1. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
  2. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. You can find out more by following.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

Opinions On What Would Be Considered As 'Beating The House'

Discussion in 'Online Casinos' started by Black21Jack, Oct 22, 2004.

    Oct 22, 2004
  1. Black21Jack

    Black21Jack Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Courier driver
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    I want to give a hypothetical and I would like peoples opinion on whether they think the 'house', and a 'negative expectation game' has been beaten.

    I just want an answer to the above question without anyone saying it is not possible, or being negative. Just answer yes or no, whether you consider as the 'house' being beat.
     
  2. Oct 22, 2004
  3. Macgyver

    Macgyver Dormant account PABnononaccred

    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    North Carolina
  4. Oct 22, 2004
  5. bethug

    bethug Banned User - Winner of the "<a href="http://www.c

    yes , way to go
     
  6. Oct 22, 2004
  7. bpb

    bpb Banned User - repeated violations of rule 1.14 (tr PABnorogue PABnonaccred

    Location:
    Haverhill
    This may be splitting hairs a bit, but I think the size of the weekly cashouts is important. Or perhaps the amount wagered per week is a better measure.

    For example, if you did a negative progression starting at 1 cent, and stopping for the week when you've profited by that 1 cent, then odds are you could go your entire lifetime playing without losing .. as you would need to lose 16 consecutive times before burning through your $1,000 roll. you have a better than 50/50 chance of dodging those 16 straight losses once per week for 20 years.

    So, I would say, add an average weekly cashout to the problem.
     
  8. Oct 22, 2004
  9. bethug

    bethug Banned User - Winner of the "<a href="http://www.c

    bpb, yes or no??
     
  10. Oct 22, 2004
  11. Black21Jack

    Black21Jack Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Courier driver
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Ok I see what you are saying, but without wanting to get into the betting method I will say a cashout ranging from minimum of $350.00 - maximum $1000.00 on a weekly basis, depending on whether the 'stop loss' method comes into play. Keep in mind that the player will never burn through his bankroll, it is impossible in this scenario, and even if that did happen he has cashed out $1000.00 after the first week making him break even. He is now playing with the casinos money and has recovered his $1000.00 after the first week making it zero risk.
     
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2004
  12. Oct 22, 2004
  13. m249a

    m249a Dormant account

    Occupation:
    self employed
    Location:
    Pa
    Yes........profit is profit period.
     
  14. Oct 22, 2004
  15. bpb

    bpb Banned User - repeated violations of rule 1.14 (tr PABnorogue PABnonaccred

    Location:
    Haverhill
    I gave a definite no along with a clear counterexample of negative progression, starting at 1 cent, stopping at any profit. If you add an average weekly cashout figure to the problem, my answer would likely change.
     
  16. Oct 22, 2004
  17. bpb

    bpb Banned User - repeated violations of rule 1.14 (tr PABnorogue PABnonaccred

    Location:
    Haverhill
    Given weekly cashouts of $350 - $1,000, never touching the original $1,000 ... then I think this would clearly demonstrate that the player is beating the house.
     
  18. Oct 22, 2004
  19. Vesuvio

    Vesuvio Dormant account

    Location:
    UK
    Black21Jack - if you could cash out $350-$1000 every week for a lifetime, then by all means I'll say you've beaten the house (or you're the luckiest man alive).

    Your state,emt above about having cashed out $1000 in the first week is a complete non sequitur. If I win the Major Millions jackpot this week & lose every week for the rest of my natural life but am still in profit it won't mean I've beaten the house.

    Now, the problem is... there's no system known to man that will guarantee you cashing out a profit each week. The last time you posted something like this you admitted it was completely hypothetical & told me your system - which with all due respect doesn't stand a cat in hell's chance of doing what you say. So this is really a pointless discussion. But fun anway :D
     
  20. Oct 22, 2004
  21. Petunia

    Petunia Dormant account

    -- No--

    *And since I don't need to explain myself *grin* think about it.
     
  22. Oct 22, 2004
  23. Black21Jack

    Black21Jack Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Courier driver
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Has nothing to do with what I was saying. There was a post which implied the bankroll could be depleted. My point about cashing out the $1000.00 was that the player had recovered his $1000.00 (in this scenario it is guaranteed that he will cash that $1000.00 after the first week) meaning he is now playing with zero risk and if he did not make it to the second week without burning out his bankroll then he has lost nothing as he breaks even. I should have said that in such a case he did not beat the house but also that the house did not beat him. Remember that I said he will never deposit any more money so if he did lose all money that is it. I also said that he will never zero out, as the method used prevents it completely.

    Where did I post that this scenario is based on what I told you in the PM that I sent you? On that matter I am still going strong and have not lost a penny since I told you about it.
     
  24. Oct 22, 2004
  25. bethug

    bethug Banned User - Winner of the "<a href="http://www.c

    I have proven you can cash out 100 dollars a day, 100x 30 3000, most people in my hood dont make 3000 a month. Now i am willing to challenge any one that doubt it $$ 500.00 bucks ;)
     
  26. Oct 22, 2004
  27. ftg

    ftg Banned User - bogus claim - violation of <a href="


    While I believe you can win at online casino, you have NOT PROVED anything concrete at all.

    I remember last time (in PM) I asked you your playcheck logs, initially you agreed to send me but eventually you didn't without any reasons. (You first said that you don't know how to extract the logs from playcheck to excel and I have shown you step by step.)
     
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2004
  28. Oct 22, 2004
  29. Black21Jack

    Black21Jack Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Courier driver
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    ftg, can you PM me on how to do this. It would be greatly appreciated.
     
  30. Oct 22, 2004
  31. bethug

    bethug Banned User - Winner of the "<a href="http://www.c

    ftg, i had a big reason, you made fun over one of my post, also i dont have excel on my laptop, and you can see where i played at three differnet casinos screen shots. enough said.
     
  32. Oct 22, 2004
  33. ftg

    ftg Banned User - bogus claim - violation of <a href="

    1. I don't mind you refused to give it out because this is yours. After looking at your posts, I just want to know what your system is but you just have some screen shots and never describe it in details. I say : it's ok but I want to know more and that's why I PM you to ask for the playcheck logs.

    2. The fact is you agreed and and asked me how to do it. I PMed you but then receive no further response. You never say you don't have an excel. I expect you to PM me for not able to send it to me becasue of this and that.

    3. Again, it's fine you keep your system as your secret.

    4.
    Which one? when did it happen? After you agreed to send me the logs and before you actually send it to me?
     
  34. Oct 22, 2004
  35. Stanford

    Stanford Dormant account

    Location:
    USA
    You have beaten the house and exceeded expectation.

    Someone else has lost more then their expectation.

    In total of the universe those that have played to expectation combined with those that have had varience (both plus and minus) together approach expectation.

    If Joe did not die but kept playing he would go bust using whatever stop method or session method you can contrive other than one. If he stops and never goes back, he will always be a winner.

    Stanford
     
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2004
  36. Oct 22, 2004
  37. Black21Jack

    Black21Jack Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Courier driver
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Actually if Joe was immortal and would never die he could go on forever doing what he is doing, or as long as the casino stayed in business without ever having to deposit a cent of his own money. I am going to leave it at that and I thank all those who responded.
     
  38. Oct 22, 2004
  39. Stanford

    Stanford Dormant account

    Location:
    USA
    Then you earlier premise is wrong. Either the game has positive expectation or it doesn't. If it has positive expectation then with proper bet sizing Joe might never go broke. He has a small Risk of Ruin.

    If it is a negative expectation the risk of ruin is 100%. Joe will go broke.

    If you are claiming there is a betting system that can beat a negative expectation game you are wrong. You owe it to yourself to find out why.

    Stanford
     

Share This Page