You're shown three boxes by a benefactor from which you must select one. Two are empty but the third contains great wealth. You do not know which contains the fortune although the benefactor does. You make your choice and pick one. Before you open it, the benefactor opens one of the remaining boxes and reveals its contents. NOTHING INSIDE. He then offers you the chance of changing your original selection and exchanging it for the remaining unopened box. That's the dilemma. Do you swap, do you keep your original choice, does it make any difference to your chance of success?
For those of you who are not familiar with the Monty Hall problem: try to give an answer here before googling for it.
he he, mistar, you have to admin when this is presented by the first time to a person it does make him/her think :) (Barely nobody gets to give a 1-second answer).
Okay gents, don't cheat! Do try to solve it mentally and then resort to Google... nolinks://montyhallproblem.com/ (nolinks://montyhallproblem.com/)
:)
I have been studying this for years. My only question/concern still remains. If this problem was automated rather than a human element involved, is there any difference in the outcome? Ken
Hmm, I think it's not gonna be that hard to be coded. I can actually try and share the results. Any predictions? :)
Quote from: mistarlupo on October 28, 2009, 06:03:41 PM
Hmm, I think it's not gonna be that hard to be coded. I can actually try and share the results. Any predictions? :)
If it's done right,... there will be no difference.
nolinks://nolinks.grand-illusions.com/simulator/montysim.htm (nolinks://nolinks.grand-illusions.com/simulator/montysim.htm)
70 / 30... Using the simulator above. I'm not sure how legitimate it is though.
Nice app mistarlupo.
Now a little context to throw an idea on the table. You know the sections/columns bets. Now look at the same logic with this. What happens when a trend (dominance) shows that one of the three sections or columns among all three respectively have a break. What happens when one section sleeps for twenty spins. Do you have an advantage when that happens?
Quote from: Gizmotron on October 28, 2009, 08:40:13 PM
Nice app mistarlupo.
Now a little context to throw an idea on the table. You know the sections/columns bets. Now look at the same logic with this. What happens when a trend (dominance) shows that one of the three sections or columns among all three respectively have a break. What happens when one section sleeps for twenty spins. Do you have an advantage when that happens?
Yes,
..and I posted something like this elsewhere.
I posted that I believed Spike probably watched all 3 even chances and probably used a Monty Hall type principal (among others) to select his bets.
Quote from: bombus on October 28, 2009, 09:27:41 PM
Yes,
..and I posted something like this elsewhere.
I posted that I believed Spike probably watched all 3 even chances and probably used a Monty Hall type principal (among others) to select his bets.
I've been referring to them as combinations. One example is to take the long shot form. You bet the odd-reds combo, you bet the high-black, the low-even combos. You even put a lot on five numbers like the even-high-black combo. You also combine the columns where one sleeps and you bet the red only in the other two hot columns. It's comes down to effective guessing while exposing combinations based on multiple trends. I even have a method for waiting for times when it works. I don't do things like this when it's not working. Any losses are like triggers not to use this. Then again there are the odds that nine tries balance out when four numbers are used. Same goes for four tries for nine numbers when they are used. It's good to see combinations and combined dominances. That always pays off better when that hits.
You always win a higher percentage if you switch. Marilyn Vos Savant proved this in Parade Magazine. Computer simulations have been written and over a gazillion tries, you always come out ahead if you switch.
It cannot work with roulette as you MUST have a moderator who KNOWS which box the car is in and which box the goats are in. (That's the real Month Hall!) With roulette, if you picked dozen one, and someone could guarantee you dozen two would lose, you could switch to dozen three and always be in the black.
Let's find that person who can tell us dozen two will lose!
Aw, it's "The Amazing Spiki" and he's not talking.
(TwoCat humor there Spike. Don't send the furies after me!)
Sam
That's just it. In a situation where the center column sleeps for 20 spins you can assume you are being told that for a while it will not hit. All you do is bet the other two columns with a flat bet on each. For that matter you might figure on a positive progression for a few spins. I was just attempting to show that having a source for an advantage can come in the form of a continuing streak. Of course nobody is going to provide you with a sure thing.
Dang!
A Detailed explanation of this problem can be found at the link below:
nolinks://nolinks.montyhallproblem.com/ (nolinks://nolinks.montyhallproblem.com/)
Another idea to apply the technique in bet selection is to make guess for the next 3 spins result. if you do not get the first one right, change the decision for the next two spins..
PH
spining7 - "I don't play that way anymore because I will not go back to a casino until I find a simple method/bet I can rely on. I'm not a fan of being pumped up with emotional chemicals every time I sit at a table."
There will never be a bet you can rely on. You can float pretty successfully around the even chances. It's never wrong to attack an obvious trend when it happens. In fact it's kind of dumb not to.
It's never wrong to attack an obvious trend when it happens. In fact it's kind of dumb not to.>>
Very dumb. When you see nothing but mostly low numbers hitting, jump on the train, who knows when it will end. I've seen one side dominate for 200 spins.
I saw 24 numbers dominate on six different tables in the Cesar's Casino for over five hours. Now I was totally a beginner back then and bet that it had to stop. So I bet against it. I lost my paycheck that night. It did put me on the road to discovering how trends work though. If I had bet with it I would have cleaned up. I just didn't know.
I have always had an issue with this trend betting garbage (sorry). It is very easy to say what you should of or should not of done AFTER seeing a bunch of numbers. Thats like reading what the winning lotto numbers were from yesterday and being pissed cause you did not bet those 6 numbers. I'll give an example. Here is a number hit from a local casino.....22. Ok, go for it! What are your future trend betting numbers going to be? I'll help out a little more. Here are some more numbers hit in order......22, 27, 7, 33, 28, 28, 24, 36, 19, 31. I guess betting on the high numbers is a solid trend bet, lets do it. Oops, too late, the numbers are now hitting 1-18. Ken
Quote from: Mr J on April 04, 2010, 06:02:17 PM
I have always had an issue with this trend betting garbage (sorry). It is very easy to say what you should of or should not of done AFTER seeing a bunch of numbers. Thats like reading what the winning lotto numbers were from yesterday and being pissed cause you did not bet those 6 numbers. I'll give an example. Here is a number hit from a local casino.....22. Ok, go for it! What are your future trend betting numbers going to be? I'll help out a little more. Here are some more numbers hit in order......22, 27, 7, 33, 28, 28, 24, 36, 19, 31. I guess betting on the high numbers is a solid trend bet, lets do it. Oops, too late, the numbers are now hitting 1-18. Ken
You are still having trouble with trend betting. You might consider following the effectiveness tracking while you are at it. Effectiveness follows trends too. "Oops" is not a very effective technique. It's nobody's job to get you to improve. You don't get it so you attempt to feebly make fun of something you don't get. That makes you one of those "Dopes" that John Patrick mentions. If you keep acting like a dope then people are going to pick up on that pattern.
John Patrick is full of nonsense.
Quote from: Noble Savage on April 04, 2010, 07:13:05 PM
John Patrick is full of nonsense.
To be honest I have no idea. He recommends using trends. I use trends. He recommends playing with a sense of how it's going. I do that too. He thinks that people stuck on the expectations of long term math probability can't see how gambling is about what is currently happening. I see it that way too. Just because the odds are against you, by a fraction of the whole risk, it does not predict what must happen on the very next spin. The odds predict nothing for the next few spins.
Ok, Gizmo. I find it odd that most notice a trend (myself included) AFTER its over or real soon before its over. I could give you all kinds of numbers......then you TELL ME, #1 Is the trend over? #2 Is the trend just starting? #3 Is there no trend at all? Surely, an ace player should be able to spot it. Ken
Quote from: Mr J on April 04, 2010, 10:15:12 PM
Ok, Gizmo. I find it odd that most notice a trend (myself included) AFTER its over or real soon before its over. I could give you all kinds of numbers......then you TELL ME, #1 Is the trend over? #2 Is the trend just starting? #3 Is there no trend at all? Surely, an ace player should be able to spot it. Ken
Ken, that is the heart of the problem regarding trend betting as a method. That is exactly why I actually use effectiveness as the base line, final word. If the effectiveness is trending positive then I attack with higher priced flat bets. I expect to lose several first bets while attempting to get on a solid trend early. I try to stay at even while searching for good trends. You can win small amounts with short lived trends. All you really need to do is keep track of the effectiveness of your attempts to get on early. If it's not going easy then randomness is being observed as being in favor of losing. You can adjust if it's a continuous effect. If it's difficult because of the chaotic state then you should just get out of that session. All sessions are not profitable. Playing trends does not kill you off like losing a progression does. It should only cause you minimal damage. You just need to know how you are going to attack when the opportunities occur.
"If the effectiveness is trending positive" >>> Give me an example.
Quote from: Mr J on April 05, 2010, 03:58:18 PM
"If the effectiveness is trending positive" >>> Give me an example.
Perhaps you will recall me saying things like "test as you go?" Here is a Victor-esque example: "nolinksLnolinksLwLnolinksw"
If the trend is happening, that you win more times than you lose, then you could say that you are experiencing a current state where there is a dominance occurring. I associate winning as being positive. If your bet selection process is working then that is a positive effectiveness trend.