Yeah, while we all agree, at least I think we do, that betting systems can and do produce results that confirm a higher number of winning sessions, or a higher chance of winning x units, given a goal and a bankroll of X, god forbid we actually define how long such a betting system might last.
Much easier to just say, "it'll never work over a billion hands" and leave it at that.
Why then, if we actually did define how long a betting system might last, people might actually know how often they will win at least a half-unit betting a 50 unit bankroll and either winning a half-unit or losing their 50 units playing a max of 100 hands. Given that, they may wonder "what if I had a 500 unit roll?" and bet it the same way at various times, with a different unit, how long might it last then?
They may even learn how likely it is to finish 10 units ahead betting X units in a certain way compared to flat-betting the same number of units over the same number of hands in various games.
People that go to Vegas once or twice a year who play a limited amount of time. armed with such knowledge, may actually change the way they want to play their bankroll.
Some may eventually come to understand just how long a 2000 unit bankroll might last, or just exceed HA, or even show a profit, betting it in different ways at different games.
Some may even say, 15000 spins of a roulette wheel is good enuf for me with X% chance of being ahead.
But much easier to smugly pat yourself on the back and say that anyone who has won anything over whatever was just "lucky" and a billion decisions from now is bound to lose and is an idiot for thinking otherwise.
So, if anyone here wants to pick any betting system they want, playing any game they want, with a roll of their own choosing, and define the liklihood of winning x units over how long, and, who knows, maybe even compare such liklihood of being that far ahead compared to flat-betting, or, heresy of heresies, compare such liklihood, if blackjack, to a counter with the same roll, go ahead, show some computer results, that'd be cool.
No one has, with the exception of maybe one person that I know of, and I doubt if anyone will.
After all, why bother with any pesky details, when we all know you'll be broke when you're 412 years old.
Much easier to just say, "it'll never work over a billion hands" and leave it at that.
Why then, if we actually did define how long a betting system might last, people might actually know how often they will win at least a half-unit betting a 50 unit bankroll and either winning a half-unit or losing their 50 units playing a max of 100 hands. Given that, they may wonder "what if I had a 500 unit roll?" and bet it the same way at various times, with a different unit, how long might it last then?
They may even learn how likely it is to finish 10 units ahead betting X units in a certain way compared to flat-betting the same number of units over the same number of hands in various games.
People that go to Vegas once or twice a year who play a limited amount of time. armed with such knowledge, may actually change the way they want to play their bankroll.
Some may eventually come to understand just how long a 2000 unit bankroll might last, or just exceed HA, or even show a profit, betting it in different ways at different games.
Some may even say, 15000 spins of a roulette wheel is good enuf for me with X% chance of being ahead.
But much easier to smugly pat yourself on the back and say that anyone who has won anything over whatever was just "lucky" and a billion decisions from now is bound to lose and is an idiot for thinking otherwise.
So, if anyone here wants to pick any betting system they want, playing any game they want, with a roll of their own choosing, and define the liklihood of winning x units over how long, and, who knows, maybe even compare such liklihood of being that far ahead compared to flat-betting, or, heresy of heresies, compare such liklihood, if blackjack, to a counter with the same roll, go ahead, show some computer results, that'd be cool.
No one has, with the exception of maybe one person that I know of, and I doubt if anyone will.
After all, why bother with any pesky details, when we all know you'll be broke when you're 412 years old.