Clip from earlier message...
"The Player may choose to play exactly the same rules
as the Dealer is REQUIRED to play; or the Player may choose some of the
other
options. Since the Player has more choices or options in play than does the
Dealer, why does the Dealer have the statistical advantage? It seems to me
the
Player would have the advantage."
------------------------------------
Doesn't the law of large numbers figure in here somewhere too:
1. The probability of winning with the house strategy is known a priori and
it is optimal (as someone else pointed out).
2. An individual playing with this same strategy may win or lose more or
less in the short run.
3. With the volume of games the house plays, the empirical probability will
approach the a priori probability in the long run--to the house's advantage.
Simplistic and poorly articulated I am sure, but I think it captures the
essence of the mechanism at work here.
"The Player may choose to play exactly the same rules
as the Dealer is REQUIRED to play; or the Player may choose some of the
other
options. Since the Player has more choices or options in play than does the
Dealer, why does the Dealer have the statistical advantage? It seems to me
the
Player would have the advantage."
===========================================================================
This list is open to everyone. Occasionally, less thoughtful
people send inappropriate messages. Please DO NOT COMPLAIN TO
THE POSTMASTER about these messages because the postmaster has no
way of controlling them, and excessive complaints will result in
termination of the list.
For information about this list, including information about the
problem of inappropriate messages and information about how to
unsubscribe, please see the web page at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
===========================================================================
