4th August 2005, 04:33 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 479
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mr J
"Can you post an example of a series of 37 spins with 18 winners that loses?"
Sure. Start at $10, when we lose we add $10 to the bet, when we win we lower the bet by $10.
Win the first 18 spins = +$180
Lose the next 19 spins = -1900
You are contradicting yourself.
In the roulette example I provided, I had 18 wins and 19 losses and made a profit.
Your sample wasn't random. Either is the one I described above, ie both of our 'tests' are biased.
You said yourself that the wins will be worth more than the losses. To me this is saying that you agree that it will give you an advantage over straight bets.
No. If the the 2 bets pay even money, you still need to win >50% to profit.
Yes you are entitled to an opinion, but please if you are going to voice it, provide something to back it up.
Sure, it's called mathematics.
You can't just rock up and say it won't work. What is the reason that a progressive staking system does not give you an advantage.? On the figures I have provided, it does.
Yes I can.
All a staking system does is change the distribution of winnings/losses.
Again, your test was biased.
I don't need to prove to you why progessions don't work, you need to prove to mathematicians all across the world why they DO work.
|
Firstly Mr. J.
Your series of 37 spins did not produce a loss of anywhere near that much. It is quite confusing to me why you would argue against my thoughts on staking systems with a crazy staking system that has nothing to do with anything written previously.
What I asked for, was a series of 37 spins that produces a loss using the figures 1.2 and .8.
If you took the time to respond, surely you have time to read what you are responding to.
Secondly.
Explain to me about the 2 bets on an even money event. You say you wouldn't profit. If you bet $10 on the loss and $12 on the win, how do you argue that there is not a $2 profit.?
What about mathematics proves what you are saying? Mathematics is a very broad area.
|