vinylweatherman
You type well loads
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Location
- United Kingdom
Reply
My point about the 2 casino sessions is that the luck should be shared evenly between both accounts, and one accountshould not continually get the good hits and the other the bad. To elaborate though, this experiment would need to be run a number of times, and consistently show one session being favoured with good hits over the other. Although this will happen at random, it is equally likely that both sessions will be the same. Several runs should show no trend in the long term on a per session basis, as well as the slot approaching the same house edge in each account. This will probably not provide a rigorous scientific proof unless huge numbers of sessions are run. I suspect the only way to prove this argument either way is to start from the viewpoint that it is completely random, and attempt to prove that it is random. It should be possible, given a big enough sample, to show the results to be independent of any of the "paranoia", such as wager size, time of day, playing with bonuses etc.
As for the VP experiment, I have tabulated the numbers of each outcome from Royal Flush to Sweet FA. According to wizardofodds, the house edge is the same for the multihand variants provided the paytable is the same. Deuces Wild differs due to paytable differences between single hand and multi-hand versions. I will render my results into a form that I can post here, and that you all can read clearly too!
GrandMaster said:No, they should be completely independent of each other.
Do you have a record of the numbers of the various outcomes? How much have you lost?
My point about the 2 casino sessions is that the luck should be shared evenly between both accounts, and one accountshould not continually get the good hits and the other the bad. To elaborate though, this experiment would need to be run a number of times, and consistently show one session being favoured with good hits over the other. Although this will happen at random, it is equally likely that both sessions will be the same. Several runs should show no trend in the long term on a per session basis, as well as the slot approaching the same house edge in each account. This will probably not provide a rigorous scientific proof unless huge numbers of sessions are run. I suspect the only way to prove this argument either way is to start from the viewpoint that it is completely random, and attempt to prove that it is random. It should be possible, given a big enough sample, to show the results to be independent of any of the "paranoia", such as wager size, time of day, playing with bonuses etc.
As for the VP experiment, I have tabulated the numbers of each outcome from Royal Flush to Sweet FA. According to wizardofodds, the house edge is the same for the multihand variants provided the paytable is the same. Deuces Wild differs due to paytable differences between single hand and multi-hand versions. I will render my results into a form that I can post here, and that you all can read clearly too!