Gambler's Paradox..???

[Hugh Demann]

Certainly Ken, but I'm not quite sure what's cum over you..  

The point I was trying to make is that 'someone' has NO logical reason for being here,

Except to antagonize other (MORE INTELLIGENT) members..   ( around 3000, give or take)

Might I draw the jury's attention to the following:

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

Nuff said.

[Mike]

Certainly Ken, but I'm not quite sure what's cum over you..  

I'm sure Ken hasn't missed the implied insult here.

The point I was trying to make is that 'someone' has NO logical reason for being here,

Sorry, but my logical reason for being here is to point out that there are no logical reasons for your (and many others) claims. I think your grasp of what "logical" means is a little shaky, better add it to that list for when you go to the library.

Except to antagonize other (MORE INTELLIGENT) members..   ( around 3000, give or take)

If by "antagonize" you mean "enlighten", then guilty as charged.

Might I draw the jury's attention to the following:

It's usual to provide some evidence when you're accusing someone, but this isn't really a "trial" is it? it's just your childish way of retaliating because I made a fool of you in public. Anyway, let's go through the points.

1.You're a maths genius with a gambling problem
(the problem is you don't know how to win!)

Not a math genius, but I took the trouble to learn some statistics because I thought it might be relevant to my study of roulette. You, on the other hand, are so arrogant that it never occurred to you. Shame really, because if you had taken the trouble you wouldn't look such an idiot as you do now. Perhaps I'm doing you an injustice though, maybe you're just not bright enough to understand basic statistics.

Don't know how to win? perhaps, but neither does anyone else, they just think they do. At least I now know how to NOT lose.

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

No, 6 months actually (give or take). But I'm pretty sure I've tested many more approaches, methods and systems than  others who search for years but only test manually, because I'm a good programmer (not bragging, just stating a fact).

3.You've never felt the need to venture into a REAL casino
(because there might be girls there)

This is quite irrelevant to anything, and rather odd, coming from someone who claims to restrict their play to RNGs.

4.You can't create a consistant winning bet
(because Wikipedia doesn't show you how)

So what's so special about me? No-one can create a consistent winning bet based on math. And did it ever occur to you that I might have written that Wiki entry?  

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

No, I joined a roulette forum to get ideas. As it turned out, most were dumb, but I wouldn't call the members dumb. What are YOU doing here? I can't think of any LOGICAL reason, you already have the holy grail, right?

6.You believe roulette can't be beaten by Maths
(but stick around just in case you're wrong)

I don't just believe it, I know it. The reason I'm sticking around it because I want to explain why I made a mistake, and maybe help others to avoid it. Like I said elsewhere, I feel I have a moral responsibility to not let people be scammed or mislead. What are YOU doing here?

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

That's a bit of an exaggeration, I don't spend too much time on this forum.  By the way, my "complete lack of knowledge" can be proved over and over in many different ways, whereas what you're claiming can't be, but it's up to you to show it, if you claim it. I haven't seen any evidence of that, only specious bluster.

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

Nice going! now you've managed to insult kelly too (and it's not true).

[Mr J]

"I'm sure Ken hasn't missed the implied insult here" >>> I got it but dont really care.  Ken

[Steve]

I've removed Hugh for offensive behavior. I have no doubt he's been here before more than once under different names. And Hugh, you appear to think you know what you're talking about, but really dont.

[Mr J]

I dont see the logic coming back under a new user name? The person will post exactly the SAME. Its a matter of only a few posts, you can spot the same person. If they know this, why ATTEMPT to come back, I dont get it?  Ken

[Steve]

Ken, the world is full of people that dont have lives.

[Norman Bates]

I think the wheel knows what grows on the other side of the fence. You just have to coax it a little bit..., and after my tongue lashing on AR I was given the boot!!!  God help me if that happens here.  That way I wouldn't have anyone , or anywhere to go to, and vent my stress.  God willing, we'll all make it through this life unscathed.  If not, who will pray for you?

[gavind]

Ken, the world is full of people that dont have lives.

I can attest to this. I think those are people that have no care for time that they have wasted.

[Archie]

I can attest to this. I think those are people that have no care for time that they have wasted.

Hugh Demann = You the man.

[ausguy]

gavind & archie - what's the point of posting on discussions that have been dormant for 3 years ?

[Mike]

Hugh Demann = You the man.

3 years on and nothing's changed, just a different crop of hopeful newbies who are deluded into thinking that they can "beat" roulette with patterns and progressions. Oh well, it's a hobby I guess.

[Archie]

archie - what's the point of posting on discussions that have been dormant for 3 years ?

Slow day, couldn't resist the Simpson's joke.

Cool avatar, Mike.

[Archie]

-