Whats The Math of Short Term Probability?

[Herb6]

My question is this, if we are doing a test, and you win, how long must you wait before you can bet again?

Meaning, if you play one spin and win, how long must we wait before you can play the next spin?

[winkel]

My question is this, if we are doing a test, and you win, how long must you wait before you can bet again?

Meaning, if you play one spin and win, how long must we wait before you can play the next spin?

I bet every spin until I have 1 unit per bet spin, if I win the very first spin I bet again

[Herb6]

Put it this way, how do we test your method if you only play until you've won one unit?

[winkel]

Put it this way, how do we test your method if you only play until you've won one unit?

I would agree to bet for 3 (or name it) wins (not units) per test day

[Spike!]

Herb spewed the old talking point: >>In the long run you will find that you can't predict an EC any better or any worse than chance would dictate.>>

It all comes down to this. The long run only exists if you play a mechanical system that does the same thing over and over and over. The long term will eat it like a buzz saw. But if you play a method that changes on every spin, that correctly reads the random and anticipates whats coming next, you are ALWAYS in the short term and there is no math that covers the short term. On every spin you're starting over. You just can't get it thru you're math soaked brain that this is possible, so for you, it isn't. Not my problem.

[Herb6]

Winkel,

Why must you wait between wins?  What determines how long you must wait?  Why are you limited on the amount you can win?

[winkel]

Winkel,

Why must you wait between wins?  What determines how long you must wait?  Why are you limited on the amount you can win?

don´t you read?

I don´t wait, I bet every spin.

How many hours will you test me each day? Just tell!

[Herb6]

How are you going to be betting?  ECs or straight up numbers?

[winkel]

How are you going to be betting?  ECs or straight up numbers?

would be nice if you would read properly: we were talking about ECs

[Herb6]

Would be nice if you learned some manners too.

[winkel]

Would be nice if you learned some manners too.

I have better manners than you boy!
I read properly, that is the honour I ca give another person at minimum

[Herb6]

Winkel,

Nobody is going to take you seriously with that attitude problem of yours.

[winkel]

What now?

do you try me or not?

[Spike!]

Gizmo said: >>By your own logic there is nothing but a slight advantage to the house. You admittedly think that you can't do better than that. >>>

Thats because they're stuck in the long term. They feed a mehanical system into a simulator, and yup, it loses every time, right at the house edge. They have zero flexibility in their betting. The math of roulette totally depends on you doing the same type of thing over and over and over. If you learn how to go with the flow of whats being presented in the random outcomes, to study it and really see whats going on, their long term math goes out the window.

I'm always being asked what my triggers are to bet, and when I say I don't have any, they throw their hands up in disgust and say I'm lying. They cannot wrap their tiny minds around betting without triggers. All a trigger does is trap you in the long term math, why would I want to do that?

[MiniBaccarat]

G'day,

Winkel, Herb6 is now trying to find an 'out'!

[MiniBaccarat]

-