### Author Topic: why would someone test a method using simulation software?  (Read 15161 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### mr j

##### Re: why would someone test a method using simulation software?
« Reply #225 on: October 30, 2018, 09:07:40 PM »
Here is another point/question I have. How many results (past or present) equals a trend?

Ken

This is a decent question. L = black, R = red.

At WHAT POINT is this a trend??
LL? R? LRLR? LRL? LLRRLLRR? LLRRL? etc.

#### mr j

##### Re: why would someone test a method using simulation software?
« Reply #226 on: October 30, 2018, 09:56:54 PM »
When a player JUMPS INTO a trend, at WHAT POINT is that?

#### palestis

##### Re: why would someone test a method using simulation software?
« Reply #227 on: October 30, 2018, 11:12:22 PM »
If you did, you should be able to repost it.
Simulation to test systems is good up to a certain extend. But it is unrealistic if you assume unlimited capital for B/R, and time that would run into years if not a lifetime.
The bankroll is irrelevant because the point is to COMPARE one system with another, the only difference between them being virtual bets/ no virtual bets.

I no longer have the code, but I'll write another sim this time an interactive one where you can input the bankroll and number of spins in a session. You will also be able to upload your own spins.
I'll do it once more for the last time.
If you avoid to comment on this particular example and make reference to some vague simulation, where money and time is infinite, then there is no point to argue about it, because it becomes insult to someone's basic intelligence, and blatant disregard for common sense.
Let's say I decide to play ODD EC's for the session.
As soon as I start I get hit with 6 even numbers. With martingale I lose \$630 if the min. is \$10 and \$945 if it is the weekend when the least minimums are \$15.
You tell me if a player in his right mind will continue after this,
knowing that it will take 63 hits on ODD just to recover from this disaster. Not to mention that you will meet the same fate long before you recover.
(does your simulation take real life situations into account? Of course not because a simulation only sees numbers and disregards human emotions).
So where is the connection between perpetual betting and betting after several virtual losses?.
Betting from the beginning, as you see, sends you home a loser in  the first 6 spins.
Who cares about what the simulation says, if I can't continue playing?
Comparing the 2 methods in real life play stops right there. In the paper it may continue for years, but it's useless.

And you are telling me that the B/R is irrelevant.
Yes it is if you play roulette for hobby in some online casino with 10 cents chips. Then it's not a big deal.
So look at the picture and tell me what your simulation is advising you to do.
And don't tell me I cherry picked again, because  5 and 6 and 7 EC's in a row happens all the time.
It's a matter of being unlucky enough to pick the wrong EC to bet on.

#### Mike

##### Re: why would someone test a method using simulation software?
« Reply #228 on: November 01, 2018, 11:23:01 AM »
(does your simulation take real life situations into account? Of course not because a simulation only sees numbers and disregards human emotions).
Since when should emotions be a factor in betting?
Quote
And you are telling me that the B/R is irrelevant.
And it is. The point of the simulation is to tell whether waiting for virtual losses is better than not waiting. The bankroll is completely irrelevant to it; as long as both methods (waiting and not waiting) start with the same bankroll it doesn't matter what it actually is.

Quote
So look at the picture and tell me what your simulation is advising you to do.
The simulation doesn't "advise" me to do anything. I "advise" the simulation. You have it the wrong way round.

Quote
It's a matter of being unlucky enough to pick the wrong EC to bet on.
Correct, it's a matter of luck. What you're failing to understand is that once you have your 5 virtual losses, the chance of getting another 5 ACTUAL losses is exactly the same as getting 5 actual losses when starting "from the beginning" (without waiting for the virtual losses). You've already agreed with me that the math is the same in both cases. Everything you've said about the bankroll applies just as much to betting after the virtual losses as it does to not using them. You may get a streak of 10 losses right from the start, but now it's going to take longer to recover because you have to wait for the virtual losses. Even if this doesn't happen, it WILL sooner or later, and it's a matter of luck whether you're still in profit when the losses come whether you use virtual losses or not.

The following users thanked this post: mr j

#### mr j

##### Re: why would someone test a method using simulation software?
« Reply #229 on: November 01, 2018, 01:32:27 PM »
"as long as both methods (waiting and not waiting) start with the same bankroll" >> BINGO, agreed.