Not the Grail, just a regular one - Bablokos!!! - page 109

 
Let's say that after two differences in the increments of one sign (for example, plus), the sign changes, which does not contradict the author, however, the change of this sign can cause almost any number that fell out! We need the numbers to be less than half of all possible (is there any point in betting on 30 numbers of roulette wheel?)! Unfortunately, if the sign changes less than half of all combinations, we lose! Bottom line is the same 50/50!
 
Lastrer:
Let's say: after two differences of increments of one sign (for example, plus), the sign changes, which does not contradict the author, however, a change of this sign can cause almost any drawn number! We require that the numbers were less than half of all possible (is it worth betting on 30 numbers roulette table?)! Unfortunately, if the sign changes less than half of all combinations, we lose! Bottom line is the same 50/50!

In principle, it makes sense. Except for this one:

Almost any dropped number can cause this sign to change

P.S. Everything. Got it. Thank you.
 

Gentlemen, for the sake of the common cause, I cannot but draw your attention to the FUNDAMENTAL, MAIN point in our research - DO NOT confuse the cause with the consequence (!!!).

Who in their right mind would need MATHEMATICAL proof that a properly made coin has the same chance of falling for heads as for tails? THE BEHAVIOUR OF A REAL COIN IS PRIMARY (!!!). Mathematics - ONLY DESCRIBES WITH DIFFERENT BUCKS WHAT REALLY GOES IN NATURE, NOT IN OPPOSITION (!!!).

Therefore, look for various peculiarities in STATISTICS of past outcomes, use them for your own selfish ends, but DO NOT EXPECT THAT the REAL coin will "dance according to your wishes" and try to "restore balance", "strive for balance" or any other mathematical FANTOM you have deduced. EVERY TIME YOU MAKE A NEW THROW THE RESULT WILL BE 50/50!!!

 
I'm not going to argue with the maths, however, what would you bet on: three tails in a row, or four eagles in a row? I was asking here, the mate's solution is not trivial, and it gives you something to think about.
 

"From the ceiling" (as I "sit on another horse"), I would first of all pay attention to the FUNDAMENTAL fact that in an eight-bit sequence the AMOUNT OF ZEROS AND UNITS EQUAL TO 4 HAS THE NUMBER OF COMBINATIONS.

So, with equal probability of any of them, I have the LARGEST Odds of encountering a sequence containing 4 eagles (all in a row and not in a row here). And it's clear to a goat that, when searching for my TC, I'll first of all look to see what I can get out of it.

So - somewhere like this... (I apologize if I answered the wrong question. I can correct myself...)

 

I have not studied this question, however, I can tell you that having studied it, we almost certainly won't stand a chance. This is Paukas' philosophising, which ensures a VERY 100% hit without proof, on a hunch - life experience, so to speak. Everything would be fine, if it weren't for that BUT. And a little, as they say, doesn't count!

Thus, neither this post, nor yours, nor Paukas' posts say anything on the subject, and are flooding, subject to deletion by the moderators. That's how it is.

SZY. By the way, GDP claims 97% of the flooder, oh, excuse me, Hphilosophical posts, that is, it has overtaken the entire planet.

 
Lastrer:

I have not studied this question, however, I can tell you that having studied it, we almost certainly won't stand a chance. This is Paukas' philosophising, which ensures a VERY 100% hit without proof, on a hunch - life experience, so to speak. Everything would be fine, if it weren't for that BUTY. And a little, as they say, doesn't count!

Thus, neither this post, nor yours, nor Paukas' posts say anything on the subject, and are flooding, subject to deletion by the moderators. So it goes.

No, not so, the GDP claims 97% of the flooder, oh, excuse me, Hphilosophical posts, that is, has overtaken the entire planet.

I can't agree with the inclusion of my post to flooding, because it says EXCLUSIVELY about the real facts, available to strict verification.

And you've gone too far with the odds. I went deeper into the data for the sake of interest, and immediately came across some interesting things...

 

We look up, suddenly notice the title of the thread and Oooo.... Definitely not flood, I was wrong.

And, so, about the stuff, I'm very interested, for I'm very interested in skews, however, without the f@@cking. I just think it's a question for another thread.

Start it, I'll be very grateful, just review correctly, very much please!

 
Lastrer:

We look up, suddenly notice the title of the thread and Oooo.... Definitely not flood, I was wrong.

And, so, about the stuff, I'm very interested, for I'm very interested in skews, really, without the f@@@@ing. I just think it's an issue for another thread.

The title of the topic implies a discussion of a certain Bablokos. That's who we're looking for...
 

No, the author has posted the state. We are not talking about it, and now we are talking about the coin, and the possibility of making money on it, those on SB, but not about the top-street of the author. They don't have any money for their profit, but they do have some sort of pair trading.

I think, maybe unjustifiably, everyone switched to this thread, probably created because of the removal of another, not unknown, thread.

Reason: