del - page 2. | Bitcointalksearch.org

Shogen

legendary

Activity: 966

Merit: 1001

Quote from: bfisher1968 on September 28, 2015, 02:19:09 PM

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)

bfisher1968

jr. member

Activity: 41

Merit: 1

Quote from: ndnh on September 28, 2015, 01:58:36 PM

Quote from: bfisher1968 on September 28, 2015, 01:42:20 PM

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.

JackpotRacer

legendary

Activity: 1974

Merit: 1014

All Games incl Racer and Lottery game are Closed

Quote from: bfisher1968 on September 28, 2015, 01:42:20 PM

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

ndnh

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1005

New Decentralized Nuclear Hobbit

Quote from: bfisher1968 on September 28, 2015, 01:42:20 PM

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.

bfisher1968

jr. member

Activity: 41

Merit: 1

Quote from: Shogen on September 28, 2015, 12:58:31 PM

Quote from: bfisher1968 on September 28, 2015, 12:15:52 PM

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.

Shogen

legendary

Activity: 966

Merit: 1001

Quote from: bfisher1968 on September 28, 2015, 12:15:52 PM

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

jr. member

Activity: 41

Merit: 1

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

CanIHazBitcoin777

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: Omikifuse on September 25, 2015, 10:43:53 AM

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 Cheesy

Omikifuse

legendary

Activity: 1834

Merit: 1009

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

Phildo

legendary

Activity: 1526

Merit: 1000

Quote from: CanIHazBitcoin777 on September 25, 2015, 10:02:33 AM

Quote from: Phildo on September 25, 2015, 09:52:43 AM

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.

CanIHazBitcoin777

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: Phildo on September 25, 2015, 09:52:43 AM

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.

greatr

sr. member

Activity: 447

Merit: 250

i dont think that theres a strategy that would bring any one enough profits to risk

Phildo

legendary

Activity: 1526

Merit: 1000

Quote from: CanIHazBitcoin777 on September 25, 2015, 09:30:31 AM

Quote from: Phildo on September 25, 2015, 08:25:12 AM

THis is not true, this is the gambler's fallacy.

The odds of a fair coin being head or tails is 50/50, every time, no matter what the previous x flips were.

If you ALREADY flipped 10 heads, NOW the odds of getting 11 in a row are 50/50 because you ALREADY did the hard part of getting 11 in a row, getting 10 in a row.

Quote from: ndnh on September 25, 2015, 08:56:37 AM

You are stating the EV is not positive and is the same. (correct)

You are stating ROI % that implies a positive EV (contradictory and incorrect)

Suppose you make 1,000,000,000,000 rolls and got all heads, for the next head assuming the game to be a fair one, the odds are 50%, and for the tails the odds are 50%.

I think you are taking it in a way where in a probability distribution of say 1000 rolls, ~500 are heads and ~500 are tails, and if you get 100 heads, the next flip would most likely land a tail. This concept DOES NOT apply in this case. Because the distribution you are talking about is INFINITE. Even if the probability distribution happens to be evenly distributed (is it?) say in centillions (tending towards infinity to be stated properly) of hash combinations, it still gives you an astronomically insignificant effect (1/infinity tending to 0)

I understand what you are saying guys but you fail to see the perspective.

Let's look at "life". All life expectancy is negative because everybody will die eventually.

So by your logic nobody can be a billionaire in his lifetime because his life has a negative expectancy, but that is obviously not the case.

So you can have local positive expectancy, while the overall one is negative.

I tend to see probability as a collective of local ones, so the total negative expectancy of a gambling game, is composed of local positive expectancies + local negative expectancies, where the local negative dominates, but that doesnt mean that the positive cannot happen.

Take the inverse for example, if you win 1000 times in a row in a 50% probability dice game:
- did you played agains overall negative expectancy: Yes because the payout ratio was < 1x
- did you had a local positive expectancy: Yes, because you won 1000 in a row. Otherwise you could not have the trend. It was lucky, but it was still a trend.

So if you can jump on a local positive expectancy train, you can win locally, but if you "force" your luck, you will eventually lose.

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.

CanIHazBitcoin777

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: Phildo on September 25, 2015, 08:25:12 AM

THis is not true, this is the gambler's fallacy.

The odds of a fair coin being head or tails is 50/50, every time, no matter what the previous x flips were.

If you ALREADY flipped 10 heads, NOW the odds of getting 11 in a row are 50/50 because you ALREADY did the hard part of getting 11 in a row, getting 10 in a row.

Quote from: ndnh on September 25, 2015, 08:56:37 AM

You are stating the EV is not positive and is the same. (correct)

You are stating ROI % that implies a positive EV (contradictory and incorrect)

Suppose you make 1,000,000,000,000 rolls and got all heads, for the next head assuming the game to be a fair one, the odds are 50%, and for the tails the odds are 50%.

I think you are taking it in a way where in a probability distribution of say 1000 rolls, ~500 are heads and ~500 are tails, and if you get 100 heads, the next flip would most likely land a tail. This concept DOES NOT apply in this case. Because the distribution you are talking about is INFINITE. Even if the probability distribution happens to be evenly distributed (is it?) say in centillions (tending towards infinity to be stated properly) of hash combinations, it still gives you an astronomically insignificant effect (1/infinity tending to 0)

I understand what you are saying guys but you fail to see the perspective.

Let's look at "life". All life expectancy is negative because everybody will die eventually.

So by your logic nobody can be a billionaire in his lifetime because his life has a negative expectancy, but that is obviously not the case.

So you can have local positive expectancy, while the overall one is negative.

I tend to see probability as a collective of local ones, so the total negative expectancy of a gambling game, is composed of local positive expectancies + local negative expectancies, where the local negative dominates, but that doesnt mean that the positive cannot happen.

Take the inverse for example, if you win 1000 times in a row in a 50% probability dice game:
- did you played agains overall negative expectancy: Yes because the payout ratio was < 1x
- did you had a local positive expectancy: Yes, because you won 1000 in a row. Otherwise you could not have the trend. It was lucky, but it was still a trend.

So if you can jump on a local positive expectancy train, you can win locally, but if you "force" your luck, you will eventually lose.

ndnh

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1005

New Decentralized Nuclear Hobbit

Quote from: CanIHazBitcoin777 on September 25, 2015, 05:53:36 AM

Quote from: ndnh on September 24, 2015, 10:53:34 AM

Do you believe your strategy is positive EV? Wink

No, and i never said I will give any edge, I just said that this strategy can help gamble in a "safer" way.

You are stating the EV is not positive and is the same. (correct)

You are stating ROI % that implies a positive EV (contradictory and incorrect)

Suppose you make 1,000,000,000,000 rolls and got all heads, for the next head assuming the game to be a fair one, the odds are 50%, and for the tails the odds are 50%.

I think you are taking it in a way where in a probability distribution of say 1000 rolls, ~500 are heads and ~500 are tails, and if you get 100 heads, the next flip would most likely land a tail. This concept DOES NOT apply in this case. Because the distribution you are talking about is INFINITE. Even if the probability distribution happens to be evenly distributed (is it?) say in centillions (tending towards infinity to be stated properly) of hash combinations, it still gives you an astronomically insignificant effect (1/infinity tending to 0)

Phildo

legendary

Activity: 1526

Merit: 1000

Quote from: CanIHazBitcoin777 on September 25, 2015, 05:43:42 AM

Quote from: leex1528 on September 24, 2015, 10:21:07 AM

So your betting strategy is basically the definition of gamblers fallacy? How would you expect us not to mention it? There is no way you studied stats and came up with this, I studied stats for 1 year and I can tell you this is pretty much what you learn on day 1, "Are the events independent on one another or not"

In your case, they are not, so you are doing nothing with stats at all.

If you'd care to read my posts before replying it would be better.

I didnt deny that the rolls are independent of another, but overall they are confined to a cluster that is dictated by the local probabilities.

After 10 heads the tails has a higher probability of occuring (locally). Yes this is true.

However if the overall cluster is reshuffled, to give room to 11,12,13... heads in a row, then obviously that will happen eventually too.

So we must look for a exploitation in the cluster until it is intact , but that is impossible to predict because that is random too, it can reshuffle anytime.

So yes you need to be lucky too, I dont give any edge here, i`m just trying to exploit a pattern until it exists, after its gone we can lose too, so it is gamble.

Quote from: scriptman on September 24, 2015, 01:23:19 PM

I can't believe your charging for the demo

This is a sales thread after all....

You're a cheeky monkey

That was not my intention at all, i just didnt found a free file hosting service.

Here i found one, so now you can download it for free and see for yourself.

THis is not true, this is the gambler's fallacy.

The odds of a fair coin being head or tails is 50/50, every time, no matter what the previous x flips were.

If you ALREADY flipped 10 heads, NOW the odds of getting 11 in a row are 50/50 because you ALREADY did the hard part of getting 11 in a row, getting 10 in a row.

CanIHazBitcoin777

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: Betwrong on September 25, 2015, 07:48:51 AM

Quote

after 20 consecutive losses I increase the bet to 8% of my balance so that is 0.04BTC

As you know you can lose 2-3 times after that increasing, which is 0.08-0.12BTC and to get that amount back will take lots of time and what is more important lots of risk too. Most likely you'll lose everything trying to recover. Of course you can win with that strategy if you are lucky, but you can also win betting 0.5 BTC just one time on 0.98x payout.

You only increase it to 8% of the balance for 1 bet, after that resume it to the minimum bet size, regardless if you won or lost.

We are "hunting" the consecutive switches.

Quote from: Erza on September 25, 2015, 08:08:14 AM

Quote from: Tauja on September 25, 2015, 06:26:33 AM

Of coure, Low risk, low rewards
High risk high return
But i'm not sure about this

Yeah that is so true, but sometimes people with a great luck can hit jackpot and win big and of course this is exception, mostly people will earn like that way but you need some good balance for you to sustain your loss or you will never hit it back again

Yes but this strategy is for low risk people who would like to win smaller but safer.

If you want to win big, then use SatoshiDice for example, bet 1 BTC and set the win rate to 0.2%, your multiplier will be 490.

So with a 0.2% probability you could win 490 BTC with 1 BTC betted Cheesy

Erza

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Tauja on September 25, 2015, 06:26:33 AM

Of coure, Low risk, low rewards
High risk high return
But i'm not sure about this

Yeah that is so true, but sometimes people with a great luck can hit jackpot and win big and of course this is exception, mostly people will earn like that way but you need some good balance for you to sustain your loss or you will never hit it back again

Betwrong

legendary

Activity: 3374

Merit: 2198

I stand with Ukraine.

pjsonowal

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

see there is no particular strategy that will work all the time...you have to keep changing strategies to be a winner.....keeping on with one strategy is a waste of time..frm my point of view

Topic: del - page 2. (Read 3829 times)