Gambler's Paradox..???

[Kelly]

Standard deviation is just a measure tool like a measure tape or similar. You just take any amount of spins, count what came out. You then put that amount into the tool and you then get a value for those spins. Its not rocket science, it just gives you a value for the spread between 2 chances (if we talk even chances) you just witnessed.

[Mike]

You can't talk about 'standard deviation' one second, and 'luck' the next..

That's a contradiction in terms..  surely..?

Luck is an unknown / unpredictable phenomenon that causes an event to go one way rather than another,

Standard deviation is a known / predictable MATHEMATICAL formula..

You can't kid a kidder, my friend..

{sigh}

Wrong again, Mr Janus. There is no contradiction at all. In fact, standard deviation IS luck, your 'luck' is quantified in terms of standard deviation. I suggest you try to educate yourself before digging the hole deeper.

[Hugh Demann]

{sigh}

Wrong again, Mr Janus. There is no contradiction at all. In fact, standard deviation IS luck, your 'luck' is quantified in terms of standard deviation. I suggest you try to educate yourself before digging the hole deeper.

First you say Maths has NO merit in the 'chance / luck' game of roulette,

Now you claim to be able to quantify 'luck / chance' in terms of a MATHEMATICAL formula..   hahaha!!

Boy, you sure is crazy..!

FFS, why can't you see that you're contradicting yourself..?

Am I going too quickly for you..?

And I think you should change your surname to 'Janus'. 

(Mike, your last name isn't 'Hunt' by any chance, is it?)

[Mike]

First you say Maths has NO merit in the 'chance / luck' game of roulette,

Correct, it doesn't. In terms of being able to predict the next number or sequence of numbers, math is useless. It's because the wheel has no memory. Statistics don't CAUSE anything, so how can you predict results from them? So far, so good.

Now you claim to be able to quantify 'luck / chance' in terms of a MATHEMATICAL formula..   hahaha!!

Again, correct. How else could you quantify luck? Like I said, you obviously don't even know what standard deviation is. Look it up and we can talk, in the meantime, stop trying to wing it. You may be a verbally clever smart-arse, but you need  some education (and a little humility wouldn't go amiss either).

FFS, why can't you see that you're contradicting yourself..?

Where is the contradiction? The problem is your lack of understanding. Just because you can quantify something doesn't mean that you can control or predict it. In the case of roulette, the reason why you can't do that is because outcomes are statistically independent. Better look that up too while you're at the library.

[Mike]

Here you go Mr Janus, this will get you started:

nolinks://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casino_game

Standard deviation

The luck factor in a casino game is quantified using standard deviations (SD). The standard deviation of a simple game like Roulette can be calculated using the binomial distribution. In the binomial distribution, SD = sqrt (npq ), where n = number of rounds played, p = probability of winning, and q = probability of losing. The binomial distribution assumes a result of 1 unit for a win, and 0 units for a loss, rather than -1 units for a loss, which doubles the range of possible outcomes. Furthermore, if we flat bet at 10 units per round instead of 1 unit, the range of possible outcomes increases 10 fold.

SD (Roulette, even-money bet) = 2b sqrt(npq ), where b = flat bet per round, n = number of rounds, p = 18/38, and q = 20/38.

For example, after 10 rounds at $1 per round, the standard deviation will be 2 x 1 x sqrt(10 x 18/38 x 20/38) = $3.16. After 10 rounds, the expected loss will be 10 x $1 x 5.26% = $0.53. As you can see, standard deviation is many times the magnitude of the expected loss.

The range is six times the standard deviation: three above the mean, and three below. Therefore, after 10 rounds betting $1 per round, your result will be somewhere between -$0.53 - 3 x $3.16 and -$0.53 + 3 x $3.16, i.e., between -$10.01 and $8.95. (There is still a 0.1% chance that your result will exceed a $8.95 profit, and a 0.1% chance that you will lose more than $10.01.) This demonstrates how luck can be quantified; we know that if we walk into a casino and bet $5 per round for a whole night, we are not going to walk out with $500.

[Mr J]

I said this a week ago, I'll say it again. When I got banned from RF, take a guess how many times I went back under a different user name........?  Ken

[Ulysses]

For example, after 10 rounds at $1 per round, the standard deviation will be 2 x 1 x sqrt(10 x 18/38 x 20/38) = $3.16. After 10 rounds, the expected loss will be 10 x $1 x 5.26% = $0.53. As you can see, standard deviation is many times the magnitude of the expected loss.

American = 5.26% Plain daft

Single zero = 2.7% Not bad

Single zero with la partage = 1.3% Getting better

Non zero wheel = 0% Purfect

[Mr J]

Even with no zeros, there still is not an edge. Ken

[John Gold]

I was thinking that if you played on a no zero wheel like at BV. It may be possible to play a positive progression and do ok a lot of the time.
It would be great if a live online casino decided to use a no zero wheel to attract business. Probably most people would still lose because of greed and bankroll issues. I don't expect to see it myself but it would be a blast.  

[Mr J]

There's still 36 numbers and the payout is 35:1.  Even if there were only 35 numbers, thats evened up, still no edge. The only way there would be an edge.....36 numbers and the payout is 37:1.  Ken

[Mr J]

Some may disagree, feedback would be cool.  Ken

[Ulysses]

It would be great if a live online casino decided to use a no zero wheel to attract business. Probably most people would still lose because of greed and bankroll issues. I don't expect to see it myself but it would be a blast. 

As Betfair and BV offer software 'no zero' it's only a matter of time before more casinos follow and then one of them will eventually offer live no zero. I predict this to be within the next 2 years. 

There's still 36 numbers and the payout is 35:1.  Even if there were only 35 numbers, thats evened up, still no edge. The only way there would be an edge.....36 numbers and the payout is 37:1.  Ken

I see what your saying mrj but you do get your initial bet/wager returned so it does even up me thinks.

[Mike]

Mr J, I have sent you a PM.

[Hugh Demann]

So, just to recap:

1.You're a maths genius with a gambling problem

(the problem is you don't know how to win!)

2.You've been studying roulette for the past 2 weeks and got STUCK

3.You've never felt the need to venture into a REAL casino

(because there might be girls there)

4.You can't create a consistant winning bet

(because Wikipedia doesn't show you how)

5.You joined a roulette forum to see if any of the DUMB members could help you

6.You believe roulette can't be beaten by Maths

(but stick around just in case you're wrong)

7.You've dedicated your life to teach everyone YOUR complete lack of knowledge

8.You're building up the courage to ask Kelly out on a date to the Maths Dufus Convention

[Mr J]

@Hugh Demann >> Is it possible you can make your point WITHOUT calling names, using foul language and constantly stirring the pot here? Is that possible sir? I am passing this along to Steve, maybe he has a 'better idea' what to do.   Ken  (I deleted one post)

[Mr J]

-