle has the advantage in his game. It may take a trillion flips, but you can't quit,
and he can; a winner).
.
.
.
.

Post by Bill Vanek
“Knew you couldn’t show.” “Run and hide now.” Fucking insanity.

.

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
Does the house have an "advantage" on every bet you make on a roulette
wheel?

Why don’t you tell us? You fancy yourself the expert on this sort of thing.
And I need another laugh.

[da pickle]

Post by VegasJerry

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
I ask you a question and you do not answer my question.

.

Post by Bill Vanek
You are identical to Jerry. All of your questions have been answered over and
over by more than one person, and you claim to have never seen them.

.
.
.
As much as I enjoy watching and reading you dolts dodge and Bicker & Bitch, back and forth,
I fail to understand your continued desperate dodge to me. Using me as some sort of foil for
your failures.
.
No, my questions were NOT answered (“over and over”). That was my point. They were not
answered at all. That is the point of asking tough (embarrassing) direct questions. It’s taught at
POST. (Ask a direct question. Require an answer). It’s what prosecutors do. (It’s what brought
Rudy Giuliani his ruin. Prosecutor: “Your Honor, please direct the defendant to answer the question.”
Away from FOX a judge directed him to “Answer.” To which he had to reply, “No, I don’t have any
proof or evidence.” And the Bar took away his license.)
I return you to your Dodge & Weave ceremony.
(And, yes. Pickle has the advantage in his game. It may take a trillion flips, but you can't quit,
and he can; a winner).

This is interesting, Jerry. You and Tim are the only ones that actually
admit that I have an "advantage". Since I am only going to play my bet
"once", I do not think I will need a trillion flips to win my one time.

Thanks, Jerry.

[Bradley K. Sherman]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

Post by da pickle

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write nonsense.

...
My friend quit after 50 tries ... down 4 ... never down more than 8.

I downloaded 10,000 flips from random.org (a file of 1's and
0's) and ran a Perl script against it that doesn't quit. I
got a maximum run of 85 straight losses.

You confused me.
...

Yes, sorry. That was very unclear. I mean that I played through the
10,000 flips like this:
1. Set count to 0
2. If next flip is "1" increment count, else decrement count.
3. If count > 0, return to (1.)
All I was doing was recording the greatest number of flips to get to +1.
"85 straight losses" just means that the counter got to -85 at one point.

--bks

[Bill Vanek]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

Post by da pickle

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write nonsense.

...
My friend quit after 50 tries ... down 4 ... never down more than 8.

I downloaded 10,000 flips from random.org (a file of 1's and
0's) and ran a Perl script against it that doesn't quit. I
got a maximum run of 85 straight losses.

You confused me.
...

Yes, sorry. That was very unclear. I mean that I played through the
1. Set count to 0
2. If next flip is "1" increment count, else decrement count.
3. If count > 0, return to (1.)
All I was doing was recording the greatest number of flips to get to +1.
"85 straight losses" just means that the counter got to -85 at one point.
--bks

I saw similar numbers in my sims. My sim was intended to show how many times
the player with one bet never got behind in a sim of X trials. It was what
one would expect - there were always some sims where that player never got
behind even one bet no matter how many trials I used. Obviously, the more
trials in a sim, the lower the number of sims where he never got behind.
Exactly what the math would tell you.

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

Post by da pickle

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write nonsense.

...
My friend quit after 50 tries ... down 4 ... never down more than 8.

I downloaded 10,000 flips from random.org (a file of 1's and
0's) and ran a Perl script against it that doesn't quit. I
got a maximum run of 85 straight losses.

You confused me.
...

Yes, sorry. That was very unclear. I mean that I played through the
1. Set count to 0
2. If next flip is "1" increment count, else decrement count.
3. If count > 0, return to (1.)
All I was doing was recording the greatest number of flips to get to +1.
"85 straight losses" just means that the counter got to -85 at one point.
--bks

I saw similar numbers in my sims. My sim was intended to show how many times
the player with one bet never got behind in a sim of X trials. It was what
one would expect - there were always some sims where that player never got
behind even one bet no matter how many trials I used. Obviously, the more
trials in a sim, the lower the number of sims where he never got behind.
Exactly what the math would tell you.

What does -85 or 85 straight losses mean ...

[Bill Vanek]

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

Post by da pickle

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write nonsense.

...
My friend quit after 50 tries ... down 4 ... never down more than 8.

I downloaded 10,000 flips from random.org (a file of 1's and
0's) and ran a Perl script against it that doesn't quit. I
got a maximum run of 85 straight losses.

You confused me.
...

Yes, sorry. That was very unclear. I mean that I played through the
1. Set count to 0
2. If next flip is "1" increment count, else decrement count.
3. If count > 0, return to (1.)
All I was doing was recording the greatest number of flips to get to +1.
"85 straight losses" just means that the counter got to -85 at one point.
--bks

I saw similar numbers in my sims. My sim was intended to show how many times
the player with one bet never got behind in a sim of X trials. It was what
one would expect - there were always some sims where that player never got
behind even one bet no matter how many trials I used. Obviously, the more
trials in a sim, the lower the number of sims where he never got behind.
Exactly what the math would tell you.

What does -85 or 85 straight losses mean ...

Well maybe we have come a bit closer to understanding why you keep claiming
no one is answering your questions. Do you understand that you replied with a
question to a post that has the answer in that very post, and indeed was the
whole purpose of that post? Why don’t you try looking just a few lines
above the start of your reply for BKS's words, "85 straight losses just
means...”, and then read the rest of that sentence. Hope this helps.

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

Post by da pickle

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write nonsense.

...
My friend quit after 50 tries ... down 4 ... never down more than 8.

I downloaded 10,000 flips from random.org (a file of 1's and
0's) and ran a Perl script against it that doesn't quit. I
got a maximum run of 85 straight losses.

You confused me.
...

Yes, sorry. That was very unclear. I mean that I played through the
1. Set count to 0
2. If next flip is "1" increment count, else decrement count.
3. If count > 0, return to (1.)
All I was doing was recording the greatest number of flips to get to +1.
"85 straight losses" just means that the counter got to -85 at one point.
--bks

I saw similar numbers in my sims. My sim was intended to show how many times
the player with one bet never got behind in a sim of X trials. It was what
one would expect - there were always some sims where that player never got
behind even one bet no matter how many trials I used. Obviously, the more
trials in a sim, the lower the number of sims where he never got behind.
Exactly what the math would tell you.

What does -85 or 85 straight losses mean ...

Well maybe we have come a bit closer to understanding why you keep claiming
no one is answering your questions. Do you understand that you replied with a
question to a post that has the answer in that very post, and indeed was the
whole purpose of that post? Why don’t you try looking just a few lines
above the start of your reply for BKS's words, "85 straight losses just
means...”, and then read the rest of that sentence. Hope this helps.

Does not help at all.

Please use more words to explain what you think is so simple to understand.

I do not understand what the counter is or whether it actually is
counting what I am interesting in understanding what you are talking about.

If 85 straight losses means that the person that does not lose on the
first 50/50 bet loses one net bet 85 times in a row ... then the
advantage is more than I thought.

[Bill Vanek]

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

Post by da pickle

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write
nonsense.

...
My friend quit after 50 tries ... down 4 ... never down more than 8.

I downloaded 10,000 flips from random.org (a file of 1's and
0's) and ran a Perl script against it that doesn't quit. I
got a maximum run of 85 straight losses.

You confused me.
...

Yes, sorry. That was very unclear. I mean that I played through the
1. Set count to 0
2. If next flip is "1" increment count, else decrement count.
3. If count > 0, return to (1.)
All I was doing was recording the greatest number of flips to get to +1.
"85 straight losses" just means that the counter got to -85 at one point.
--bks

I saw similar numbers in my sims. My sim was intended to show how many times
the player with one bet never got behind in a sim of X trials. It was what
one would expect - there were always some sims where that player never got
behind even one bet no matter how many trials I used. Obviously, the more
trials in a sim, the lower the number of sims where he never got behind.
Exactly what the math would tell you.

What does -85 or 85 straight losses mean ...

Well maybe we have come a bit closer to understanding why you keep claiming
no one is answering your questions. Do you understand that you replied with a
question to a post that has the answer in that very post, and indeed was the
whole purpose of that post? Why don’t you try looking just a few lines
above the start of your reply for BKS's words, "85 straight losses just
means...”, and then read the rest of that sentence. Hope this helps.

Does not help at all.

I’m not the least bit surprised.

Post by da pickle
Please use more words to explain what you think is so simple to understand.

I have good news for you. I no longer think your problem is cognitive
decline. I think nothing at all has changed, and you have always been like
this with your elliptical, wandering narratives that mean next to nothing.

Post by da pickle
I do not understand what the counter is or whether it actually is
counting what I am interesting in understanding what you are talking about.
If 85 straight losses means that the person that does not lose on the
first 50/50 bet loses one net bet 85 times in a row ... then the
advantage is more than I thought.

Maybe it’s time to ask yourself if you might just be very wrong about this
whole thing. Do you ever do that, or is that blocked by your ego? And maybe
you could apologize to Tim, and then he might steer you towards some means to
get a very basic understanding of probability.

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

Post by da pickle

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write nonsense.

...
My friend quit after 50 tries ... down 4 ... never down more than 8.

I downloaded 10,000 flips from random.org (a file of 1's and
0's) and ran a Perl script against it that doesn't quit. I
got a maximum run of 85 straight losses.

You confused me.
...

Yes, sorry. That was very unclear. I mean that I played through the
1. Set count to 0
2. If next flip is "1" increment count, else decrement count.
3. If count > 0, return to (1.)
All I was doing was recording the greatest number of flips to get to +1.
"85 straight losses" just means that the counter got to -85 at one point.
--bks

I saw similar numbers in my sims. My sim was intended to show how many times
the player with one bet never got behind in a sim of X trials. It was what
one would expect - there were always some sims where that player never got
behind even one bet no matter how many trials I used. Obviously, the more
trials in a sim, the lower the number of sims where he never got behind.
Exactly what the math would tell you.

What does -85 or 85 straight losses mean ...

Well maybe we have come a bit closer to understanding why you keep claiming
no one is answering your questions. Do you understand that you replied with a
question to a post that has the answer in that very post, and indeed was the
whole purpose of that post? Why don’t you try looking just a few lines
above the start of your reply for BKS's words, "85 straight losses just
means...”, and then read the rest of that sentence. Hope this helps.

Does not help at all.

I’m not the least bit surprised.

Post by da pickle
Please use more words to explain what you think is so simple to understand.

I have good news for you. I no longer think your problem is cognitive
decline. I think nothing at all has changed, and you have always been like
this with your elliptical, wandering narratives that mean next to nothing.

Post by da pickle
I do not understand what the counter is or whether it actually is
counting what I am interesting in understanding what you are talking about.
If 85 straight losses means that the person that does not lose on the
first 50/50 bet loses one net bet 85 times in a row ... then the
advantage is more than I thought.

Maybe it’s time to ask yourself if you might just be very wrong about this
whole thing. Do you ever do that, or is that blocked by your ego? And maybe
you could apologize to Tim, and then he might steer you towards some means to
get a very basic understanding of probability.

What does "85 straight losses" mean in this example?

Please explain to someone who asks.

[Bradley K. Sherman]

Post by da pickle

Yes, sorry. That was very unclear. I mean that I played through the
1. Set count to 0
2. If next flip is "1" increment count, else decrement count.
3. If count > 0, return to (1.)
All I was doing was recording the greatest number of flips to get to +1.
"85 straight losses" just means that the counter got to -85 at one point.

...
What does "85 straight losses" mean in this example?
...

It was a mistake on my part. I should not have used the
word "straight". All it means is that, in my simulation,
one player walked into the random.org coin flip casino
and was down 85 bets. That's the only question I was
looking at.

There's a simpler way to look at your coinflip game. Just
download 10,000 flips (the max allowed at random.org) and
subtract the number of "heads" from the number of "tails".
That's what the house made or lost. There's no way to
avoid that conclusion, assuming an even money bet on each
flip. The "strategy" of the player(s) is completely
irrelevant.

--bks

[da pickle]

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

Post by da pickle

Yes, sorry. That was very unclear. I mean that I played through the
1. Set count to 0
2. If next flip is "1" increment count, else decrement count.
3. If count > 0, return to (1.)
All I was doing was recording the greatest number of flips to get to +1.
"85 straight losses" just means that the counter got to -85 at one point.

...
What does "85 straight losses" mean in this example?
...

It was a mistake on my part. I should not have used the
word "straight". All it means is that, in my simulation,
one player walked into the random.org coin flip casino
and was down 85 bets. That's the only question I was
looking at.
There's a simpler way to look at your coinflip game. Just
download 10,000 flips (the max allowed at random.org) and
subtract the number of "heads" from the number of "tails".
That's what the house made or lost. There's no way to
avoid that conclusion, assuming an even money bet on each
flip. The "strategy" of the player(s) is completely
irrelevant.
--bks

Thanks ... I am not really interested in whether he loses 85 or a
millions net bets. I would like to know if the one net bet loss passes
back and forth between the two players along the way.

It seems to me that a 50/50 game is just going to be a situation that
neither side ever gets infinitely ahead no matter if they play to
infinity. It seems to me that the net bet win/loss seeks even with
maybe large net losses to either side cancelling each other out along
the long long way to even again.

That is just my "feeling" and I do not claim it is "correct" but it
seems like that is better than the idea that even money bets are not
really even money bets.

Thanks for your information. If you can figure out a program that
tracks the net one win transfer back and forth in a 50/50 game, that
would be interesting.

[Bill Vanek]

Post by da pickle

Post by da pickle

Yes, sorry. That was very unclear. I mean that I played through the
1. Set count to 0
2. If next flip is "1" increment count, else decrement count.
3. If count > 0, return to (1.)
All I was doing was recording the greatest number of flips to get to
+1.
"85 straight losses" just means that the counter got to -85 at one
point.

...
What does "85 straight losses" mean in this example?
...

It was a mistake on my part. I should not have used the
word "straight". All it means is that, in my simulation,
one player walked into the random.org coin flip casino
and was down 85 bets. That's the only question I was
looking at.
There's a simpler way to look at your coinflip game. Just
download 10,000 flips (the max allowed at random.org) and
subtract the number of "heads" from the number of "tails".
That's what the house made or lost. There's no way to
avoid that conclusion, assuming an even money bet on each
flip. The "strategy" of the player(s) is completely
irrelevant.
--bks

Thanks ... I am not really interested in whether he loses 85 or a
millions net bets. I would like to know if the one net bet loss passes
back and forth between the two players along the way.

Seriously? You are asking if sometimes two players in an even money game will
sometimes trade the lead? One player is ahead, then the other player is
ahead, and so on... why would you think you even have to ask that question?
Have you never personally been ahead and then behind etc. while gambling? You
ask that like you are some deeply thoughtful person who asks the tough
questions that others never thought of.

Post by da pickle
It seems to me that a 50/50 game is just going to be a situation that
neither side ever gets infinitely ahead no matter if they play to
infinity. It seems to me that the net bet win/loss seeks even with
maybe large net losses to either side cancelling each other out along
the long long way to even again.
That is just my "feeling" and I do not claim it is "correct" but it
seems like that is better than the idea that even money bets are not
really even money bets.
Thanks for your information. If you can figure out a program that
tracks the net one win transfer back and forth in a 50/50 game, that
would be interesting.

“Seems”? “Feeling”? “If you can figure out a program”? You are
oblivious to the world around you. ALL of the goofy questions you are asking
here, and ALL of your silly claims have been addressed, and ANY program you
can wish for has been written, probably thousands of time over hundreds of
years (except for the computer programs...). You posted your resume here, and
there were technical job histories there, so I don’t get this at all. You
sound like a liberal. I used to have the formulas that would answer your
questions programmed into my TI82. It’s just that easy. You don’t need to
feel or guess or intuit anything on the subject you brought up. It’s all
known already, and has been for a very long time. You could figure out all of
this yourself with very little work, but you choose to look silly here
instead.

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by da pickle

Yes, sorry. That was very unclear. I mean that I played through the
1. Set count to 0
2. If next flip is "1" increment count, else decrement count.
3. If count > 0, return to (1.)
All I was doing was recording the greatest number of flips to get to +1.
"85 straight losses" just means that the counter got to -85 at one point.

...
What does "85 straight losses" mean in this example?
...

It was a mistake on my part. I should not have used the
word "straight". All it means is that, in my simulation,
one player walked into the random.org coin flip casino
and was down 85 bets. That's the only question I was
looking at.
There's a simpler way to look at your coinflip game. Just
download 10,000 flips (the max allowed at random.org) and
subtract the number of "heads" from the number of "tails".
That's what the house made or lost. There's no way to
avoid that conclusion, assuming an even money bet on each
flip. The "strategy" of the player(s) is completely
irrelevant.
--bks

Thanks ... I am not really interested in whether he loses 85 or a
millions net bets. I would like to know if the one net bet loss passes
back and forth between the two players along the way.

Seriously? You are asking if sometimes two players in an even money game will
sometimes trade the lead? One player is ahead, then the other player is
ahead, and so on... why would you think you even have to ask that question?
Have you never personally been ahead and then behind etc. while gambling? You
ask that like you are some deeply thoughtful person who asks the tough
questions that others never thought of.

Post by da pickle
It seems to me that a 50/50 game is just going to be a situation that
neither side ever gets infinitely ahead no matter if they play to
infinity. It seems to me that the net bet win/loss seeks even with
maybe large net losses to either side cancelling each other out along
the long long way to even again.
That is just my "feeling" and I do not claim it is "correct" but it
seems like that is better than the idea that even money bets are not
really even money bets.
Thanks for your information. If you can figure out a program that
tracks the net one win transfer back and forth in a 50/50 game, that
would be interesting.

“Seems”? “Feeling”? “If you can figure out a program”? You are
oblivious to the world around you. ALL of the goofy questions you are asking
here, and ALL of your silly claims have been addressed, and ANY program you
can wish for has been written, probably thousands of time over hundreds of
years (except for the computer programs...). You posted your resume here, and
there were technical job histories there, so I don’t get this at all. You
sound like a liberal. I used to have the formulas that would answer your
questions programmed into my TI82. It’s just that easy. You don’t need to
feel or guess or intuit anything on the subject you brought up. It’s all
known already, and has been for a very long time. You could figure out all of
this yourself with very little work, but you choose to look silly here
instead.

My simple question is ...

In a non-biased 50/50 game does the net one bet ahead pass back and
forth to each side along the way?

Does that happen a lot more times before you might get to a 85 straight
losses run ... you "could" you just start with 85 straight losses that
one really bad time? How often would that be since you only want to win
once?

I think if you win the first time ... you should stop right there. Even
if you lose the first time, you might go through a period of behind even
more or maybe get even again ... you might decide that quitting even is
not so bad.

I really do think you would have an "advantage" if you quit while you
were one net bet ahead ... especially if it was the first try.

[Bill Vanek]

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by da pickle

Yes, sorry. That was very unclear. I mean that I played through the
1. Set count to 0
2. If next flip is "1" increment count, else decrement count.
3. If count > 0, return to (1.)
All I was doing was recording the greatest number of flips to get
to
+1.
"85 straight losses" just means that the counter got to -85 at one
point.

...
What does "85 straight losses" mean in this example?
...

It was a mistake on my part. I should not have used the
word "straight". All it means is that, in my simulation,
one player walked into the random.org coin flip casino
and was down 85 bets. That's the only question I was
looking at.
There's a simpler way to look at your coinflip game. Just
download 10,000 flips (the max allowed at random.org) and
subtract the number of "heads" from the number of "tails".
That's what the house made or lost. There's no way to
avoid that conclusion, assuming an even money bet on each
flip. The "strategy" of the player(s) is completely
irrelevant.
--bks

Thanks ... I am not really interested in whether he loses 85 or a
millions net bets. I would like to know if the one net bet loss passes
back and forth between the two players along the way.

Seriously? You are asking if sometimes two players in an even money game will
sometimes trade the lead? One player is ahead, then the other player is
ahead, and so on... why would you think you even have to ask that question?
Have you never personally been ahead and then behind etc. while gambling? You
ask that like you are some deeply thoughtful person who asks the tough
questions that others never thought of.

Post by da pickle
It seems to me that a 50/50 game is just going to be a situation that
neither side ever gets infinitely ahead no matter if they play to
infinity. It seems to me that the net bet win/loss seeks even with
maybe large net losses to either side cancelling each other out along
the long long way to even again.
That is just my "feeling" and I do not claim it is "correct" but it
seems like that is better than the idea that even money bets are not
really even money bets.
Thanks for your information. If you can figure out a program that
tracks the net one win transfer back and forth in a 50/50 game, that
would be interesting.

“Seems”? “Feeling”? “If you can figure out a program”? You are
oblivious to the world around you. ALL of the goofy questions you are asking
here, and ALL of your silly claims have been addressed, and ANY program you
can wish for has been written, probably thousands of time over hundreds of
years (except for the computer programs...). You posted your resume here, and
there were technical job histories there, so I don’t get this at all. You
sound like a liberal. I used to have the formulas that would answer your
questions programmed into my TI82. It’s just that easy. You don’t need to
feel or guess or intuit anything on the subject you brought up. It’s all
known already, and has been for a very long time. You could figure out all of
this yourself with very little work, but you choose to look silly here
instead.

My simple question is ...
In a non-biased 50/50 game does the net one bet ahead pass back and
forth to each side along the way?

You’re talking about one bet ahead like it’s some mysterious object, like
dark matter. All you are asking is if the lead can change in an even money
game, and there is not one person here who understands why you would have to
ask that.

Post by da pickle
Does that happen a lot more times before you might get to a 85 straight
losses run ... you "could" you just start with 85 straight losses that
one really bad time? How often would that be since you only want to win
once?

If you would stop and listen and try to understand the answers you have been
given repeatedly, you wouldn’t be asking again. Like I said, the answers
are not mystery, and have been worked out for hundreds of years. Tim has
given you many answers, and you chose to reject them. Not the best approach
to learning about something you don’t understand.

Post by da pickle
I think if you win the first time ... you should stop right there. Even
if you lose the first time, you might go through a period of behind even
more or maybe get even again ... you might decide that quitting even is
not so bad.

The one point we have all tried to make is that no matter what you do, an
even money game is a zero EV game. There is no method to get an advantage,
except from the risk of ruin standpoint. So yes, quitting is always a fine
idea in an even money game, because it’s a waste of time.

Post by da pickle
I really do think you would have an "advantage" if you quit while you
were one net bet ahead ... especially if it was the first try.

The only advantage you would have is that you cannot lose back that one 50/50
bet you were lucky enough to win.

You actually sound like you have softened your stance on this. Good choice.

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
I really do think you would have an "advantage" if you quit while you
were one net bet ahead ... especially if it was the first try.

The only advantage you would have is that you cannot lose back that one 50/50
bet you were lucky enough to win.
You actually sound like you have softened your stance on this. Good choice.

It is nice that you finally admitted that the person who quits while
ahead one bet has an advantage in a 50/50 betting string.

[I did not soften anything ... that was my "stance" all along.]

Merry Christmas

[Bill Vanek]

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
I really do think you would have an "advantage" if you quit while you
were one net bet ahead ... especially if it was the first try.

The only advantage you would have is that you cannot lose back that one 50/50
bet you were lucky enough to win.
You actually sound like you have softened your stance on this. Good choice.

It is nice that you finally admitted that the person who quits while
ahead one bet has an advantage in a 50/50 betting string.
[I did not soften anything ... that was my "stance" all along.]
Merry Christmas

You celebrate Christmas with total dishonesty? Interesting.

[da pickle]

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle

Post by Bill Vanek

Post by da pickle
I really do think you would have an "advantage" if you quit while you
were one net bet ahead ... especially if it was the first try.

The only advantage you would have is that you cannot lose back that one 50/50
bet you were lucky enough to win.
You actually sound like you have softened your stance on this. Good choice.

It is nice that you finally admitted that the person who quits while
ahead one bet has an advantage in a 50/50 betting string.
[I did not soften anything ... that was my "stance" all along.]
Merry Christmas

You celebrate Christmas with total dishonesty? Interesting.

No, I celebrate my single win ... it's the amount that makes the difference.

Hope you have a happy day and celebration.

[da pickle]

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

Post by da pickle

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write nonsense.

...
My friend quit after 50 tries ... down 4 ... never down more than 8.

I downloaded 10,000 flips from random.org (a file of 1's and
0's) and ran a Perl script against it that doesn't quit. I
got a maximum run of 85 straight losses.
--bks

Not much help ... straight loss are not the problem.

I just wonder if you did what I asked "one" time and reported your result.

Try it ... only takes some seconds.

Real people ... real results

Try it ... I did say "Please".

[I know it does not "prove" anything. Just want to see your results ...
one time.]

[Tim Norfolk]

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

Post by da pickle

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write nonsense.

...
My friend quit after 50 tries ... down 4 ... never down more than 8.

I downloaded 10,000 flips from random.org (a file of 1's and
0's) and ran a Perl script against it that doesn't quit. I
got a maximum run of 85 straight losses.
--bks

Net losses to that point, or just sequential?

[da pickle]

Post by Tim Norfolk

Post by Bradley K. Sherman

Post by da pickle

...
...

This is silly. Set a limit on attempts or be doomed to write nonsense.

...
My friend quit after 50 tries ... down 4 ... never down more than 8.

I downloaded 10,000 flips from random.org (a file of 1's and
0's) and ran a Perl script against it that doesn't quit. I
got a maximum run of 85 straight losses.
--bks

Net losses to that point, or just sequential?

I am not at all sure I even come close to what you are saying ...

85 net losses at some time along the way? One side or the other?

Remember, we only are talking about one side ... not the other.

If ONE side wins the first toss ... there is no series at all for the
OTHER side.

[RichD]

Post by da pickle
My friend quit after 50 tries ...

He'll never play again? Forever?

--
Rich

[da pickle]

Post by RichD

Post by da pickle
My friend quit after 50 tries ...

He'll never play again? Forever?
--
Rich

Maybe ... did you play ... just once?