Get exclusive CAP network offers from top brands

View CAP Offers

Reply To: This is how online casinos make money

[bsa_pro_ad_space id=2]
#721503
Anonymous
Inactive
nick777 wrote:
It wasn’t too long ago that everyone did believe the world was flat, and you would’ve been hanged for saying different.

Yes indeed. And those who said it was not flat had to prove it, and eventually their alternative evidence was accepted as correct.

If you wish to dispute accepted wisdom, you must be able to prove your claims, else you look foolish. Today, claiming that the world is flat without any scientific proof would make you look like a nut. This is the same as you claiming that the expert gambling mathematicians have been wrong for the last 40 years, without you providing any concrete proof for your alternative theories.

Quote:
I hardly think i’m not making sense here, not too long ago a simple math formula was used to defeat the roulette wheel, by guaging the speed of the ball accurately.

It wasn’t exactly simple, which is why it was conducted by a bunch of PHDs (or equivalent) and has thus far not been repeated. It required custom hardware to record the path of the ball, and then custom software to perform the calculations and predict the landing point.

But this backs up my point. Accepted wisdom was that you could not predict the landing point of the ball. They developed an alternative theory, and proved it in practice by developing the necessary tools to test it.

If you wish to dispute 40 years of accepted gambling mathematics, you must do the same. Create a simulation and prove your point, it’s not that hard. And if you don’t know how to make a simulation, and thus are unable to repeat their tests, on what basis do you think you’re qualified to question their facts?

Quote:
Ignoring every advanced principle mentioned here for a moment, and looking at this simplistically…
Try to understand, you have 2 hands with an 85% chance of winning, (0.85 x 2) against 1 hand with a 15% chance of winning, (0.15 x 1)

This is the correct maths for two tens against a dealer 6, assuming an infinite number of decks. The full charts, as generated by simulation, are here:
http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/appendix1.html

Scenario 1, stand:
Return is 0.704, so for every $100 bet you get $170.40 back.

So overall profit is $70.40 on your $100 bet

Scenario 2, split: (EDIT: these calcs are wrong, see next post. But the conclusion is still correct, in fact even more so.)
You now have two hands, both 10 versus dealer 6.
Your return per hand is 0.2878, so on a $100 bet you get back $128.78

You have two hands, so you make $28.78 profit per hand for a total profit of $57.56.

This is clearly less than scenario 1.

Quote:
You can thank me later

I’ll thank you now. Your blithe assumption that you can disprove 40 years of established mathematics with a few off-the-cuff formulas is highly amusing. I am keen to see what else you are able to disprove in the same manner.

They say the world is round, and they have all this evidence and photos and stuff to prove that, but I’m pretty sure it isn’t – I mean, I used a spirit level on some shelves I was putting up, and it said they were flat! So I must be right, those scientists don’t know what they’re talking about.