# Mathematics of Horse Race Gambling

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Vic the Trader, Mar 24, 2010.

Messages:
1,117

16. ### LakonValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,117
But hopefully not in a math / science forum.

I think your attempted humour went over his head. I think he even wrongly took your wrongly calling of his euros dollars, and proceeded from that to some .. who knows what ..

17. ### LakonValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,117

A fair enough self admission. Yes, I can see where you haven't followed your narrative.

Does it ? Nothing like personal experience, I say. Thanks for the heads up.

Again, I can see the truth of this in your case. Still, I wouldn't be too quick to used 'pensioners' as a term of derision 'round these parts. I recall looking at the 'how old are you' thread recently, and was quite surprised (maybe not so surprised) to see that some of the minds I have the highest regard for here, are in there 60's and 70's. But yes, I can see how a modicum of wisdom still eludes yourself.

Ah yes .. I'm just now recalling .. Did I see a big black line across your name here recently .. I did, didn't I (If I'm mistaken, please disregard the following).
What was that ban for Tach ? Trolling ? Abuse ? Don't worry too much about it at this stage. I'm not accusing you trolling - just persistent superstition in a hard physics / math page.

Talk about not comprehending posts .. not following narratives. I have consistently moved AWAY from attributing any importance to roulette bias. Staring you in the face (inter alia) is this, in the last line of my post #28

My contention with Tach is not about roulette bias ..

.. and ? What ? A million (say) people were playing roulette throughout the world at the same time as you. 550,000 of them were losing (you can take THAT to the bank). You happened to be one of the 450,000 that was winning at that time. What of it ? Some of the losers believed the devil did it. Some of the winners believed it was emanations from the star system Plaedius. Others from their dead mother. Others from the faeiry folk at the tip of the Horn Of Elfin. Others from anomalous cognition derived during geomagnetic fluctuations circa 13.30 sidereal time .. and you ? .. read on!

Here, Tach, we get to the heart of the matter, the crux of your ongoing superstition, and the nature of your double think and double speak. And the even scarier thing now, is that it appears you're not just been stubborn, but that you can't even see it yourself.

- So far as roulette is concerned, casinos positively encourage ANY kind of recording devise. Last time I went to one (around 2 decades ago) they were handing out clever, multi layered recording sheets to roulette players, together with neat looking corporate pens. About five years ago, some casinos here in Australia, were, on request, lending ipads to roulette players, loaded with software designed to catalogue, calculate, and predict winning numbers .. like .. you know .. (chuckle ..)
More recently, I am informed that there are a plethora of smart phone apps for the same purpose.

- Assuming an unbiased wheel (I've never seen otherwise) roulette is a game of chance. You would agree.

- Each spin recreates the initial conditions, and is totally independent - unaffected by previous results. You would agree.

- That's why casinos have no hesitation in allowing recording / calculation. You would agree here too.

So this is where you continue to commit your egregious error, and your grievous sin against mathematics and logic.

TO SAY THAT THEIR ALGORYTHUM WAS WORTH NOTHING, AND AT THE SAME BREATH, TO SAY YOU BET OPPOSITE TO IT, IS TO SAY YOU TOOK ALL HEED OF IT.

TO SAY YOU CONTINUED TO BET OPPOSITE TO SOME INFORMATION THAT WAS VALUELESS AND WORTHLESS, IS TO SAY YOU TOOK ALL HEED OF IT FOR A FULL HOUR.

YOUR BETTING WAS GUIDED, DETERMINED, DICTATED, BY WHAT YOU YOURSELF HAVE CALLED WORTHLESS INFORMATION - FOR A FULL HOUR.

Don't you get it Tach ? Please, please, PLEASE tell me you're just been stubborn and obstinate .. not that you STILL don't get it.

You know, I was going to continue to address your further comments, particularly your accusations that I haven't followed your .. narrative .. and I was going to give you proof - proof staring you in the face - that YOU haven't followed your OWN narrative, but in light of the above, it's all pales into insignificance. Just address the three sentences, in caps, above.

Edit
- changed my second line
- various spelling edits

18. ### TachBannedBanned

Messages:
5,265
The roulette tables in dr. Jarecki case were biased, the book I linked in is very clear on the subject. The book is also very clear in pointing out that dr. Jarecki broke the bank multiple times. You are still unable to follow simple narratives.

What is "ALGORYTHUM"? Why are you shouting? I bet opposite to the PEOPLE that were using a computer. You are re-affirming your inability to follow simple narratives. <shrug>

You are getting rather shrill, the bees under your bonnet getting rather active, I reckon. Demonstrating your inability to read and comprehend again.

Don't you get it Tach ? Please, please, PLEASE tell me you're just been stubborn and obstinate .. not that you STILL don't get it.

You should really try to learn how to read, is English not your first language or did you fail logic in school? Both?

19. ### eramSciengineerValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,875
Tach, do you have more details on how Jarecki computed it? Sound like a really cool idea.

20. ### shown1980Registered Member

Messages:
1
yes i am completely agree with you mathematics is like a horse racing . Did you know ? there's one simple fact about which horse wins a race every time. In fact its so simple its almost hard to believe it's true. Like in any sport the horse that wins is the best horse. Just like in football, the best team wins the game, or in golf the best player needs the least number of shots to get round the 18 holes. The question is which horse is going to be the best on the day? The answer is to look at the form from previous races, together with other data such as trainers, jockeys, betting, weights etc

21. ### Captain KremmenAll aboard, me Hearties!Valued Senior Member

Messages:
12,738
The odd thing is that the fastest horses do not always win top class races.
You would think that they would do so, especially on the flat and in short races.
But Class I races are generally won by the best thoroughbreds.
The only form that counts is when they have run against each other previously.

Horses that have won lower class races running very fast, often come nowhere in a high purse race.
So why don't they run as fast as they can, and win?
I don't know.

Last edited: Aug 31, 2013
22. ### TachBannedBanned

Messages:
5,265
I posted a link to a book that has a whole chapter dedicated to him.

23. ### LakonValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,117
LOL .. now you're diverting back to roulette bias and some book written by some wack job ..

Anything, ANYTHING to obfuscate and focus attention away from your superstition. Even just these two earlier comments of yours alone, are suffient to reveal the depth of it;

their algorithm wasn't worth anything

followed by ..

"I tailored my bets to be exactly the opposite of theirs"

So your tailoring was precisely as worthless as their algorithm .. you clever little sausage you ..

You haven't disabused yourself of your superstition. I suspect you never will.