Search results

Based on the wording in the original game. "Choose N1=50 and show that number, flip a coin to decide if N2 is 51 or 49. It should be impossible for them have a chance other than 50% of guessing if N2>N1. Which will lead to positive expectation with the imbalanced payout." Beats the game...

Or simpler, choose N1=50 and show that number, flip a coin to decide if N2 is 51 or 49. It should be impossible for them have a chance other than 50% of guessing if N2>N1. Which will lead to positive expectation with the imbalanced payout.

My mistake. I didn't see that I "choose" two numbers. I assumed I randomly generated two numbers between 1-100 and choose a single one to show.

Well not a 100% of the time, just positive expectation, given a random game, it is completely within the realm of possibility that my described approach would lose. But regardless, what strategy would you use to make it profitable for you?

Mind explaining why my analysis was right or wrong?

Deterministic => One possible outcome based on a given state Probability => Multiple possible outcomes based on a given state Probability fundamentally does not exist within a deterministic universe.

I code software for a living and I have never heard the term 'Educated software'. Mind explaining?

Interesting question, Assuming your methodology is to guess greater from shown numbers less or equal to 50, less for shown numbers greater than 50. Which means, the only time I would win would be if both numbers are N1,N2 <= 50 or N1,N2 > 50, and I show the number closer to 50. So case1...

Then it does not teach anything about betting in a 50/50 game, merely betting in a game where the payouts are not fair for both parties. Much like, I flip a coin, if its heads, you give me 2$, if its tails, I give you 1$, has positive expectation.

To an educated theorist, the assumption of determinism is as much of a hail mary as the assumption of non-determinism. If fact in science, no theory can ever be proven, only disproven, and unfortunately, there is no way to disprove determinism or disprove non-determinism. But, recent research in...

E(X) = 0.75*(-X) + 0.25*(3*X) = 0. Not quite sure why you think it has positive expectation? Am I missing something? You cant count the return of the original bet as a gain in equity because it was already part of your equity. If you wanted to, you treat it like a fee to play, and return it in...

The only thing coin flipping can teach you about trading is that humans are easily fooled into thinking there are patterns in true randomness.

Sorry if this question has been asked before. But how do you deal with slippage between theoretical fills and actual fills?

I used to write co located news arb systems as well as market making systems based on stat arb principles. Those 'visuals' you posted at the start of the thread, a few of those looked pretty similar to the type of artifacts my MM system would make in volume and price as it would test the market...

You're are not correctly understanding the definition of front running. It is IMPOSSIBLE for two market participants who have no connection to each other except for data flowing through the order book to front run the other. All data which is acted upon is by definition of coming through the...

Yea, but the ones with the longer network cables would complain that the ones with the shorter network cables are front running them.

There will ALWAYS be someone who knows the order flow (post book) before someone else. ie east cost vs west cost traders. There is no way around this issue. And low latency to the exchange does not facilitate front running. Front running is when someone has privileged access to information...

I have always agreed with you, if someone is doing something illegal, like getting someone's trade information before it hits the order book and place an order before ahead of it (this is front running), that is properly illegal and should be stopped. As for HFTs which are just reacting faster...

I'd like to meet the person who programmed an HFT system to factor in English language journalism. I am no NLP expert, but I'd expect that to explode at some point. I hope you were being sarcastic.

By the same logic, a person manually trading from the east coast is front running a person manually trading on the west coast. That is not what front running is.