|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| New! FREE CARD COUNTING PRACTICE SOFTWARE
Free Card Counting Practice Software (By JP): Download FREE BLACKJACK SIMULATION SOFTWARE Release of Version 6, January 11, 2007 Upgrade of Blackjack PowerSim Programmable Simulation Software Download Version 6, January 11, 2007 Upgrade of Blackjack PowerSim & Instructions Free |
Download Free Blackjack Strategy Index Generator: Sam Case's Strategy Index Generator Software |
| forums | Blackjack Main |
| You are not logged in Login Register | |
messages
post
search
read all messages in forum
|
|
|
Subject : Wrong. posted by JohnWright on Oct-11-2008 05:36pm |
| "Yes, if we bet on tails after 3 consecutive heads, we lose some 1/16 of the time." You will lose 1/2 of the time. There were only two trials with 3 consecutive heads. One of them was followed by another heads, one was followed by tails. The idea of progression has been proven invalid. You might be able(I did say MIGHT) to win some small amount of money in the short run. But eventually you will hit a losing streak that will A. Break your bankroll, or B. hit table max, therefore destroying your chance to recoup. Anyway, degree of certainty may have many hits on google, but only your website presents it as a mathematical idea that can be computed. So I ask again, what is it? Is your global warming statement saying that DC is an unprovable idea? Or that you won't discuss DC here? I think if it's relevant to anything gambling/probability related we should discuss it. |
| read all messages in thread | reply | messages |
