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

mitch

Ueber Meister
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Location
UK
Bethug you constantly claim to beat all casinos by means of your money management system. Of course anyone who has any knowledge of probability theory knows this to be absolute bollocks

Even if you were god, which apparently you wish to indicate with your ability to manipulate natural laws why would you post on a public forum? God surely wouldn't bother and an advantage player would never do this because the last thing he would ever want is for other players to become aware of a method of beating casinos as this would cause his stream of money to dry up as casinos went out of business due to them beating the universally accepted laws.

Hope you are not really god as I do not fancy spending the rest of my life as a frog!

"win don't gamble"

Mitch
 

Black21Jack

Dormant account
Joined
Mar 1, 2004
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
I started this thread to ask a simple question, and to get opinions from other players and not to start a debate on gambling systems. I never said I was beating the casinos in such a manner as posted, my Joe Schmo scenario is hypothetical. If I was, I would never post how I was doing it that is for sure. Anyways thanks to those that gave me a yes or no response.
 

Stanford

Dormant account
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Location
USA
Black21Jack said:
I started this thread to ask a simple question, and to get opinions from other players and not to start a debate on gambling systems. I never said I was beating the casinos in such a manner as posted, my Joe Schmo scenario is hypothetical. If I was, I would never post how I was doing it that is for sure. Anyways thanks to those that gave me a yes or no response.

Well.... what you said was.

"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."

So again, either this game has positive expectation or Joe is going to go broke. If you contend otherwise, you are essentially contending that the house edge can be overcome by some system.

Players should understand that this isn't possible. If you think it is, it is in your best interest to understand why it isn't. If you are having fun with "systems" that's great but realize the reality.

Stanford
 

Black21Jack

Dormant account
Joined
Mar 1, 2004
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Stanford said:
Well.... what you said was.

"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."

So again, either this game has positive expectation or Joe is going to go broke. If you contend otherwise, you are essentially contending that the house edge can be overcome by some system.

Players should understand that this isn't possible. If you think it is, it is in your best interest to understand why it isn't. If you are having fun with "systems" that's great but realize the reality.

Stanford

When I added that if he was immortal and would never die, it was part of the hypothetical. I wanted to see how many people would still say that he was really lucky and deny that even in such a scenario, the house has been beat. I would like you to show me where I said once in my post that it could be overcome by a system or that my example was real. I don't think that most players will take this as me contending that the house can be beaten, you have got to give players more credit. Most gamblers can think for themselves.
 

Stanford

Dormant account
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Location
USA
Black21Jack said:
When I added that if he was immortal and would never die, it was part of the hypothetical. I wanted to see how many people would still say that he was really lucky and deny that even in such a scenario, the house has been beat. I would like you to show me where I said once in my post that it could be overcome by a system or that my example was real. I don't think that most players will take this as me contending that the house can be beaten, you have got to give players more credit. Most gamblers can think for themselves.

If you say that it is part of the hypothetical, it is part of the hypothetical.

If you are proposing a hypothetical of money management overcoming a house edge in a negative expectation game where the player plays for infinity, you are proposing an impossibility. The answer would be a meaningless "yes".

It is like saying, if you saw a flying pig, would you say pigs can fly?

Now I know that you ask posters not to address the impossiblity, but that is what makes it meaningless. Is there a reason you propose such a hypothetical? Perhaps if we knew what you were trying to get to, it would be easier to answer correctly.

Stanford
 
Last edited:

sw2003

Dormant account
Joined
Apr 25, 2004
Location
somewhere :)
Stanford said:
Well.... what you said was.

"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."

So again, either this game has positive expectation or Joe is going to go broke. If you contend otherwise, you are essentially contending that the house edge can be overcome by some system.

Players should understand that this isn't possible. If you think it is, it is in your best interest to understand why it isn't. If you are having fun with "systems" that's great but realize the reality.

Stanford

Stanford, I think you are missing the point! This is not about positive or negative expectation. This is about provided that Joe was able to double his money in the first week and withdrew his original deposit. He could have done it by a system or he was lucky or whatever. The doubling his money part is a condition that was imposed at the outset. Based on this condition, one can ask a question based on that.

Oh don't tell me it is impossible to double one's money within one week. There are lucky people who doubles their money all the time and of course there are people who lose their bankroll every week too.
 

snuf419

Dormant account
Joined
Mar 22, 2003
counter-argument..??

Blackjack,

Here is my reasoning. Put the subsequent wins aside, the whole scenario is solely based upon the fact that the person won in his initial session. He could have lost.

If I were to tell you I won a hand in BJ and never return, am I beating the house? Yes. But if you ask me to do it repeatedly, then we all know the answer would be 'no'.

If you keep betting with money you win, no matter you win or lose in your subsequent bets, you are a winner! So this whole thing is like arguing in a circle.

I have four 90 degrees corner, am I a rectangle? Yes!
But that's what gave me 4 90 degrees corner to begin with!


See my point?
 

Stanford

Dormant account
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Location
USA
sw2003 said:
Stanford, I think you are missing the point! This is not about positive or negative expectation. This is about provided that Joe was able to double his money in the first week and withdrew his original deposit. He could have done it by a system or he was lucky or whatever. The doubling his money part is a condition that was imposed at the outset. Based on this condition, one can ask a question based on that.

Oh don't tell me it is impossible to double one's money within one week. There are lucky people who doubles their money all the time and of course there are people who lose their bankroll every week too.

You are certainly correct. And that's why I answered yes the first time. It happens all the time as you say.

But now Black21Jack says the hypothetical is that Joe plays a negative expectation game every week for infinity and never goes broke. This is a different question.

Now obviously, this could not happen so I am very unsure of what the point might be and have asked Black21Jack for clarrification.

Stanford
 

jpm

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
Joined
Mar 29, 2002
KasinoKing said:
Hypothetical bollocks or not, he just asked for a simple Yes or No answer.
Stop waffling!

LOL, hypothetical bollocks! I love it. :lolup:
 
Top