Re: Odds of winning

Chris Buckley <chrisb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:slrnduktsu.dc7.chrisb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

In article <Xns97648972D9C0Btaustingmail@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, No 33
Secretary wrote:
throopw@xxxxxxxxx (Wayne Throop) wrote in news:1139433145@xxxxxxxxx:

: No 33 Secretary <terry.notaniceperson@xxxxxxxxx>
: Try addressing the system everyone else is talking about.

Hm? I thought the system everybody was talking about was
"you have a huge but finite amount of money,

Nope. The theoretical systems is that you have infinite money. That's
why it can't be implemented in real life.

But that's not the only problem people have been saying!

The basic problem is that it cannot be connected to real life in *any*
meanginful way.

The basic problem has been described as a person placing bets using a
Martingale scheme with a theoretical infinite amount of money.

If a bet and resolution takes 5 seconds, and a person does nothing but
place Martingale bets for their entire life - say 50 years worth of
gambling - and they have an infinite amount of money, then the
expectation is that they will have a net loss. The time constraints
mean only a finite number of bets can take place, and for any finite
number of bets, the expectation is negative.

If YOU want to change the problem and say you were talking about an
immortal person gambling (and get the discussion back on-topic), feel
free to start a new topic.

Shheeesh! How many times can this group have monster threads about
limits to infinity? (I know, I know, probably infinite :)

It's a math problem. Get over it.

--
"So there is no third law of Terrydynamics."
-- William Hyde
Terry Austin
.

Relevant Pages