Profit Report Revisited
- Thread starter Kasi
- Start date
Katweezel
Well-Known Member
FredP, Sonny's quote (above) is in response to your sentence: ..."However, pure mathemetics ignores the dynamics of a game like blackjack, where the frequency of premium hands and the ability to vary playing strategy comes into play"...Sonny said:
Yours is an intriguing sentence containing tantalizing clues... You talk of the frequency of premium hands (and inferring the frequency of non-premium hands). Could you share some of those figures from your research, if you would; without giving away too much?...
With dealer busts @ 28.20%, does this high figure play any part in your system?
Now comes the $64 question regarding that sentence. HOW AND WHY IS YOUR CLAIM VALID?
zengrifter
Banned
Picasso's statement above is TRUE, I believe. This has been pointed out by several theorists including Peter Griffin. Yes? zgSonny said:
zengrifter
Banned
Voodoo claims should not be disallowed by a rules tweak - many of the best Voodoo discussions were instigated by one or another Voodoo claim.Sonny said:
The Voodoo Forum is not specifically solely for debunking voodoo - debunking voodoo is a natural function of the community but not the stated purpose of the forum, nor should it be. zg
zengrifter
Banned
Thats the spirit! zgSonny said:
fredperson
Active Member
First of all, Mr. Sonny, I have no intention of "presenting" my code to youSonny said:
or anybody else. Writing a BJ simulator is not rocket science, and the results were easily validated.
Secondly, I'm still chuckling about your offer to "fix" my code. Thanks, but no thanks.
Sonny
Well-Known Member
I guess that's where we disagree. The Voodoo forum should be a place to educate people so that they can avoid the pitfalls that most gamblers fall victim to. We should show them how to spot the scam artists and system sellers out there. We should teach them how to tell if their own systems are effective or not, and if they aren't we should show them why. We should show people the flaws in typical gambler's logic that are costing them money and draining their bankrolls. We should be helping people, not confusing them by allowing any random gambler with a system make false claims. There are plenty of other websites out there where people can brag about their progression systems and make any claims they want. This forum should not be another one of those.zengrifter said:
-Sonny-
Sonny
Well-Known Member
So it looks like you're sticking with the empty bragging. We've certainly heard enough of that from you. I've given you plenty of time to make your opinions known and your voice has been heard. Obviously you've said everything you have to say and you have nothing more to offer. There's no reason to repeat the same empty claims over and over. Please do not post again until you are ready so share something legitimate.fredperson said:
-Sonny-
zengrifter
Banned
Too harsh. zgSonny said:
I don't think so at all.zengrifter said:
All this progression nonsense is much like someone coming onto a forum full of physicists, announcing that they had made a successful perpetual motion machine, and that all of known physics is somehow wrong.
But they won't prove it, won't describe it in detail, and steadfastly refuse to consider all rational arguments as to why this might not be possible. But they keep claiming all sorts of success with it.
I think giving these idiots any forum at all for their nonsense is more than generous.
sagefr0g
Well-Known Member
gambler's fallacy
:whip:
would maybe one reason why it's so hard to let go of the gambler's fallacy and the maturity of chances sort of reasoning be that true randomness is really only an idealized human mental construct and that a genuine one hundred percent random event may not even really exist?Sonny said:
:whip: