Probability of losing x # of hands in a row – Page 2

  • sagefr0g

     

    Quote: iCountNTrack said:
    Yes it is more probable to lose one hand in a row than to lose 50 hands in a row, but how is that useful to you, as you agree with me the probability of losing on the hand you are just about to play is not affected by previous results

    it seems a paradox, but i suspect it’s really not, as would be true in all things, i suppose. maybe even quantum mechanics?. really more a matter of cognition than physics, albeit both attributes may or may not be involved.
    perhaps an analogy, albeit an imperfect one would suffice. such as we think we have two types of forces, gravity & electromagnetism. which is ‘stronger’? which seems ‘stronger’? foolin around with a magnet & paper clip, maybe one would think gravity is stronger than magnetism, but certain academics like to say that magnetic ‘force’ is many orders stronger than gravitational ‘force’.
    here’s one of many i don’t know. which force is stronger, the gravitational ‘pull” of a black hole, or the pull of a magnet on a paper clip? if two equal strength black holes could latch on to two magnets, could they pull the magnets apart? lol
    could the apparent strength of either ever over come that of the other, errhh i mean the gravity or magnetism? lol
    whatever, icnt, i think your question is really just a matter of cognition. no?

  • blackjack avenger

    a cooler froggie

    Quote: sagefr0g said:
    it seems a paradox, but i suspect it’s really not, as would be true in all things, i suppose. maybe even quantum mechanics?. really more a matter of cognition than physics, albeit both attributes may or may not be involved.
    perhaps an analogy, albeit an imperfect one would suffice. such as we think we have two types of forces, gravity & electromagnetism. which is ‘stronger’? which seems ‘stronger’? foolin around with a magnet & paper clip, maybe one would think gravity is stronger than magnetism, but certain academics like to say that magnetic ‘force’ is many orders stronger than gravitational ‘force’.
    here’s one of many i don’t know. which force is stronger, the gravitational ‘pull” of a black hole, or the pull of a magnet on a paper clip? if two equal strength black holes could latch on to two magnets, could they pull the magnets apart? lol
    could the apparent strength of either ever over come that of the other, errhh i mean the gravity or magnetism? lol
    whatever, icnt, i think your question is really just a matter of cognition. no?

    Err Ummm
    Fractional Kelly, seems I am a one trick pony

    Dang guberment

    I was thinking black hole also

    Also, as soon as I read the OP
    I thought ptogression!

    I like the old avatar, other was scary

  • sagefr0g

     

    Quote: blackjack avenger said:
    Err Ummm
    Fractional Kelly, seems I am a one trick pony

    it’s a sweet one though a’int it? just gotta have a nice big roll though, maybe?

    Quote:
    Dang guberment

    heh, heh, do we even have one?

    Quote:
    I was thinking black hole also

    hmmm, maybe in another context? such as a progression sucking up all ones loot?
    but anyway, OP needs to know there is such a thing as situational plays. ie. Dubey’s stuff, weak as it may be.

    Quote:
    Also, as soon as I read the OP
    I thought ptogression!

    yup, question is, is that all bad, is a progression ever of any value? we all know they will eventually hose you.

    Quote:
    I like the old avatar, other was scary

    zg would call it ‘ shape shifting’

  • blackjack avenger

    a short long run

    Quote: sagefr0g said:
    it’s a sweet one though a’int it? just gotta have a nice big roll though, maybe?

    Isn’t it how you get the big roll? By staying in the game with fractional Kelly?

  • SBT

     

    Responders seem to be saying that progressions are a terrible idea. Since you all have been doing this pursuit longer than I have, I will take your word for it. Also, the research I have been doing shows that it can’t be a winning system over time.

    Regarding the probability of losing a certain number of hands in a row, this still remains a ponderable issue to me. If a coin is flipped five times, it is true that none of the outcomes has any bearing on subsequent ones. However, the likelihood of at least one tail appearing in five flips is greater than zero tails, if a simulation were conducted of millions of series of five flips. But the random nature of blackjack hands means that a player cannot predict when he/she will have three losses, or ten, or fifteen in row, even if three successive losses is a more likely scenario than fifteen. This is the relevant factor I think icountntrack was referring to, and which makes progressive betting too risky.

  • sagefr0g

     

    Quote: blackjack avenger said:
    Isn’t it how you get the big roll? By staying in the game with fractional Kelly?

    yes that’s how i see it. fractional Kelly puts your ROR way down, so with an advantage over time even with ups and downs of the concomitant volatility one can weather the storm and come out ahead, with a bigger big roll.

  • tthree

     

    Quote: leatherguyray said:
    When folks put down negative progressions, as they should, they always refer to the system carried to infinity (which in reality is a table limit and ruin). A negative progression properly employed can be and often is a very useful tool. In years of experience using it I find that most especially in choppy play (win one, lose one) a three bet negative progression is always a money maker when applied to your small, waiting, bet. Bet a nickle…win. Bet a dime…lose. (Choppy and you are down a nickle.) Next bet another 10. A win does what martingale does. A loss makes you down 15. Next bet is 15 shooting for even and if the cards are indeed running choppy you probably won the ten and will almost certainly win the 15. Plug in any numbers you want, but only do a total of three negative bets. Everything is 50/50 and that can’t change, but cards run the way cards run. We all know that. If they are indeed choppy this works. If they are not choppy, you be your own guide dog and do what floats your boat.

    I can see when the hand outcome has been choppy. My problem is I can’t see when the hand outcome WILL be choppy. Classic ploppy thinking that a past trend indicates what the future holds.

The BlackjackInfo Knowledge Base contains over 200,000 messages posted by the BlackjackInfo community.

Posting and replies to the knowledge base are no longer available, but comments and replies are welcomed on the blog.