Thinking About Odds and Evens
So, there’s always some kind of noise in the news about how bad gambling is. As there are always two sides to every story, I can guess what makes them think that.
But here’s what I’m thinking:
I’m thinking that winning at gambling has a much better shot than we think. Follow my theory of 50-50:
First, every event can have only two outcomes, polar opposites of each other - on/not on, win/not win. Ones or zeroes like the binary system – if it’s good enough for the basis of all technology, it’s good enough for this blog.
Also, each contestant should be considered separately, and not weighted against the field. The reason this should be done is because unlimited random variables surround each contestant in an equal amount – an infinity’s worth. The result is that the probability of a related outcome creating a loss (i.e. because another horse outruns them) becomes exactly equal to the probability of anything else creating that loss (like a volcanic eruption, a jockey having menstrual cramps, the planetary alignments, or just some idiot walking across the track).
Conclusion: Since every horse (or Nascar driver, political candidate, whatever) has an equal chance of winning or losing, anything that pays better than even money (1 to 1) becomes lucrative. The best part is that, as it works out, you’ll be right half the time. Unless, of course, the Lord was also born a gambling man and really does play dice with the universe. Then all bets are off.
I’m thinking, though, that since probabilities are only proven when tested over time, we may never be able to have a clear answer on the gambling issue. Like they say, we always have more time than money, and you gotta pay to play.
I’m also thinking my 50-50 theory throws the saying, “the odds are always with the house”, right out the window. So when you see a profitable gambling establishment you know their money isn’t coming from the tables. Besides the markup they get from the soft-drinks, they are probably using the theory of 50-50 to remit their taxes. They take the pile of money they owe for taxes and split it up - one dollar to the government, one dollar back to the house, one for them, one for me…
But most of all I’m thinking that they can stop working on a solution to the chaos theory. This theory tries to find an order in random sets of data. Well, I’ve done it and everything is a 50/50 proposition. It’s actually been summed up quite well already – “You’re damned if you do, and you’re damned if you don’t.” But can someone please explain to me that if the best we can possibly do results in only a 50% chance of success, why is losing still so damned disappointing 100% of the time.
But here’s what I’m thinking:
I’m thinking that winning at gambling has a much better shot than we think. Follow my theory of 50-50:
First, every event can have only two outcomes, polar opposites of each other - on/not on, win/not win. Ones or zeroes like the binary system – if it’s good enough for the basis of all technology, it’s good enough for this blog.
Also, each contestant should be considered separately, and not weighted against the field. The reason this should be done is because unlimited random variables surround each contestant in an equal amount – an infinity’s worth. The result is that the probability of a related outcome creating a loss (i.e. because another horse outruns them) becomes exactly equal to the probability of anything else creating that loss (like a volcanic eruption, a jockey having menstrual cramps, the planetary alignments, or just some idiot walking across the track).
Conclusion: Since every horse (or Nascar driver, political candidate, whatever) has an equal chance of winning or losing, anything that pays better than even money (1 to 1) becomes lucrative. The best part is that, as it works out, you’ll be right half the time. Unless, of course, the Lord was also born a gambling man and really does play dice with the universe. Then all bets are off.
I’m thinking, though, that since probabilities are only proven when tested over time, we may never be able to have a clear answer on the gambling issue. Like they say, we always have more time than money, and you gotta pay to play.
I’m also thinking my 50-50 theory throws the saying, “the odds are always with the house”, right out the window. So when you see a profitable gambling establishment you know their money isn’t coming from the tables. Besides the markup they get from the soft-drinks, they are probably using the theory of 50-50 to remit their taxes. They take the pile of money they owe for taxes and split it up - one dollar to the government, one dollar back to the house, one for them, one for me…
But most of all I’m thinking that they can stop working on a solution to the chaos theory. This theory tries to find an order in random sets of data. Well, I’ve done it and everything is a 50/50 proposition. It’s actually been summed up quite well already – “You’re damned if you do, and you’re damned if you don’t.” But can someone please explain to me that if the best we can possibly do results in only a 50% chance of success, why is losing still so damned disappointing 100% of the time.
posted by Candy Shockley at
6:01 PM
<< Home