Thread: The "no-win scenario".

Borrowing on an old Star Trek idea about Captain Kirk's on-going thematic-struggle with that, isn't that really what we're up against here? The mind-sets of a game like... ?

Well, Kirk cheated his way out of it (at the "academy"), but later conceded that there's "no way to cheat death"... and nor did he. And for those others, fictional or not, who take up the same "challenge", most by some sort of (symbolic/mock) gaming, but a few by the more/less-serious means... i think every interpretation of this problem must necessarily be unique, because those are each just a form of practice for the real end-game (noted earlier).

So let's just take a quick look at some of the forum-members here to work up a "bases", or general set of common components among each. Please bear in mind that none of this is by any means purely-scientific, personal/professional, or anything else but my own passing thoughts in between rolling over under the covers. And that methods are bound to overlap, and shared. Anyone may feel free to add to the list, or give his/her own interpretation/solution to these scenarios.

1. Kirk cheated.

2. garnabby seeks to "win by breaking even". (Perhaps looking for a way to lose under a "no-lose scenario" yeilds the same answer?)

3. Some of us (, you know who you are,) try to "prove something" by pursing challenges which are either silly "fantasies of fantasies", of no value even if attainable; or ones plainly out of their grasps, as the grade-6 Ellis trying to let on he's the math-guru of math-gurus (,and at the other extreme, who can't and won't note even where they got which SELF-CLAIMED PhD, or genius-level IQ-certification) Eg, the scammers here whose last resort is propaganda... and after all the facts have already been clearly laid out.

4. gr8player's (at the GG) "poison of choice" seems to be self-delusion.

5. The martingale-bettors, by force over finesse. Versus the very-slow bettors... every 10th game, increasing to $10 after losing $5 five or six times in a row with a $50,000 stake.

6. The diplomatic Archer's, BigJoe's, and littogage's, who "run cover" for the Grab's... instead of ever getting on with something "from the heart". Akin to the Nathan's, the keepers of the " gambling etiquette"... ie, discipline, MM, and "no system wins all the time".

7. The know-it-all loudmouths like John, gizmotron, and Spike (at the GG), who claim to have some sort of "holy grail"... but which they intend to "take to their graves" because the rest of us are "undeserving". (Really because they can't make up their own minds about what they're actually doing at any particular time?)

8. The Mike's, who like to create a "sandbox" or two, and see what life springs from it. Versus also those who leave nothing to chance by rigorously, and strenuously, taking everything apart first... the experts.

9. The bank-robber types, who almost always get caught, or dead. As if "you could take it with you" anyway, lol.

10. The AP's, like Savant (aka Sonny, the bj-site owner), who really think that if they just "dagumit" work hard enough, then the unlikeliest of edges over the house shall be theirs. Smug ain't smart, right?

11. They who try to turn the tables? (With the propaganda, or for real.)




Were you "between a rock and a hard place" of a different sort? How did you escape? Did you?



************************************************** *******************

UPDATE-edit: To not have to bump this thread to reply to John's re-copied nonsense below, i'm putting my reply here.

"I said "your god", with a lower-case 'g'... even to refer to the god-of-the-foolish, such as yourself?

LOL.

Gambler's Glen Message Boards : Baccarat Message Board : Carlo down the johno... .

Gambler's Glen Message Boards : Baccarat Message Board : Mission Accomplished "

You need to quit drinking Buddy.

Originally Posted by Ellis

You need to quit drinking Buddy.

Have some fun, sillE... you're not going to win anything at the tables, or even here.

Garnabby, I see you have yet to post ANY credentials, whatsoever. Several of the guys on my forum knew me when I taught Math, Calculus and Physics. But that was 30 years ago. Who cares. They are a lot more interested in what I did in AC 25 years ago. They were there, too. But if you think I'm going to start telling you where I worked and therefore who my employers were, you're crazy. I don't trust you.

BTW, when I left SUNY I created a large Memorial Scholarship fund in memory of my daughter who died there at the age of 21. I sure as hell don't want the likes of you messing around there. I still have many ties and connections there. I wouldn't want them knowing I had any association with the likes of you.

I don't think you want to tell me who your employers are either. The name I was born with, E Clifton Davis, my address, phone number and private email are all posted. You can't do that for obvious reasons.

Originally Posted by Ellis

Garnabby, I see you have yet to post ANY credentials, whatsoever. Several of the guys on my forum knew me when I taught Math, Calculus and Physics. But that was 30 years ago. Who cares. They are a lot more interested in what I did in AC 25 years ago. They were there, too. But if you think I'm going to start telling you where I worked and therefore who my employers were, you're crazy. I don't trust you.

BTW, when I left SUNY I created a large Memorial Scholarship fund in memory of my daughter who died there at the age of 21. I sure as hell don't want the likes of you messing around there. I still have many ties and connections there. I wouldn't want them knowing I had any association with the likes of you.

I don't think you want to tell me who your employers are either. The name I was born with, E Clifton Davis, my address, phone number and private email are all posted. You can't do that for obvious reasons.

I take it you didn't read the "Carlo down the johno" thread-link i recently posted in this forum.

Go over there, the GG, read it... i ended up putting some creds there, for the reasons stated there. But i much rather getting on with (openly) applying the skills and experiences required here, which are to be ultimately exposed anyway.

You may choose to reciprocate, or not, as johno. (But i hope you don't take it as hard as he, lol.)

No thanks. If you are involved it would be a complete waste of time. Your idea of fun and mine are two entirely different things. You argue either side for the sake of arguing. I consider that the height of stupidity for anyone past the age of 7. I seldom read your posts let alone your links. A complete waste of time.

Originally Posted by Ellis

No thanks. If you are involved it would be a complete waste of time. Your idea of fun and mine are two entirely different things. You argue either side for the sake of arguing. I consider that the height of stupidity for anyone past the age of 7. I seldom read your posts let alone your links. A complete waste of time.

That's a good boy, Ellis,

Now you know why i don't put out my name, address, and phone... too many queers in the world "fishing" for stuff, etc. Unnecessary anyway; and that's what the cons do, and the perverts ask for, right? (Nothing else to lose.)

Here's another pertinent link, for those who want to (admit to having) read some more interesting stuff. Gambler's Glen Message Boards : General Discussion : NEW YEARS RESOLUTION- . For those who haven't yet read the Carlo-thing, as i'm sure the real "peeps" must be "glued" to all of this stuff 24/7... Gambler's Glen Message Boards : Baccarat Message Board : Carlo down the johno... . .

Interesting how you, and some of the others here, have commented on the two of us being the same person. I couldn't have put better "words in your mouth" were i you.

And what a great year 2010 has started to be.

P.S. I had a super Christmas, did you?

Originally Posted by garnabby

Interesting how you, and some of the others here, have commented on the two of us being the same person. I couldn't have put better "words in your mouth" were i you.

Sure Garnabby, at least in your tangled mind.

Originally Posted by garnabby

P.S. I had a super Christmas, did you?

Why do you ask? Is that your goal in life - to make everyone miserable?

I suspect you'll achieve it. What a complete waste of perfectly good skin.

Hmmm, Garnabby is suspiciously absent from the tie system solution. I consider that a victory of sorts. He's a very windy guy right up until someone challenges him to use his own brain. Then poof.....

If I were forced to invent a tie system it would be this. After the first tie on the second line of a horizontal score card, I would bet tie on the next four second-line bets.Simply because there are likely to be more TT and ties tend to come in clumps (double tie, skip tie, double skip tie). Important point: I would not advocate this because in the long run it still would be a bad bet.

Agreed Georgia! I was referring to the tie system on your "Half Baked" thread that I outlined over there and got criticized by Garnabby for calling it a scam. He seems to be overly influenced by the big words the orininator used in his spiel. But simple 4th grade math proves conclusively that it won't work. I'm giving him a much better head start than I had. I already told him it doesn't work. Since he is such a math pretender and likes to criticize the math of us lesser mortals, I'm challenging him to tell us WHAT 4th grade math tells us it doesn't work. When I figured it out 14 years ago I was already older than Garnabby is now. And I first had to demonstate it didn't work - then figure out why. He should be able to do this in his sleep. But I doubt it because he can't look it up. He's got to use his own head for once. If your crusade is to rid the world of scammers you first need the math qualifications to prove who the scammers are. Garnabby obviously has no idea since this tie guy scammed HIM so easily. Garnabby was totally taken in hook, line and sinker. But how do we know its a scam? What 4th grade math proves it? If Garnabby can't figure out such simple math then he's been scamming us right along. Silence is golden! It took me a while but it sure didn't take this long. What's it been - a week now. Another couple of days and Garnabby can consider himself EXPOSED. Then maybe Archer will tell us. Maybe not!

Might have been me you're talking about John. I tried designing a system wherein you waited for 40 plays w/o a tie then bet a 1111222233334444 prog and a few bets after that I can no longer remember. What I do remember is the first shoe I tried it in had no ties. I never bet ties again.

The cards have no memory and ties happen when they happen and don't when they don't. Trying to associate any rhyme or reason to it is about as useful as looking for intelligence in cloud formations.

I'd like to tell you why the odd/even tie system actually produces a shortage in ties right when it seems like ties would be more abundant. But, I'm waiting for Garnabby to give up. But that may not be within the scope of his character.