It is Gambling, but you seriosly increase your chances of winning to above 50% if you do some basic estimating. In a normal lottery the chances of winning are almost 0.

Is that gambling? Did you read the examples? What would you describe as not gambling?

Quote:

Quote from estrader:

It is Gambling, but you seriosly increase your chances of winning to above 50% if you do some basic estimating. In a normal lottery the chances of winning are almost 0.

If you bought all the tickets would this be gambling?

Visualize this....What if you bought half of them to win and half of them to lose, with a reversal option for later and a bonus off all the winnings in between?....what say you?

gawd....don't you folks get it? Do I need to learn how to communicate all over again....What am i doing wrong...how can I explain this better.

You do not need to decide anything, causing you to lose...

Get out of the box...open your minds.....

I know why the markets work now.....Some people will never get it...

In a normal lottery the chances of winning are almost 0

1. If the market is fair, then it must be random. Otherwise, the market is not fair. It is the very randomness of the market that demonstrates its fairness.

Instruments are a part of the market, therefore, if they are fairly traded, they must also be random.

2. It is well established, and mathematical proof of this, is available in any standard probability and statistics textbook, that it is impossible to predict, with any certainty, the outcome of a future, random event. One can analyze the probability of a series of random trials, only if all of the possible outcomes are known in advance. In a game of dice there are 36 possible outcomes, thus the probabilities are known. In the market, there are an infinite number of outcomes, thus the probabilities cannot be known.

3. If the market is random, and no future random event can be predicted with certainty, then instruments which make up the market of random events do not trend, nor range, because if they did, then the market would not be fair/random.

This leads to the following, rather interesting hypothesis. If anyone discovers a means of predicting a future trend or range in the market or its instruments, then they have simultaneously proved that the market is not fair. Rather, it is rigged.

If the market is rigged, then instruments may indeed trend or range. Some people have postulated that the market is indeed rigged, short term. The trick, is to discover, if it is rigged, then how is it rigged.

Have you discovered that the market is rigged, short term? If so, then tell us how.

This is the wrong thread for this...I think Proflogic had something going...(who I respect greatly).

You seem to be missing the point here. I am not qualified to discuss this as Proflogic can, but I know this:

Barrons ad....The market goes up you make money....it goes down you make money....That fat guy in the raft could be you or me, but the water he is floating in is where the money is made....

Michael B.

Quote:

Quote from kjkent1:

OK.

1. If the market is fair, then it must be random. Otherwise, the market is not fair. It is the very randomness of the market that demonstrates its fairness.

Instruments are a part of the market, therefore, if they are fairly traded, they must also be random.

2. It is well established, and mathematical proof of this, is available in any standard probability and statistics textbook, that it is impossible to predict, with any certainty, the outcome of a future, random event. One can analyze the probability of a series of random trials, only if all of the possible outcomes are known in advance. In a game of dice there are 36 possible outcomes, thus the probabilities are known. In the market, there are an infinite number of outcomes, thus the probabilities cannot be known.

3. If the market is random, and no future random event can be predicted with certainty, then instruments which make up the market of random events do not trend, nor range, because if they did, then the market would not be fair/random.

This leads to the following, rather interesting hypothesis. If anyone discovers a means of predicting a future trend or range in the market or its instruments, then they have simultaneously proved that the market is not fair. Rather, it is rigged.

If the market is rigged, then instruments may indeed trend or range. Some people have postulated that the market is indeed rigged, short term. The trick, is to discover, if it is rigged, then how is it rigged.

Have you discovered that the market is rigged, short term? If so, then tell us how.