The technical analysis day trader types I know call it 'noise'.Originally Posted by Butterfly
The technical analysis day trader types I know call it 'noise'.Originally Posted by Butterfly
Don't worry mate I'm a prepper and will be about 1000 metres above sea level when the shit hits the fan.Originally Posted by socal
You do make some sense but perhaps lack a little experience when it comes to betting on the financial markets. Although I do agree with the sentiment that physical gold is good, you do come across a bit of a fanatic caught in the latest fad (gold).
I agree it will continue to rise but to lay 10/1 on it being under $1900 in 6 months from now is just silly. I wouldn't take the bet seriously, as I'd be robbing you blind. It should be me laying odds. The football game is a perfect analogy. Regardless of how perceptive you are and your world view. No one is good enough to predict with any certainty a 90% chance of gold rising above $1900 in 6 months. Even money at best.
the technical traders do create a lot of noises, that's for sureOriginally Posted by 9999
market timing gurus are actually technical chartists more than fundamental analysts, so that's why I want to call it on their BS
it's not gambling, the odds are better in a gambleOriginally Posted by 9999
investment take skills, most individuals don't have it and will lose 90% of the time, this is very well documented in some financial literature
like I said, gambling has better odds, investing take real skills because you are dealing with true randomness, in gambling, the rules set the odds in one of the party "favor".
Take out replace 'investment' with 'wagering' and 'financial markets', insert horse racing, football betting, poker, even lottery in there, and the statement is still true (and well documented).Originally Posted by Butterfly
That is totally not true for many forms of what people call gambling. An interesting court ruling in New York ruled poker as a game of skill. Professional football bettors register as professionals and report their wins and losses, in the USA. Where do you draw the line? How can you say the odds of a football match are set in stone? Is it not just a price based on perception?Originally Posted by Butterfly
Of course things such as poker machines, some card games, money wheels, roulette etc, where the odds actually are set in stone, you cannot find an edge. Actually, sometimes jackpots provide edges on slot machines (and lotteries). There are 'investors' that pursue these positive expectation opportunities. Their bets are no less valid than those on financial markets. Financial markets are basically a bunch of derivatives of real stuff to make it easy for everyone to gamble on what they think will happen in the future.
I was thinking more like Black Jack and Roulette, and other casino games
poker does take skill, it's not random
Yet it considered by most a game of 'gambling'. When you go all-in, it's a 'bet', not an investment. So what is the difference?Originally Posted by Butterfly
Anything where the odds can never be certain is a game of skill, so sports betting is just as valid as poker for 'investment' based on skill.
Blackjack is defo beatable. It's harder now because the casinos take measures to stop card counting, and will just plain boot you if you are caught. Some big money was made though when the maths geeks figured it out before the casinos.
It's still possible now to have positive expectation in the now common 8 deck shoes, but it's a tough count, and returns about 0.5% on your total amount bet with a huge standard deviation. Not for the faint hearted, but there are guys doing it even today.
Roulette is beatable or used to be, i used to make thousands years ago on online sites before being banned from them all. Lots of people used to do it, basically you just play red or black, put £1 on red, if red comes in take your £1 winnings off and leave the stake on, if black comes in double your stake to £2, then if red comes in you take £3 out (£2 winning and £1 of your stake, so you've made £1) and leave £1 stake for next spin, if black had come in again double your stake to £4, red would come in take £7 out yet again leaving £1 stake for next spin, and so on. Most i ever had of black coming in was 7 times in a row which had my stake up to £128, seems a lot just to win £1!!! It takes a long time playing like this and is monotonous, tedious and boring but was basically fool proof as in i never lost a single time, and would average out to about £50 an hour, basically if you had nothing to do for a day was an easy way to make £500.
^ Dunno about that 'system' but well played, I did OK 'bonus whoring', ie working the sign up bonuses to suck you in to your advantage. It used to be very juicy, now the edge is quite thin and not really worth it due to the risk of not being paid by dodgy online casinos.
^^ we believe you, Bumboy
it is amazing that such a well known method doesn't break the banks everyday...amazing
of course, in real life, the wheel has a slight advantage to the owner, that advantage depending on how many green zero slots there are
in addition, in real life, I have yet to meet an gambler who admits to losing! they all win, and sometimes fabulous amounts
I have reported your post
Worked perfectly, also used to get all sign up bonuses, i'm going back a good few years though, only problem was finding online casinos which would take a £1/$1 bet on the outside bets red/black, odd/even etc. as any higher and you'd need too much money to cover yourself and you would get banned as soon as they realised what was going on as in regular cash withdrawls and no money being deposited, and obviously they took a closer look at your account and it was game over. Think the longest i ever lasted with one online casino before getting banned was about a month and i took them for over £10k, i normally did well if was still going after a week, always had all money paid out to me when accounts were closed/banned though.
^ What I think you are describing is known as 'martingale' system, and is flawed. If you were playing perfect strategy it's nearly a zero sum game, but not an edge, a slight negative one in fact. Because eventually, 20 blacks will come in a row, and in that very unlikely scenario you get busted and some. So basically you were betting at very short odds, against the house advantage, and never unlucky enough to lose. I don't think there's a mathematical advantage in the play you describe.
Getting the bonuses, and always moving on to the next bonus, you should have won, though playing a martingale risk management strategy is far from optimal. I'm sure most advantage players would agree.
It's funny how they report poker tournament results for TV hype. They add up each players total cash outs, and leave out all the buy-in. So you have losing players with '$980,000 in career winnings'.Originally Posted by DrAndy
It's just odds, as i said most i had was 7 blacks come up in a row, 5 was common, of course theoretically black could have come up an unlimited amount of times in a row and you'd be stopped out but it never went past 7 with me. Basically every time red came up, you won a £1 regardless if you had £1, £2, £4, £8, £16, £32 sitting on it at the time as after every red you take your money off and start with a £1 again and it was fokin tedious doing it hour after hour but you couldn't lose and it was basically free money and lots of it while it lasted.
[quote=9999;2230373]in what form do you buy silver and from whom may i ask?Originally Posted by OhOh
^^ What you're describing BB, unless I'm missing something, has been nashed over and debunked (if you;re talking about a martingale variant). I just don't see how the odds are tipped in your favour. Most I've seen at a roulette table is 13 blacks in a row and I don't get around them that much. So just that one time and you're screwed, glad it never happened to you mate.
In granual form from Chinese traders in Chiang Mai. First buy with cash (from gold sold elsewhere), second buy was an exchange (Thai physical) gold for silver granuals. I can have them made into bars but couldn't find silver bars anywhere.Originally Posted by draco888
Happy to share the reliable and trustworthy source of the physical granuals.
The odds are in your favour as you just keep doubling up till you win then start again, you just have to stick to it and not deviate which can be challenging as it is foking boring but only way you can ever lose if black did come in an x amount of times in a row, i was always covered up to and including 8 times and as i said it never went past 7. Even if it had it would have needed black to come in 9 times in a row on a regular basis for me not to win, and there were a group of us doing it at the time and not one of us had ever had 9 blacks come up in a row. It wouldn't have worked in a real casino as you'd be chucked out straight away, plus when i worked in casinos in the early 90's (life long bans from most of them aswell!!!!), £10 was the minimum bet on the outside bets which makes it a non starter straight away.
why stop to investment ? when risk is involved, everything is a bet, when walking in the street, above all in ThailandOriginally Posted by 9999
the difference with investment is the way payoff are structured, the returns are too small for being labeled "bets"
^^ Fair enough. The math just doesn't add up for me (unless you add a bonus component). Good point about the min. bet though it does buy you more time. But what are you risking in the event of say 30 misses in a row?
For me to buy this I'd have to see gains over a significant sample size, then start reconsidering the laws of the universe.
Rubbish. There's a tone of short priced betting options. Punters bet 1/2 odds and less all the time.Originally Posted by Butterfly
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)