del

[CanIHazBitcoin777]

I didn't say no one could be a billionaire, I didn't say that you couldn't flip 1 million heads in a row. I said that if you flipped 10 heads in a row, the odds the next one being heads is 50/50. In your nonsense you said that tails was more likely on the 11th roll. That is flat out wrong. If you don't want people to call you on your bullshit don't post bullshit.

There is no way to PREDICT trends among independent events. You can look back and find them, but you cannot predict them because each roll is independent and has nothing to do with previous rolls/flips.

Ok, but what if your personal luck variable, and the casino's luck variable are independent.

We know the casino has negative expectancy, but we dont know if the person has. And if we add that together, if you have a higher perosnal expectancy than the casinos negative expectancy (his personal luck), then you can come out a winner in the end.

Many people did that, they played roulette, baccarat, dice or whatever and they ended up net winners.


There is no other way to find out, but only if you gamble and see for yourself.

[Phildo]

I didn't say no one could be a billionaire, I didn't say that you couldn't flip 1 million heads in a row. I said that if you flipped 10 heads in a row, the odds the next one being heads is 50/50. In your nonsense you said that tails was more likely on the 11th roll. That is flat out wrong. If you don't want people to call you on your bullshit don't post bullshit.

There is no way to PREDICT trends among independent events. You can look back and find them, but you cannot predict them because each roll is independent and has nothing to do with previous rolls/flips.

Ok, but what if your personal luck variable, and the casino's luck variable are independent.

We know the casino has negative expectancy, but we dont know if the person has. And if we add that together, if you have a higher perosnal expectancy than the casinos negative expectancy (his personal luck), then you can come out a winner in the end.

Many people did that, they played roulette, baccarat, dice or whatever and they ended up net winners.


There is no other way to find out, but only if you gamble and see for yourself.

It is definitely possible to win at -ev games, you need to be lucky. I have no problem with you saying that.

The problem comes when you say factually incorrect things like the 11th roll has a better chance of being tails after the first 10 are heads, or that looking for a trend and using that to help make your next pick is a viable strategy when things are independent.

[Omikifuse]

It is more or less as the advice: 'stop when you are winning', or, in others words, stop when the variance is working in your favor

[CanIHazBitcoin777]

It is more or less as the advice: 'stop when you are winning', or, in others words, stop when the variance is working in your favor

Yes, never double down on losses, that is not a good plan. When lose stop, when win then start preparing to stop before losing

[bfisher1968]

The only way to win at dice is to play 3  strategies at the same time.

Example:

start at 1 satoshi at 10x payout doubling the bet after 5 losses in a row. Reset the bet back to 1 satoshi after a win.

FOR BETTING LOW
At the same time keeping track of any rolls\results of less then 1 and how many bets you have placed. Once you reach 500 rolls without a roll/result being under 1, start betting at 99x payout and double the bet after 48 losses in a row. Reset the bet back to 1 satoshi and 10x payout.

FOR BETTING HIGH
At the same time keeping track of any rolls\results of greater then 99 and how many bets you have placed. Once you reach 500 rolls without a roll/result being over 99, start betting at 99x payout and double the bet after 48 losses in a row. Reset the bet back to 1 satoshi and 10x payout.


repeat

[Shogen]

The only way to win at dice is to play 3  strategies at the same time.

Example:

start at 1 satoshi at 10x payout doubling the bet after 5 losses in a row. Reset the bet back to 1 satoshi after a win.

FOR BETTING LOW
At the same time keeping track of any rolls\results of less then 1 and how many bets you have placed. Once you reach 500 rolls without a roll/result being under 1, start betting at 99x payout and double the bet after 48 losses in a row. Reset the bet back to 1 satoshi and 10x payout.

FOR BETTING HIGH
At the same time keeping track of any rolls\results of greater then 99 and how many bets you have placed. Once you reach 500 rolls without a roll/result being over 99, start betting at 99x payout and double the bet after 48 losses in a row. Reset the bet back to 1 satoshi and 10x payout.


repeat

Each bet is independent. After 500 rolls without <1, the chance to have <1 does not change but is still the same at exactly 1%, so the "switch" part doesn't quite work. Also, even if a very low base bet at 1 satoshi, you will quickly run out of fund to continue doubling your bet when you hit a long losing streak.
In short, your strategy would not work in the long run. Indeed, no strategy would work in the long run for the luck based dice game with negative EV.

[bfisher1968]

The only way to win at dice is to play 3  strategies at the same time.

Example:

start at 1 satoshi at 10x payout doubling the bet after 5 losses in a row. Reset the bet back to 1 satoshi after a win.

FOR BETTING LOW
At the same time keeping track of any rolls\results of less then 1 and how many bets you have placed. Once you reach 500 rolls without a roll/result being under 1, start betting at 99x payout and double the bet after 48 losses in a row. Reset the bet back to 1 satoshi and 10x payout.

FOR BETTING HIGH
At the same time keeping track of any rolls\results of greater then 99 and how many bets you have placed. Once you reach 500 rolls without a roll/result being over 99, start betting at 99x payout and double the bet after 48 losses in a row. Reset the bet back to 1 satoshi and 10x payout.


repeat

Each bet is independent. After 500 rolls without <1, the chance to have <1 does not change but is still the same at exactly 1%, so the "switch" part doesn't quite work. Also, even if a very low base bet at 1 satoshi, you will quickly run out of fund to continue doubling your bet when you hit a long losing streak.
In short, your strategy would not work in the long run. Indeed, no strategy would work in the long run for the luck based dice game with negative EV.

Each bet is not independent of each other. Each bet is determined by a algorithm where a nonce is incremented each bet. Which means each bet is dependent on all previous bets, since the bet with nonce=10 would never exist without the previous 9 nonces.

The algorithms that determine the outcome are pseudo random and not truly random.

[ndnh]

Each bet is not independent of each other. Each bet is determined by a algorithm where a nonce is incremented each bet. Which means each bet is dependent on all previous bets, since the bet with nonce=10 would never exist without the previous 9 nonces.

The algorithms that determine the outcome are pseudo random and not truly random.

The result is independent.

If I give you 10 rolls, can you predict the next? No. That is referred to as independence here, of the result.

[JackpotRacer]

Each bet is not independent of each other. Each bet is determined by a algorithm where a nonce is incremented each bet. Which means each bet is dependent on all previous bets, since the bet with nonce=10 would never exist without the previous 9 nonces.

The algorithms that determine the outcome are pseudo random and not truly random.

thank you for that and Chapeau!

there will be many user who will disagree with you but a few will understand the point you made

[bfisher1968]

Each bet is not independent of each other. Each bet is determined by a algorithm where a nonce is incremented each bet. Which means each bet is dependent on all previous bets, since the bet with nonce=10 would never exist without the previous 9 nonces.

The algorithms that determine the outcome are pseudo random and not truly random.

The result is independent.

If I give you 10 rolls, can you predict the next? No. That is referred to as independence here, of the result.

The 11th roll is dependent on the server seed, client seed, and nonce and the previous rolls.

Example:

roll 1: 0.65
roll 2: 0.23
roll 3: 0.99
roll 4: 0.55
roll 5: 0.09
roll 6: 0.13
roll 7: 0.33
roll 8: 0.67
roll 9: 0.04
roll 10: 0.97

I would be willing to bet that the next roll will be higher then 1. But without the knowledge of the previous 10 bets I wouldn't.

At the same time I would like to see a server seed, client seed, nonce produce rolls anywhere close to what I listed.

[Shogen]

The 11th roll is dependent on the server seed, client seed, and nonce and the previous rolls.

An important property of hash function is avalanche. With that, two almost identical inputs would create completely different hash output (the optimum is that each output bit has 50% chance to change) , and that's why a small change in nonce is enough to create a new random number independent of the previous numbers.
For example, knowing sha512(12sPa15STZ4:j8mEOhZKHYWMcCmwvIJkdOc4ZRxMsLgrfPec4vpIMMMOiyEz08:0) is ad0d3d199ba3d6a8d577d32d596c3188be5ab134e1f9d1d7234807f26d65d9d5cd1f5a6e68ed23b 76d51f025be13dd7baedcb2e3029c207b767da215a945f371 will not help you predict sha512(12sPa15STZ4:j8mEOhZKHYWMcCmwvIJkdOc4ZRxMsLgrfPec4vpIMMMOiyEz08:1)

[ndnh]

The result is independent.

If I give you 10 rolls, can you predict the next? No. That is referred to as independence here, of the result.

The 11th roll is dependent on the server seed, client seed, and nonce and the previous rolls.

Example:

roll 1: 0.65
roll 2: 0.23
roll 3: 0.99
roll 4: 0.55
roll 5: 0.09
roll 6: 0.13
roll 7: 0.33
roll 8: 0.67
roll 9: 0.04
roll 10: 0.97

I would be willing to bet that the next roll will be higher then 1. But without the knowledge of the previous 10 bets I wouldn't.

At the same time I would like to see a server seed, client seed, nonce produce rolls anywhere close to what I listed.

1. Above post by Shogen explains significant stuff you are supposed to know. If you don't understand, hash some number using SHA256, SHA512, find a pattern, bankrupt a couple of dice sites and come back.

2.

I would be willing to bet that the next roll will be higher then 1. But without the knowledge of the previous 10 bets I wouldn't.

Gambler's fallacy.

3. If say all the rolls are dependent on each other as you said how come you are betting that the next roll will be higher and not lower than 1? That is a weird of thinking, lol.

At the same time I would like to see a server seed, client seed, nonce produce rolls anywhere close to what I listed.

Getting 10 rolls less than 1 has around (0.01)^10 probability.
Getting the next roll below 1 after that has 1% chance, above 1 has 99% chance as usual.
If you disagree read : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy

The gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy or the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the mistaken belief that, if something happens more frequently than normal during some period, it will happen less frequently in the future, or that, if something happens less frequently than normal during some period, it will happen more frequently in the future (presumably as a means of balancing nature). In situations where what is being observed is truly random (i.e., independent trials of a random process), this belief, though appealing to the human mind, is false. This fallacy can arise in many practical situations although it is most strongly associated with gambling where such mistakes are common among players.

[ndnh]

Each bet is not independent of each other. Each bet is determined by a algorithm where a nonce is incremented each bet. Which means each bet is dependent on all previous bets, since the bet with nonce=10 would never exist without the previous 9 nonces.

The algorithms that determine the outcome are pseudo random and not truly random.

thank you for that and Chapeau!

there will be many user who will disagree with you but a few will understand the point you made

More than half the time I don't get you Einstein. a compliment, not sarcasm

What is the point he made?

Each bet is not independent of each other.

Incorrect.

Each bet is determined by a algorithm where a nonce is incremented each bet.

Correct. Many dice sites have nonce-based provably fair systems. So you are saying nonce-based provably fair bets are dependent and others generated with just a server and client seed or txid and something else, aren't?

Which means each bet is dependent on all previous bets

Generation is, result isn't.

The algorithms that determine the outcome are pseudo random and not truly random.

Correct.

Edit: You know pseudo random doesn't mean it is in any way predictable or follow a pattern, right? Provably fair system doesn't work if bets aren't predetermined.

[NoRespect]

I do not understand the strategy as it is, it looks like I will start to see in this post 

[bfisher1968]

If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.

[Phildo]

If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.

This is 1000 percent wrong.

Lets just look at flipping a coin to make things simple. The equal distribution happens from having the correct probability happen over and over and over again over a large sample.

If you flip 10 heads in a row, the odds of the next one being heads is still 50/50. If you keep flipping a coin, eventually your results will get to 50/50, not because tails is more likely on future events, but just because you keep doing it.

If you get 10 heads out of 10 flips you got heads 100% of the time.

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 15 out of 20, 75% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 20 out of 30, 66 2/3% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 25 out of 40, 62.5% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 30 out of 50,  60% heads.

And so on and so on until you get back down to 50.

[bfisher1968]

If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.

This is 1000 percent wrong.

Lets just look at flipping a coin to make things simple. The equal distribution happens from having the correct probability happen over and over and over again over a large sample.

If you flip 10 heads in a row, the odds of the next one being heads is still 50/50. If you keep flipping a coin, eventually your results will get to 50/50, not because tails is more likely on future events, but just because you keep doing it.

If you get 10 heads out of 10 flips you got heads 100% of the time.

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 15 out of 20, 75% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 20 out of 30, 66 2/3% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 25 out of 40, 62.5% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 30 out of 50,  60% heads.

And so on and so on until you get back down to 50.

You are comparing something that is truly random(flipping of a coin) to a algorithm. Have you run a simulation with the algorithm from a dice site?

I also notice that in your example that your approaching 50% as more flips happen, which is what I'm saying.

[Phildo]

If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.

This is 1000 percent wrong.

Lets just look at flipping a coin to make things simple. The equal distribution happens from having the correct probability happen over and over and over again over a large sample.

If you flip 10 heads in a row, the odds of the next one being heads is still 50/50. If you keep flipping a coin, eventually your results will get to 50/50, not because tails is more likely on future events, but just because you keep doing it.

If you get 10 heads out of 10 flips you got heads 100% of the time.

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 15 out of 20, 75% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 20 out of 30, 66 2/3% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 25 out of 40, 62.5% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 30 out of 50,  60% heads.

And so on and so on until you get back down to 50.

You are comparing something that is truly random(flipping of a coin) to a algorithm. Have you run a simulation with the algorithm from a dice site?

I also notice that in your example that your approaching 50% as more flips happen, which is what I'm saying.

It looked like you were saying that it approaches 50/50 because the other option is more likely. that isn't true, it approaches 50/50 because over more trials, it will approach the true odds by just acting normally.

I have not analyzed dice sites because -ev bets need to be fun for me to make them, and dice looks anything but fun so it's not worth my time. If I was going to trust one of these sites with my money, i would look into figuring out exactly how they work, but I'm going to trust from afar that they are independent, because the code would have been cracked by now if it could be.

[leex1528]

If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.

This is 1000 percent wrong.

Lets just look at flipping a coin to make things simple. The equal distribution happens from having the correct probability happen over and over and over again over a large sample.

If you flip 10 heads in a row, the odds of the next one being heads is still 50/50. If you keep flipping a coin, eventually your results will get to 50/50, not because tails is more likely on future events, but just because you keep doing it.

If you get 10 heads out of 10 flips you got heads 100% of the time.

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 15 out of 20, 75% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 20 out of 30, 66 2/3% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 25 out of 40, 62.5% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 30 out of 50,  60% heads.

And so on and so on until you get back down to 50.

Stats are a crazy thing.  Looking at things in a short run, getting 10 heads in 10 flips is .5^10.  Not good odds.

However after 10 flips, the odds of flipping the next coin is still 50/50.  In your example after the 10 ones are head, the next 100 rolls are still supposed to be closer to 50 heads 50 tails than anything else. 

[Phildo]

If you would run a simulation of bets/rolls (same server seed and client seed) the outcome over many bets should roughly show equal distribution of numbers. It might happen in 1000 bets, 10000 bets, or 100000 bets, but it will happen. But knowing this will happen allows you to change the way you bet in your advantage.

Now if you say there is not equal distribution of numbers, that's even better. You can determine where most of the roll/bets hit and play that to your advantage.

Either way, not looking to the past results to determine the way you play dice is why most call it a luck game.

This is 1000 percent wrong.

Lets just look at flipping a coin to make things simple. The equal distribution happens from having the correct probability happen over and over and over again over a large sample.

If you flip 10 heads in a row, the odds of the next one being heads is still 50/50. If you keep flipping a coin, eventually your results will get to 50/50, not because tails is more likely on future events, but just because you keep doing it.

If you get 10 heads out of 10 flips you got heads 100% of the time.

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 15 out of 20, 75% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 20 out of 30, 66 2/3% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 25 out of 40, 62.5% heads

If the next 10 are 50/50, you have 30 out of 50,  60% heads.

And so on and so on until you get back down to 50.

Stats are a crazy thing.  Looking at things in a short run, getting 10 heads in 10 flips is .5^10.  Not good odds.

However after 10 flips, the odds of flipping the next coin is still 50/50.  In your example after the 10 ones are head, the next 100 rolls are still supposed to be closer to 50 heads 50 tails than anything else. 

That's what I was showing. It is unlikely to get 10 heads in a row. But if you do, the next one is still 50/50, AND you will get to 50/50 over the long term without changing the odds.