TurboGenius Gambler's Fallacy (absurd ?) Proof.

DutchClown, have u tried it?

 

Sorry for the typo. LOL

 

Actually, you are right it is a bit volatile, play with caution!

 

Turbo, your comments on my system, please?

 

Minimum Interval is one of the most underrated things I have posted.
I thought it would catch everyone's attention and it would take off, but there wasn't much
interest in it. (Even Bago somewhat liked it instead of bashing me.. I was shocked).
I think the incredibly difficult task of charting this kind of play is the big turn off, I have to agree.
It works but it's hard work.

@Platton - it's mentioned here and some other places
https://www.vlsroulette.com/index.php?topic=1037.0

 

When we look at roulette outcomes it has to do with minimum interval somehow. We're all exploiting this same math from different angles.

 

@DutchCrown
Nothing, there was no rush, it was to remember.
Well then I understand that how it can go up one by one, when we have more than 1 hit in a cycle we go down 1 unit. That is, if the progression is at 2, it would go down to 1, if it is at 3 it would go down to 2, if it is at 4 it would go down to 3 ...... etc.
At first I thought that the progression was always lowered to 1 unit because the maximum bet was 2. But now that I see that it can be 2, 3, 4 ..... I suppose that when we lowered the progression, it drops by 1 unit. Is it true?

Thanks so much again!!!
Regards!!

 

I didn't expect it. Thanks for sharing... Hard work is never a problem for me, the main thing is that at least something works in the end. I'll try to figure out what it is. Thanks again.

 

Ah, this minimum interval?!... Why is it that as soon as you go in one direction, you are immediately knocked down and given another??? Why do I shake so much every time from these здф?... Probably because you spend about a month on this, this hard work, you spend almost the last attempts to go to rx, because you have a free trial, and you can't afford to buy it, and when you ask something, and silence answers you, but before this silence they tell you that it's damn hard - but it works, and you spend a whole month, which in the end turns out you needed it so much, you spend that, and in the end it doesn't work, because to the secret ingredient that you were given you need another secret ingredient - well, fuck it.
I'd rather hang myself or explode from this minefield of riddles, before... No fuckin way... again...

 

We agree. Everyone seems to accept that the probability of a number hitting is 1/37, but have trouble understanding that this doesn't change when you're dealing with sequences and more complex calculations.

Yes, in HINDSIGHT we see that the distribution holds when you finally get the full set of results.

Yes, but where you go wrong is with this statement which contradicts the above:

Even if two flips have already occurred? This makes no sense. Let's take it one step at a time and start with the full set of possible sequences of 3 outcomes. We both agree that the chance of at least one head in 3 flips is 7/8. Here are the possible outcomes, as you've already shown:

HHH
HHT
HTH
HTT
THH
THT
TTH
TTT

Notice that of the 8 possible outcomes of 3 flips -- whatever the order you choose to put them in -- the probability of getting a head on the first flip is 1/2, and the same for tails. This is because in each column half the outcomes are H and half are T. That may seem obvious but it's important to remember.

Suppose the first flip turns up tails. It's true that the probability of at least 1 head is still 7/8 for the NEXT 3 flips, but now we can eliminate the first 4 rows because we have the result of flip 1. This narrow down the final sequence to one of four:

THH
THT
TTH
TTT

Look at the possibilities now (second column) : it's equally likely that a head or tail will show up on the next flip because 2 of the possible outcomes start with a head and 2 with a tail. The probability of seeing at least one head is now reduced to 3/4, right?

Now suppose the 2nd flip turns up tails again. Now that we have seen 2 tails, there are only 2 series of 3 possible:

TTH
TTT

From the 3rd column we see that the probability is again 50:50.
Each of these series started out 1/8 and are now each 1/2. So obviously, if 2 flips have already occurred, the probability is NOT 7/8. It's only 7/8 BEFORE we start betting, or in hindsight when we have the final result (as you correctly point out).

This logic holds for ANY location on the table and ANY length sequence, and explains clearly why selecting bets based on past numbers doesn't and can't give you an edge.

 

Agree in this statement

 

.

 

Joe, your problem is .. your mind is moving .. or better you allow it to be moved the game .. not seeing the whole any longer.

 

The other a guy walked to the .. about a mile away.

After 3/4 of a mile, I paused the stride .. now it was 50/50 chance in the direction .. to go either .. forward .. or back.
There's was a chewing gum stuck under my boot, & in the chewing gum a micro-camera.

Its vision attention span was about 120° which covered a few cm at most;
with the only thing its actually been able to perceive is getting bright =lifting a leg,
& movement forward or backward.

There was an eagle high above circling not giving a fuck cruising suspended in his intended orbit.
So he paid attention to the only thing moving .. the guy .. with his attention span being horizon to horizon, unfaltering.

He deduced that with 99.99999% certainty that the guy would get to end of the mile road straight stretch in so much time if no wind, but due to the guy has been unpredictably pausing taking out a cigarette & lighting it, later on took out the phone to reply to the msg, later on still double-took on a glimpse of waving neighbour, even took a step back with intention to turn around to go fetch the forgotten wallet then continued since he located one of his credit cards in his inner pocket anyway. ..

It deduced that in 99.99999% that he'd be at a mile mark in that much time + some extra of it.


Your mind is moving with the camera having long lost its firm horizon to horizon attention span,
& trying to bring others to agree with you that the only thing that's true is 50/50 chance of stepping forward & back .. & agree as well, that nothing else matters. You're absolutely correct, within your limited perspective, & within the model based on it.

The eagle, with his mind intact, 'knows' that the stride length already taken (has to) account(s) for something;
& thereof can take actions based on that, way before the guy actually made the first step .. & later too.

The eagle doesn't give the slightest fuck your correctness being incomplete in the whole picture of reality .. in fact he could & would take you anytime he desires using that to his advantage.

 

Wow, thereddiamanthe you are next best candidate for the "chief riddler" title.
Forget about roulette start writing books.

 

Yeah, I'm multi-talented. Who cares ..

 

This is a well written post that probably took a while to put together. It should be studied and read repeatedly, but unfortunately most won't.
Still, good job MJ. You're more patient than I am with some of the system junkies.

 

Consider these questions carefully without prior presumption,

If there were no extra zero pocket(s) can system bettors win?

If yes, how?

If no, why?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Random has limits. Unquote TurboGenius

Is it true?

—---------------------------------------------------------------
Since roulette spins are random, can AP players win?

-----------------------------------------------------------------

If you can answer these questions correctly, you have a proper base to work from.

If you can't answer these questions you have no proper base to work from.

If you can't find the edge then it means you can't answer these questions.

 

There are so much arguments about hotties, sleepers and normal. Some say it can be exploited, some say it can't be exploited.

Consider these questions carefully,

Can there be no hotties and sleepers?

Do pockets remain hotties and sleepers?

Is there a limit to "hotness" and "coldness"?

Is this limit predictable?

If yes how?

If no why?

Answer this questions correctly, you have a base to work from.
If you can't answer, you have no base to work from.
If you have not found the edge, you have not answered this series of questions correctly.

 

I will try to answer.

Yes we can win because random has limits like turbo said.

But i think the problem for most player is how to handle the time when the random reach their limit and how to absorb the loss when waiting the random reach the limit