vpFREE2 Forums

random cyclicality in vp

#1

gilbert wrote:
C'mon Dan. As a software developer/analyst, you know what I'm talking
about. One can set the Random Seed to a number in a program easily
if s/he wants to control the outcome of the random number to generate.
I do it all the time at work to generate random data.

Yes, I'm a software developer and video poker analyst, which is why I know what I'M talking about. Almost every statement quoted above is self-contradictory.
"One can set the Random Seed...". If it is set by someone or something, it is not random.
"...control the outcome of the random number..." Then it's not random.

I'm wondering where you work and what your responsibilities are where you "...do it all the time [control the outcome] to generate random data." Well, such manipulated data are NOT random. Sounds like a government job. Screw the scientific results, and make the data fit the preconceived ideas. (We're not sure if human activity has any significant affect on global warming, but we'll manipulate the data to "prove" that it does.)

Random means unpredictable. If video poker outcomes were not random, they would be predictable, and I would be making a fortune because I'm confident that I could figure out the algorithm.

Dan

···

--
Dan Paymar
Author of best selling book, "Video Poker - Optimum Play"
Developer of VP analysis/trainer software "Optimum Video Poker"
Visit my web site at www.OptimumPlay.com

"Chance favors the prepared mind." -- Louis Pasteur

#2

>gilbert wrote:
>C'mon Dan. As a software developer/analyst, you know what I'm

talking

>about. One can set the Random Seed to a number in a program easily
>if s/he wants to control the outcome of the random number to

generate.

>I do it all the time at work to generate random data.

Yes, I'm a software developer and video poker analyst, which is why

I

know what I'M talking about. Almost every statement quoted above is
self-contradictory.
"One can set the Random Seed...". If it is set by someone or
something, it is not random.
"...control the outcome of the random number..." Then it's not

random.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Dan Paymar <Dan@...> wrote:

--
Dan Paymar
Author of best selling book, "Video Poker - Optimum Play"
Developer of VP analysis/trainer software "Optimum Video Poker"

--------------------------------------------

gilbert wrote:
Oh well, I guess you're a software developer alright since you
disagree that "randomness cannot be programmed". Maybe something else
(not the programmers) in the air causes the numbers to be random
then!.

Here's a short description of RandSeed () function from one of the
tools we used.

For a given seed value, RandSeed will generate a reproducible series
of random values. If you want more randomized values in different
sessions, you would need to set the seed value in a more random way.
The example below will always generate the same values because the
starting seed value is always the same:

testcase RandNum ()
  RandSeed (10)
  Print (RandInt (0, 100)
  Print (RandInt (0, 100)
  Print (RandInt (0, 100)

Result: each time the testcase is run
75
79
3

#3

Dan wrote: Random means unpredictable. If video poker outcomes were not
random,
they would be predictable, and I would be making a fortune because
I'm confident that I could figure out the algorithm.

  I don't believe that non-random is the same as being relatively
easy to figure out --- or even difficult to figure out but possible for
a master.

  But since you apparently do have that belief, you should
probably consider playing at racinos in New York. The games are
non-random and have a return reputed to be around 90%. That should be no
problem for someone who is confident that he could figure out the
algorithm. It would be a big problem for me, so I'm continuing to avoid
those places. Please let us know how your experiment goes.

Bob Dancer

For a 3-day free trial of Video Poker for Winners, the best video poker
computer trainer ever invented, go to //www.videopokerforwinners.com

#4

gilbert wrote:
Oh well, I guess you're a software developer alright since you
disagree that "randomness cannot be programmed". Maybe something

else

(not the programmers) in the air causes the numbers to be random
then!.

Here's a short description of RandSeed () function from one of the
tools we used.

For a given seed value, RandSeed will generate a reproducible

series

of random values. If you want more randomized values in different
sessions, you would need to set the seed value in a more random way.
The example below will always generate the same values because the
starting seed value is always the same:

testcase RandNum ()
  RandSeed (10)
  Print (RandInt (0, 100)
  Print (RandInt (0, 100)
  Print (RandInt (0, 100)

Result: each time the testcase is run
75
79
3

Dan, I think this is a lost cause.

Gilbert, Did you miss my post about pRNGs? Of course the results are
the same for the same seed. Do you realize the first number out of a
pRNG has little to do with how VP machines operate? I noticed you
ignored my post where I explained this. Didn't fit with your
preconceived notions?

Dick

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "gilbert_616" <gilbert_616@...> wrote:

#5

Bob Dancer wrote:

<<But since you apparently do have that belief, you should
probably consider playing at racinos in New York. The games are
non-random and have a return reputed to be around 90%.>>

Are they non-random or simply unrepresentative of a fair deal from a 52-card
deck? I doubt they are non-random.

Cogno

#6

Cogno Scienti wrote:

Are they non-random or simply unrepresentative of a fair deal from a
52-card deck? I doubt they are non-random.

When it comes to a card game, most players would deem any mechanism
that results in an uneven card distribution as "non-random",
regardless of any other characteristic of that machanism.

- Harry (now warding off visions of dancing angels and needle points

···

from my sleep tonight)

#7

Dan, I think this is a lost cause.

Gilbert, Did you miss my post about pRNGs? Of course the results

are

the same for the same seed. Do you realize the first number out of

a

pRNG has little to do with how VP machines operate? I noticed you
ignored my post where I explained this. Didn't fit with your
preconceived notions?

Dick

I haven't read every post in this thread, so don't know if anyone
mentioned it makes no difference whatsoever whether the cards are
dealt randomly. NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER. Why? Because of the
speed of the RNG chip, and how they are selected and mapped. Even if
you knew for a fact the numbers are in numerical sequence, what good
would it do? Let's assume they are generated in numerical
sequence. Does that help you? Wouldn't you also need to know the
mapping scheme ... which number corresponds to which card? And
wouldn't you also need to know when, or if, the mapping scheme is
ever altered, and when that happens? And wouldn't you also need to
know if "successive" random numbers are selected to build a hand?
What if they aren't successive? And how would you figure out if they
were or wern't?

This is what I like to do. Suppose I'm dealt 3 aces. I need 1 more,
and a kicker too. So I hold my 3 aces and wait. I'm imagining the
millions of digits generated by the RNG as I wait. I wait and wait.
At just the right instant I hid redeal and, amazingly, get an ace and
a kicker. It happens every time ... well, not every time, but now
and then.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mroejacks" <rgmustain@...> wrote:

#8

Harry wrote:

<<When it comes to a card game, most players would deem any mechanism that
results in an uneven card distribution as "non-random", regardless of any
other characteristic of that machanism.>>

Then they would be missing an important distinction.

Cogno

#9

Cogno Scienti wrote:
> Are they non-random or simply unrepresentative of a fair deal from

a

> 52-card deck? I doubt they are non-random.

When it comes to a card game, most players would deem any mechanism
that results in an uneven card distribution as "non-random",
regardless of any other characteristic of that machanism.

I suspect most card players wouldn't consider "non-random" and "uneven
distribution" as topics for deeming :wink:

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@...> wrote: