someone has a gambling problem

[ QUOTE ]
You are dead wrong when you say the casinos make a fortune because they play people who are underbankrolled.
The casinos can win because they get lucky, or the casinos can win because they have the advantage, but the casinos
don't benefit from risk of ruin miscalculations.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess we will agree to disagree. However the game of casino blackjack is a prime example. The game prospered because of
bad counters overestimating their edge (if they had one at all) and overbetting their rolls.

[ QUOTE ]
You said the casinos made fortunes because advantage gamblers were underbankrolled.
If someone tells you that you are going to make a fortune, do you think he is telling you that you have a +EV opportunity,
or a -EV opportunity? It is hard to interpret what you said as other than that the casinos had a +EV situation that was
made up of -EV gambles against card counters.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you twisted my words. The casinos have a completely different ruin percentage that the typical gambler, including one
including one with +EV. The larger casinos' bankrolls are so large so as to make their ruin percentage infinitesimal.

[ QUOTE ]
Of course, many times. I have also been ahead by more than 2 standard deviations many times. Neither makes me think
you can combine -EV situations to create a +EV situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you take pleasure in twisting my words. I never said or implied anything like this. It is a obvious falsehood.

[ QUOTE ]
This is just a common fallacy that many bad tournament players think is the key difference between tournament play and
NL ring game play. As a successful MTT player and NL ring game player and as a mathematician, I'm telling you that idea
is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

With the exception of when you are twisting my words, I can accept that you are coming from a knowledgeable viewpoint and
background. I guess I'll have to think about it some more.

Fair enough?