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!

Worst losing streak

Discussion in 'Online Casinos' started by GrandMaster, Jun 15, 2004.

    Jun 15, 2004
  1. GrandMaster

    GrandMaster Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Mathematician by day, online gambler by night.
    Location:
    UK
    I was playing Vegas Strip BJ yesterday on autoplay. I managed to lose 25 units, which was my stop loss level, in 36 hands. I had a look in my playcheck log, and I found this losing streak including some hands before and after those 36.

    52 hands, won 7 (including 1 BJ), tied 4, lost 41, total loss 35.5 units, 4.22SD below expectation. :( The probability of losing this much or more in 52 hands is about 1 in 120000 (including some correction for the small sample size). The chi squared value is about 26.9, the probability of the value of chi squared with 2 degrees of freedom being greater than or equal to 26.9 is about 1 in 700000. Can anyone top this?

    My luck turned later and I made a small profit in the end.
     
  2. Jun 15, 2004
  3. lanidar

    lanidar Dormant account

    Occupation:
    retired
    Location:
    Avenel, New Jersey
    Which casino did you play in?
    And why Vegas Strip BJ?
     
  4. Jun 15, 2004
  5. Clayman

    Clayman Dormant account

    Location:
    Pennsylvania, USA
    I would guess because it has the lowest HA of all the BJ games offered by Viper.

    GM - Nice going that you made a profit in the end. That you didn't bust out down 35.5 units, shows the value of a small starting unit that is less than 2% of starting bankroll.
     
  6. Jun 15, 2004
  7. cashroom

    cashroom Dormant account

    Location:
    HOUSE
    huh how did you learn all this?

    i just heard loosing 30 something hands in a row equals 1 in 4 trillion or something like that. I've been messing up I think placing too high bets at the wrong times watching BJ tournaments on TV. But I played the Brandy vote promo and got it up from $33 to $800 something and wagered $38,000 but placed some $100 bets and lost a little sick of playing it after wagering that much. Hard to get that thing to $2003 played it tournament style
     
  8. Jun 15, 2004
  9. caruso

    caruso Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht

    Occupation:
    Casino apologist
    Location:
    England
    Small potatoes.

    My last two Gambling Federation sessions combined came in at around five SDs down, approx. 200 units over approx. 900 hands.
     
  10. Jun 15, 2004
  11. GrandMaster

    GrandMaster Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Mathematician by day, online gambler by night.
    Location:
    UK
    Yes, but mine happened on software I believe to be fair.
     
  12. Jun 15, 2004
  13. Clayman

    Clayman Dormant account

    Location:
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Not that it matters much, and mostly because I have little faith in most of my calculations, I get a chi-square of only 21.2 (~1 in 40,000). I used a W% of 43.31%, L%=47.89%, T%=8.8% to derive the theoretical number of wins, losses, ties versus observed of 7,41,4.

    Cashroom - tournament BJ and regular BJ have almost nothing in common so I wouldn't bet that big in regular BJ if I were you. Of course, as always, the risk-of ruin you are willing to play with is entirely your own choice.
     
  14. Jun 15, 2004
  15. marcolino

    marcolino Dormant account

    Location:
    Italy
    Why Gambling Federation can be considered?
     
  16. Jun 15, 2004
  17. GrandMaster

    GrandMaster Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Mathematician by day, online gambler by night.
    Location:
    UK
    Clayman is correct. I should stop trying to do chi square calculations late at night. :)
     
  18. Jun 15, 2004
  19. Clayman

    Clayman Dormant account

    Location:
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Hey, if I throw in the 1 BJ and do it over 3 degrees, it's down to 1 in 10,000.

    Now aren't you glad you can look forward to this happening again some time real soon? :D
     
  20. Jun 15, 2004
  21. jpm

    jpm Dormant account

    I hope that was the last time you played there too!
     
  22. Jun 15, 2004
  23. GrandMaster

    GrandMaster Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Mathematician by day, online gambler by night.
    Location:
    UK
    You need the expected value in each group to be about 5 or 6 for the chi squared test to be valid. It is already marginal with the expected value of the number of pushed hands, but the big discrepancy was not there, so it should be OK. The expected number of blackjacks is only about 2.5, that's definitely too low for the chi squared test.
     
  24. Jun 16, 2004
  25. Clayman

    Clayman Dormant account

    Location:
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Right. I figured you'd say something like that. I was just being facetious.

    At the risk of boring everyone to tears, what does the Yates correction do and would it be better in a situation like this?

    Heck, while we're on the subject, what was the "small sample" correction you made in the first place?

    If all this is too complicated to describe here, you know where to reach me!
     
  26. Jun 16, 2004
  27. cashroom

    cashroom Dormant account

    Location:
    HOUSE
    Gaming Federation paid me quick and hassle free

    Ther are based in Costa Rica but the check came from Montreal. I received a free scratch card in the mail for $20 and cashed out $100. I was surprised I didn't have to go through some complicated speal. received check in a week.
    Commodore is where I played
     
  28. Jun 16, 2004
  29. caruso

    caruso Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht

    Occupation:
    Casino apologist
    Location:
    England
    LOL, it was.

    Apparently they've now issued ANOTHER version. How many is that now? Three at least. Obviously this'll follow the same pattern as before: clean game, suck in the mugs, stick in the fix, clean out the mugs.

    Be smart - stay away from Gambling Federation cheating scum.

    EDIT: Ooops, thought this was the GF thread. Excuse my off topic remarks. Still, they bear repeating.
     
  30. Jun 16, 2004
  31. GrandMaster

    GrandMaster Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Mathematician by day, online gambler by night.
    Location:
    UK
    The Yates correction is normally used with only one degree of freedom, typically when there are only two groups or a 2x2 table, or if the expected frequencies are between 5 and 10. You take the differences between the observed and expected frequencies and substract 0.5 from the modulus before squaring it. The chi square distribution with n degrees of freedom is just the distribution of the sum of the squares of n independent normally distributed random variables with mean 0 and variance 1. It is a continuous distribution used to approximate a discrete distribution. The Yates correction is supposed to provide a better fit and makes the chi squared test more conservative, reducing the likelihood of rejecting the null hypothesis.

    My correction for the small sample size is nothing sophisticated, I merely included the 0.5 in the formula that I normally omit. :) My typical sample sizes are in the hundreds or thousands, the biggest error comes from not knowing the exact variance of the game.
     
  32. Jun 16, 2004
  33. jpm

    jpm Dormant account

    lol, good advice. I hope everyone takes it to heart.

    I too got one of those wonderful 'everyone's a winner' scratch card in the mail the other day. What a shock, I won a free $20 (that I had to wager 20x or something ridiculous like that). Well, I played some multihand vp on their new & improved software and, as expected, lost it fairly quickly while hitting nothing but low end winning hands. Blew the rest of it out on nickel slots which still play the same as the last revision of the s/w. Aside from maybe a couple of new games, it looks the same, plays a little faster and has a better interface. Other than that, its a pure money pit. Abandon hope all who enter!
     

Share This Page