Roulette Measuring Success

TurboGenius concept,

"Random has limits."

 

I actually didn't understand this part of your message. Maybe I'm missing something here, maybe you are referring to some things that I'm not aware of.

I read your post history again last night. Again, maybe you are referring to posts on other forums, or posted by different accounts, hmm?

 

I didn't ask for answers on a silver platter. I've put in the work needed. Apparently, it needs more. I'm okay with that.

About @TurboGenius , as I'm posting right now, I have a running test on a real casino based on the concepts he posted recently (Cold numbers getting hot, without being "Hot Numbers"). No luck so far. There is always something missing in my systems... ain't gonna give up tho!

 

Because he is nobody. Dont bother with his comment. Just do like there is no his comment in this forum.

We are just waste time to debate.

 

I did write the core math concept.

TRD refers to the "tangent line".

It's difficult to explain the pure math behind it.
Yet you have to learn and understand this math to understand roulette outcomes better.

This is YOUR knowledge barrier.

I put in effort to call out MJ's error about the rate of convergence and divergence.

There's purpose for that series of posts.

This has to do with the "tangent line" .

 

I already read your 12 unit.

So if i am not wrong.

Session bankroll : 1200 usd
Target win : 1200 usd
Stop loss : out of session bankroll.
What i dont understand about stop loss trigger if i am not wrong remember 25% session bankroll which is 3 unit.

What the function of this stop at minus 3 unit ?

Thanks

 

Thanks @Luckyfella

Still in progress to learn so maybe one day can like u.

All thanks for u, @TurboGenius @TwoUp @DutchCrown and others thats not give up to give positive comment to we who are really want to learn roulette.

Have a nice day and healthy for all of us

 

I do real time statistical count against this "tangent line" that when the live count diverge from the "tangent line" the probabilility to attain EV drop. So stop betting signal, better decision to take loss.

 

Not fully understand. Maybe just half.

But still thanks already want to explain.

Appreciate

 

Sorry, but that's absurd. The HE is present in every bet you make and isn't wiped clean when you start an new session, but is cumulative. It's this kind of thinking which makes gamblers think there is value in stop losses and win targets, or keeping sessions short. All of it is nonsense. There are so many contradictions and inconsistencies in your posts that I really don't know where to start.

 

Ok , say sometimes peoples different understand names... what you understand as betting system ?
So mostly what we say is that not possible to win , when have -EV ! That to win you must have +EV and how you got that +EV is not important. Can be that your grandmother had name - Vanga, or one of grandfaters had name Nostradamus and you know what will be after few minutes ...

 

I don't mind ..

been perceived as a black sheep in one way or another throughout all my life -- just got used to the fact being a champion either inspires envy, jealousy, misunderstanding amongst the herd incapable of comprehending or (re)producing success .. & pretty much everyone wants to have a go with him, for various reasons contingent on their evolvement, just coz they have nothing to lose & everything to gain ..

its hard to meet some(one) who has/have attained the same quality of being -- not feeling endangered by someone else's success .. without plunging directly into the existential competitive mode, although out of fun & keeping the knife sharp both might consent to it (still for the latter the impossible challenges & constant re-inventing of oneself does the job) .. that actually join forces in symbiotical manner for as long as both gain interest on it

except I ain't a sheep but a dragon having destroyed my human form long ago .. as much as esoteric that sounds



so screw them little pussies, fighting so hard for that little bit of intangible territory they've hardly managed to form through their & essentially holding onto as for dear life ..

 

Since MJ continue to insinuate this topic about short sessions, in my case 90spins.

Here's the clarification.

There's no difference in the result whether I play

10 sessions of 90 spins each on one wheel, or

10 sessions of 90 spins each on 10 different wheels, or

1 continuous session of 900 spins.

The result based on the same math is the same. Even for a continuous "x" number of spins.

Better still even if the 90 spin session is split into 3 smaller 30spins sessions the result remain the same.

I hope this explanation make useless his insinuation to be not relevant to my flatbet systems betting strategy.

 

Well, EXPERT systems bettors like me call your no-chance-to win claim as BS.

This is my last response to your low class banter. Why give you, a nobody, attention.

Hey, put me on ignore like your crew member, MJ.

 

Expectation moving forward is a negative value. Perhaps you can explain what bet amount there is that you can multiply times a negative number and produce a positive value?

Dr. Edward Thorp, and Mike Shackleford, both mathematicians also say that money management can't turn a negative expectation game into a positive one. Why are you so certain that history, the mathematicians, and the experts are all wrong?

 

To clarify why I chose 90 spin session,

Firstly based on the +EV that extrapolate the profit target at 90spins,

The practical reason that 90spin session is just nice to stop for other recreation activities.

Gambling 90spin session is fun and entertainment besides collecting the expected payout in 90spins or less.

 

So you himself can put all forum to ignore and will be calm to you ...not like such variant ?

 

Nope, random doesn't have limits. Why not? there are two reasons : a mathematical reason and a common sense reason.

1. If the pockets were removed after a spin, or any number of spins, then random would have limits (because there would be no way that a number could hit if its pocket was removed. Since pockets are NEVER removed, random doesn't have limits (common sense reason).
   
2. The Normal curve is Asymptotic to the x-axis (mathematical reason, which just validates common sense).

 

Exactly ..think about it in this way

the SU payout is 1/35 vs 1/37(8) to which IN THE LONG RUN all numbers converge too;


that means that from long-term perspective, in each cycle on those numbers selected & played you'd have to NOT bet for only two correctly identified spins, only two! for all of the numbers to win.


Alternatively, having coincidentally no edge whatsoever this 'magical' mm .. a very tiny slight progression has to make for those two spins - this progression does not have to be vertical =very important!


Since we begin betting on eg. numbers that are
a) late (below expectation) that on their first appearance only we've already covered plenty of those long-term two spins ..
b) these gained spins get distributed over the whole group of the numbers played
c) a group of late numbers, all of them add their own two-spins into the sum that gets distributed over the numbers
d) we know that (at least some of those) numbers pick up in the frequency of their appearances, meaning they are converted in either extra of those two spins &or overall cumulatively bet numbers profit
e) all that is required is for that profit to outdo the 2.7 or 5.4% playing tax disadvantage, everything over is extra bonus
f) that resets the variance &or long-term edge count by resetting the whole system

g) it that a % ain't overcome with one hit yet the slight progression takes a form of a better payout with playing fewer numbers or smaller positions grouping that numbers per spin, now requiring more hits to close
h) that means paying extra tax for that game to profit on each additional hit -- being the cause of death of many systems, but only if not played smartly ..
i) a few congested appearances of the same advantageous numbers thus far performing below the expectation & tending towards 1/37, with each its appearances resulting in the hit on a better payout makes out for & overcomes incurred by the house edge on all hits since the latest reset =very important!
see .. no need for any vertical progression .. just the CORRECT AMOUNT OF NUMBERS played = wins flat bet.
j) a few of those numbers grouped together even improve on the probability of now having congested hits over them combined, picking up their pace to 1/37

k) we know that variance can take any course of the action unfolding itself, thus at some point the debt including the accumulated house edge amount incurred for each & every hit since the latest reset that has not yet closed the game has to be ultimately overcome
j) there's no way that with time passing the numbers selected won't tend to 1/37 resulting in each of the number's congested appearances intervals, & even more numbers as grouped combined
l) the point is to endure that relaxed intervals incurring as little exposition as possible =debt recoverable keeping the game in control so that when that congested intervals come, playing proportionally to it the correct amount of numbers, balance themselves out =very important!
m) from the length of games in spins perspective it might take longer as those i=types of intervals never come in a balanced way although overall they balance themselves out
n) similar to the fact than an average for the repeat to occur overall on all numbers combined is 1/24, the same holds for unhits combined .. its average being 1/54
that's a strange phenomenon that DrTalos observed & came to while developing his first Bertrand edition

o) as the congested & relaxed intervals of number are balancing themselves out, further combined as a group of numbers raising its hit probability, the hits that did not reset the game accumulate in a cumulative edge combined .. to be overcome
p) the numbers can hit only so many times over so many spins, the same is true for the numbers grouped; figuratively speaking in one gear you can get only so many revs & in its accordance, the top speed produced at the wheels
q) in accordance with the 'correct numbers played' to balance out the house, you would have in time progress in risk playing & fewer numbers, or smaller felt positions; this would increase the combined grouped number's time in terms of spins to hit
r) if relaxed intervals were stretching further than congested, as likely as the other way around, at some point in the long-run they'll have to catch up, but from the actual practical session time/length they'll simply be at least catching up within the random's dynamic constraints
s) from the point of game length to reset & not overpaying the house tax unnecessarily by further progressing in risk of fewer numbers played, the point here is to make the most of those congested intervals in the smartest & elegant way
t) it would make sense to play fewer & fewer numbers played edge woth as least hits as possible not to incur further accumulation of tax that has to be ultimately overcome to profit, on the other hand you'd like for the hits to come quick but with lower payout you'd be inevitably prolonging the game length awaiting for that last sufficient hit for the reset as for the fairy further incurring the accumulation of the house tax to profit .. seems that common sense does not drive to a solution here .. & something counterintuitive has to happen

u) have you ever heard of multiple gears !? although the principle of the correct numbers played offsetting the cumulative house tax amount wins flat .. this in some cases of the manly longer relaxed intervals for quite a while would seemingly take a real long time to accomplish the reset & return to void (creation is always based on credit or debt)
v) for this type of continual betting system =brute force, to be performing overall within the acceptable parameters including the game length to profit, the inevitable congested intervals had to be taken advantage of smartly & the design built around that 1/54 average
x) this is where a slight vertical progression dimension comes in; for the purpose of buying time =speeding up the game (by not incurring the unnecessary addition to house tax cumulative); & nothing else
now, according to you, would be better for a vehicle to have a single gear, or its for its top efficiency best to have multiple ones .. converting the fuel/acceleration/top speed at the highest rate of effectiveness
y) numbers can hit only so many times & the revs can covert to only so much speed in spins .. plus there's the inflection point in cumulative tax amount with the condition to be inevitably resolved of being of all games
z) flat bet would take care of the grouped numbers played average with a threshold of 1/35 (or further .. more if only tracking at the beginning accounting for those two-spins per number + all the rest till the first numbers' appearances) to be 1/35) with continuous betting the slight vertical progression =gears would extend the to profit coverage further, best just above that unhit to appear avg of 1/54 .. thereof 1/60 .. with extreme elegance of the design proper cost-effectively over to 1/72.



THE INFLECTION POINT IS WHAT MATTERS !!



According to your comprehension;
would changing the gear st low revs be fuel or cost-effective
would continuous betting's maintaining the same gear at top revs be cost-effective
at what point of better range of revs is best to be changing the gears
?


There you have the alphabet & its leverage point.
Learn to make words, sentences .. paragraphs when necessary;
with each new game being a page, & the book burnt at the session's end.

Now design the lever proper, level it proper & win consistently.

.. smooth