Live data from Hacker News

Monte Carlo methods – Why it's a bad idea to go to the casino

easylang.online

121–130 of 170 posts

Re: Monte Carlo methods – Why it's a bad idea to go to the casino

#121
post #11

It's more complicated (worse) than this. That the house has a small edge only tells a small part of the story. When people go to vegas for a weekend, they might have a number in their head they are willing to gamble. If they dont, then that number is their bank account balance. Then they start flipping coins, and often they keep doing this until they go bust. They rarely cash out when up but they always lose when the…

> If they dont, then that number is their bank account balance.

Given that not everyone's account balances are zero, plenty of people gamble for entertainment without going broke. I'm occasionally rational and enjoy playing craps. It is social, rolling dice is fun, and it gives a huge range of betting opportunities. I will also almost always play until I lose. The point is to have fun playing, and not to win money at a game where my EV is negative.

If I want to win money, I play poker. The problem with poker is that I'm not good enough to play games where I can win big (10s of thousands) money. The second problem is that playing winning poker is a grind and can be quite boring.

Re: Monte Carlo methods – Why it's a bad idea to go to the casino

#122

My experience of going to high-end casinos, mostly in London, is that: - Many players were plainly cheating in some way, by marking cards and sometimes colluding with the dealer, but the casino didn't appear to mind because they were cheating in an ineffective way and still losing money to the house edge. - (Related: you would just be banned if you won an amount of money that showed you were beating the house edge: s…

European casinos I have found to be boring compared to American casinos. A craps game in an American casino can get raucous in a good, exciting way. Even more so at a 'cheap' American casino.

Contrast this when I was at the Monte Carlo casino in Monaco where they somehow sucked the fun out of craps.

Re: Monte Carlo methods – Why it's a bad idea to go to the casino

#124
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All true, but also this article is about Monte Carlo numerical methods rather than actual casinos. "Flipping a coin until you get enough tails in a row" is a really good way to describe long term gambling, though. I'm gonna borrow that.

> "Flipping a coin until you get enough tails in a row" is a really good way to describe long term gambling It's not. The correct way is saying 'flipping a weighed coin'. It can be weighed in or against your favor. If it is weighed in your favor, then you will never really have the 'until' part (i.e. get bust), if you also manage your bankroll wisely.

I think they're referring to the psychological component of gambling. Most people only exit when they go bust, i.e. when they get sufficient consecutive tails to wipe out their budget.

That's how I read it, at least.

Re: Monte Carlo methods – Why it's a bad idea to go to the casino

#125
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You hit the nail on the head. If you simply play the pass-line and free-odds on craps, the house edge is extremely small. And yet, most people lose far more than predicted by the odds. The problem is exactly as you stated - people don't have a defined exit-strategy, and their implicit exit-strategy is to keep playing till they lose everything. Which is guaranteed to happen 100% of the time even if the house-edge was…

Can you explain what you feel playing a game that will always make you lose money no matter the strategies and anything else? Very curious

I've never been to a 'proper' casino, but I've seen a few in James Bond films.

Everyone is attractive, powerful and sophisticated. People look on, impressed at his daring. Everyone has a bow tie on. Beautiful women hand him free drinks with a smile. The atmosphere isn't even slightly tinged with the desperation and regret of gambling addicts.

I can understand losing $50 a day to live out that fiction.

I have no idea whether any casinos offer that experience - the gambling things I've seen in my country have all been far more tawdry.

Re: Monte Carlo methods – Why it's a bad idea to go to the casino

#126
post #11

It's more complicated (worse) than this. That the house has a small edge only tells a small part of the story. When people go to vegas for a weekend, they might have a number in their head they are willing to gamble. If they dont, then that number is their bank account balance. Then they start flipping coins, and often they keep doing this until they go bust. They rarely cash out when up but they always lose when the…

[deleted]

Re: Monte Carlo methods – Why it's a bad idea to go to the casino

#127
post #51
post #11

It's more complicated (worse) than this. That the house has a small edge only tells a small part of the story. When people go to vegas for a weekend, they might have a number in their head they are willing to gamble. If they dont, then that number is their bank account balance. Then they start flipping coins, and often they keep doing this until they go bust. They rarely cash out when up but they always lose when the…

You hit the nail on the head. If you simply play the pass-line and free-odds on craps, the house edge is extremely small. And yet, most people lose far more than predicted by the odds. The problem is exactly as you stated - people don't have a defined exit-strategy, and their implicit exit-strategy is to keep playing till they lose everything. Which is guaranteed to happen 100% of the time even if the house-edge was…

The first two paragraphs of this story from "Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman!" illustrate your point well:

> The first time I was in Las Vegas I sat down and figured out the odds for everything, and I discovered that the odds for the crap table were something like .493. If I bet a dollar, it would only cost me 1.4 cents. So I thought to myself, "Why am I so reluctant to bet? It hardly costs anything!"

So I started betting, and right away I lost five dollars in succession--one, two, three, four, five. I was supposed to be out only seven cents; instead, I was five dollars behind! I've never gambled since then (with my own money, that is). I'm very lucky that I started off losing.

One time I was eating lunch with one of the show girls. It was a quiet time in the afternoon; there was not the usual big bustle, and she said, "See that man over there, walking across the lawn? That's Nick the Greek. He's a professional gambler."

Now I knew damn well what all the odds were in Las Vegas, so I said, "How can he be a professional gambler?"

"I'll call him over."

Nick came over and she introduced us. "Marilyn tells me that you're a professional gambler."

"That's correct."

"Well, I'd like to know how it's possible to make your living gambling, because at the table, the odds are .493."

"You're right," he said, "and I'll explain it to you. I don't bet on the table, or things like that. I only bet when the odds are in my favor."

"Huh? When are the odds ever in your favor?" I asked incredulously.

"It's really quite easy," he said. "I'm standing around a table, when some guy says, 'It's comin' out nine! It's gotta be a nine!' The guy's excited; he thinks it's going to be a nine, and he wants to bet. Now I know the odds for all the numbers inside out, so I say to him, 'I'll bet you four to three it's not a nine,' and I win in the long run. I don't bet on the table; instead, I bet with people around the table who have prejudices--superstitious ideas about lucky numbers."

Nick continued: "Now that I've got a reputation, it's even easier, because people will bet with me even when they know the odds aren't very good, just to have the chance of telling the story, if they win, of how they beat Nick the Greek. So I really do make a living gambling, and it's wonderful!"

So Nick the Greek was really an educated character. He was a very nice and engaging man. I thanked him for the explanation; now I understood it. I have to understand the world, you see.

Re: Monte Carlo methods – Why it's a bad idea to go to the casino

#128
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Luck is lumpy. Weirdly I seem to do quite well in the casino and often have evening where I leave the casino 2-3X ahead of where I started. My luck at football betting is terrible, I'm even worse at horses. When you're up it's quite the thrill. You weather the downs as a cost associated with the particular vice. I enjoy "emotionally hedging" sports events - if I want X to win I bet on Y Do you play any other things (…

Poker and sports betting have a huge difference. It is not 100% certain you will lose long term. Thus can be pleasurable to me. Certain loss simply can't be and that's why I am curious

The other thing is that "winnings" feel like a different type of money. If I win at the casino, I cannot wait to spend that new money. Whether it's buying my friends drinks or buying some item that I wouldn't buy with regular money.

It's really fun to spend money that you feel just fell from the sky. If you employ the right strategy you will still come out ahead 40-45% of the time, and those times can be quite memorable and fun.

You will definitely take losses in the long run but if you play well within your means, they won't have any impact on your life.

Re: Monte Carlo methods – Why it's a bad idea to go to the casino

#129
post #56
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You hit the nail on the head. If you simply play the pass-line and free-odds on craps, the house edge is extremely small. And yet, most people lose far more than predicted by the odds. The problem is exactly as you stated - people don't have a defined exit-strategy, and their implicit exit-strategy is to keep playing till they lose everything. Which is guaranteed to happen 100% of the time even if the house-edge was…

You can bet Don’t Pass and have everyone glower at you, but have even better odds.

People also glower and complain when you play perfect strategy at blackjack ... most people are utter shit at odds and statistics in a distracting environment like a casino.

Re: Monte Carlo methods – Why it's a bad idea to go to the casino

#130
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You hit the nail on the head. If you simply play the pass-line and free-odds on craps, the house edge is extremely small. And yet, most people lose far more than predicted by the odds. The problem is exactly as you stated - people don't have a defined exit-strategy, and their implicit exit-strategy is to keep playing till they lose everything. Which is guaranteed to happen 100% of the time even if the house-edge was…

I don't usually gamble, when I do it is roulette. Easy rules ans I only play the probabilities. I also the approach you mentioned above, never more than say 20 bucks with maybe another 10 as hard reserve. Quit when I'm ahead by a factor of, again like you, roughly 2x. And playing smaller amounts, meaning not everything at once but reasonably high, provides enough entertainment gambling for at least an hour. So in the…

Roulette has the worst odds, so what do you mean by “playing the probabilities?” Roulette’s big draw is that it’s simple, high suspense, and visceral due to being able to see the ball bounce around

Personally, my gambling strategy is simple. Whatever amount I’m gambling is considered spent in exchange for the “fun” I get. I expect to walk away with zero. If I’m winning I like to go double or nothing right before I leave on black at roulette, just for the hell of it.

Post reply on HN