Simple Maths

oynutter

In Response to Re: Simple Maths:

5 divided by 5 = 1 4 divided by 4 = 1 3 divided by 3 = 1 2 divided by 2 = 1 1 divided by 1 = 1 so 1/2 divided by a 1/2 = 1 however it is one half and not 1 whole 1 1/2 divide into a half is a 1/4
Posted by POKERTREV

 1 what?--- tomato?
 

oynutter

or banana?

aussie09

In Response to Re: Simple Maths:

In Response to Re: Simple Maths : They are sainsburys tomotoes,so they are perfectly red, although they do also sell green ones, just to please everyone--- except Tikay, who would'nt eat green ones, even if there were none of them
Posted by oynutter

oynutter... a brilliant cross reference to yesterday's dilemma

unknown_username

In Response to Re: Simple Maths:

In Response to Re: Simple Maths :  You are making the presumption the no tomatoes are ripe if you think they are red! Could they not also be green or yellow?  As all colours are created by the light shone upon them their is only a perception of colour their is no actual true colour that exists!
Posted by Donut64

This is not quite so. Colour exists as pigment which is subtractive colour. When light shines on anything some of the light is absorbed and some is reflected. The reflected light (additive) is what we see, the colour of the reflected light from the pigment. If the three primary pigments (Magenta, Cyan and Yellow) are mixed in equal parts the resultant colour is Black (before someone points it out, yes Black is termed a neutral) but if we mix the three primary colours of light (Red, Blue and Green) we get the colour (again a neutral) White. Therefore the colours do exist, it's just that without light we cannot see them. The absence of light doesn't mean You don't exist.

penguin7

I struggled with maths at school, but my first job when leaving was running a betting shop, before the age of calculators.

I was delighted to find out that the way I worked out the number of multiple bets in any number of horses or dogs was actually by using Pascals Triangle. There was actually a use for one of these fancy theories. Am I right, Vince ?

aussie09

In Response to Re: Simple Maths:

I struggled with maths at school, but my first job when leaving was running a betting shop, before the age of calculators. I was delighted to find out that the way I worked out the number of multiple bets in any number of horses or dogs was actually by using Pascals Triangle. There was actually a use for one of these fancy theories. Am I right, Vince ?
Posted by penguin7

... and on the 8th day God created pascal... probably

oynutter

In Response to Re: Simple Maths:

In Response to Re: Simple Maths : This is not quite so. Colour exists as pigment which is subtractive colour. When light shines on anything some of the light is absorbed and some is reflected. The reflected light (additive) is what we see, the colour of the reflected light from the pigment. If the three primary pigments (Magenta, Cyan and Yellow) are mixed in equal parts the resultant colour is Black (before someone points it out, yes Black is termed a neutral) but if we mix the three primary colours of light (Red, Blue and Green) we get the colour (again a neutral) White. Therefore the colours do exist, it's just that without light we cannot see them. The absence of light doesn't mean You don't exist.
Posted by elsadog

Yeh!!-- you tell im elsadog, just because we have got no tomatoes, it don't mean they ain't red innit-- anyone can see that no tomatoes are still red !!--- and I'm taking no tomatoes down to the cellar right now, where I will take a photo of them without a flash-- so I will return with proof that no tomatoes are red, even in the dark--so there donut features!!!

oynutter

Just got back from the cellar--- It's a fact donut-- no tomatoes are red and invisible--- so there!!!!

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Simple Maths:

I struggled with maths at school, but my first job when leaving was running a betting shop, before the age of calculators. I was delighted to find out that the way I worked out the number of multiple bets in any number of horses or dogs was actually by using Pascals Triangle. There was actually a use for one of these fancy theories. Am I right, Vince ?
Posted by penguin7

Ooh, me too!

I was a "settler", & this was not only before computers, it was before the betting shop calculating tool called a "Genie".

Loved it, & to this day, I still use my mental arithmetic "tricks" in preference to any calculator or PC when calculating odds & returns.

We had "short cuts" for prices like 11/8 & 13/8 (e.g., evens + a quarter +  half + 1 for original stake etc) & it's a terrific way to keep mental agility. The change to decimal odds, whilst sad for traditionalists like me, just makes calculating betting odds & returns something a 3 year old should be able to do in their head.

Sadly, it ain't so. I was in a shop today, & the bill came to £10.06, so I proferred £20.06, expecting a tenner change. The girl returned the 6p to me, baffled by it's intent. I explained it, & she said, "oh, I see, sorry, but the cash register calculates the change for me, & I can't do it your way, how would I know how much change you need". 

And Blair promised us "Education, education, education".......

MereNovice

In Response to Re: Simple Maths:

I struggled with maths at school, but my first job when leaving was running a betting shop, before the age of calculators. I was delighted to find out that the way I worked out the number of multiple bets in any number of horses or dogs was actually by using Pascals Triangle. There was actually a use for one of these fancy theories. Am I right, Vince ?
Posted by penguin7

There are many interesting features of Pascal's Triangle.
I must admit that I wasn't aware of it being used by bookmakers, though - nice one.

It can be used to work out the number of "combinations" which is, perhaps, the same thing.

hawk7112

Back to simple maths

At the moment a 1 min roulette rebuy is going on with blinds at 400000 and 800000 with 4 players remaining

Total chips in Play 72000 and increasing

Who's Winning?

loonytoons

In Response to Re: Simple Maths:

Back to simple maths At the moment a 1 min roulette rebuy is going on with blinds at 400000 and 800000 with 4 players remaining Total chips in Play 72000 and increasing Who's Winning?
Posted by hawk7112

The chip leader? am i right?

MereNovice

In Response to Re: Simple Maths:

Back to simple maths At the moment a 1 min roulette rebuy is going on with blinds at 400000 and 800000 with 4 players remaining Total chips in Play 72000 and increasing Who's Winning?
Posted by hawk7112

I'm guessing that your point is that Sky Poker is winning - handsomely.   :-)))

I wonder how big the stacks would need to get before some catastrophic processing error occurred!

loonytoons

In Response to Re: Simple Maths:

In Response to Re: Simple Maths : Ooh, me too! I was a "settler", & this was not only before computers, it was before the betting shop calculating tool called a "Genie". Loved it, & to this day, I still use my mental arithmetic "tricks" in preference to any calculator or PC when calculating odds & returns. We had "short cuts" for prices like 11/8 & 13/8 (e.g., evens + a quarter +  half + 1 for original stake etc) & it's a terrific way to keep mental agility. The change to decimal odds, whilst sad for traditionalists like me, just makes calculating betting odds & returns something a 3 year old should be able to do in their head. Sadly, it ain't so. I was in a shop today, & the bill came to £10.06, so I proferred £20.06, expecting a tenner change. The girl returned the 6p to me, baffled by it's intent. I explained it, & she said, "oh, I see, sorry, but the cash register calculates the change for me, & I can't do it your way, how would I know how much change you need".  And Blair promised us "Education, education, education".......
Posted by Tikay10

No he didnt - he offered us edukashun, edukashun, edukashun, and instead of 'fail' he gave us 'deferred success', is this like a rebuy tourney lool?

hawk7112

In Response to Re: Simple Maths:

In Response to Re: Simple Maths : I'm guessing that your point is that Sky Poker is winning - handsomely.   :-))) I wonder how big the stacks would need to get before some catastrophic processing error occurred!
Posted by MereNovice

Sorry Vince it wasn't a dig at anyone

I just never seen blinds that high with that amount of chips in play and thought it was quite funny

MereNovice

Apologies if I gave you the impression that I thought that you were having a dig at someone/something. ;-)))

Yes, these tournaments are highly entertaining.
I've only watched one which was a week ago and the same thing was happening.
I assumed that it would be a very short-lived phenomenon; it appears that I was wrong!

Perhaps we could run a competition to see who can spot the one minute roulette tournament with the highest number of rebuys. The prize could be entry into a one minute roulette tournament.

hawk7112

lol

This one had 139 Rebuys with 19 entries

penguin7

In Response to Re: Simple Maths:

In Response to Re: Simple Maths : Ooh, me too! I was a "settler", & this was not only before computers, it was before the betting shop calculating tool called a "Genie". Loved it, & to this day, I still use my mental arithmetic "tricks" in preference to any calculator or PC when calculating odds & returns. We had "short cuts" for prices like 11/8 & 13/8 (e.g., evens + a quarter +  half + 1 for original stake etc) & it's a terrific way to keep mental agility. The change to decimal odds, whilst sad for traditionalists like me, just makes calculating betting odds & returns something a 3 year old should be able to do in their head. Sadly, it ain't so. I was in a shop today, & the bill came to £10.06, so I proferred £20.06, expecting a tenner change. The girl returned the 6p to me, baffled by it's intent. I explained it, & she said, "oh, I see, sorry, but the cash register calculates the change for me, & I can't do it your way, how would I know how much change you need".  And Blair promised us "Education, education, education".......
Posted by Tikay10

Brings back some memories Tikay. I was taught by a gent called Bernie in 1975. He was Mecca Bookmakers settler trainer and he just made maths make sense to me.

When the Genie came out I used to be proud of the fact that I could usually produce the correct return in my head quicker than someone using the machine.

It was a matter of professional pride that the red pen would not touch the paper until writing the payout figure, after tax, on the betting slip.

I cant say I use much of it now, in fact I am struggling to recall how the add a point method for settling patents actually worked ! But the mental agility with numbers is never lost.

DTWBANDIT

       1                   1
       2   divided by  2   =    1  

unknown_username

In Response to Re: Simple Maths:

Just got back from the cellar--- It's a fact donut-- no tomatoes are red and invisible--- so there!!!!
Posted by oynutter

 With such conclusive proof provided by your good self how could I possibly argue!

aussie09

have we all done with this thread now?  i think we've gone off topic a wee bit.

loonytoons

In Response to Re: Simple Maths:

       1                    1        2   divided by  2   =    1  
Posted by DTWBANDIT

Yeh, Yeh, what a cheat! Are you trying to tell us all that you've worked that one out all on your lonesome, and piggies may fly lol. All you have done is read other peoples answers and copied them! Next you'll be telling us that no bananas divided into two makes a whole banana, or that tomatoes in the dark are colourless?

oynutter

 +1--- no +1/2---make it a 1/4

ps I can write b o o b s on my calculator

JAEGERBOMB

Maths is really SIMPLE guys.

When dividing with fractions all you need to do is turn the second fraction upside down and multiply both top numbers and both bottom numbers, then divide top number by bottom number.

ie 1/2 divided by 1/4 is..........................

1             4                 4
_      x      _     =          _              =            2

2             1                 2




seeemples