Arcimedes, here's what I don't understand, so please explain it to me: when a VP machine has 99.5% return over the long term, how much "lee way" or a "window" or "variance" should I allow in that figure of 99.5%? In other words, isn't 99.5% really 99.5% ?? Or is 99.4% also considered to be 99.5%?
Don't you reach a number of 99.5% by taking into account ALL of the possible hand results, as Wizard did, in his probability chart using more than 19 trillion possible returns?
So, if the probability chart is based on 19 trillion different possible returns, how can fewer than 19 trillion give you a 100% accurate reflection of that 99.5% game? I think you'll agree you cant.
In business and in economics we do extrapolate numbers. But extrapolations made with variables can be wrong. It seems to me that every hand in VP is another variable. Hence the long term is a minimum of that 19+ trillion hands. You might indeed hit that 99.5% playing fewer, just like in craps I might throw boxcars only one out of 36 times on my first 36 rolls of the dice.
Don't you reach a number of 99.5% by taking into account ALL of the possible hand results, as Wizard did, in his probability chart using more than 19 trillion possible returns?
So, if the probability chart is based on 19 trillion different possible returns, how can fewer than 19 trillion give you a 100% accurate reflection of that 99.5% game? I think you'll agree you cant.
In business and in economics we do extrapolate numbers. But extrapolations made with variables can be wrong. It seems to me that every hand in VP is another variable. Hence the long term is a minimum of that 19+ trillion hands. You might indeed hit that 99.5% playing fewer, just like in craps I might throw boxcars only one out of 36 times on my first 36 rolls of the dice.
