TurboGenius When does it lose ?

maths...and the other side of the argument is lott....i could give a few more...

i like two ups coin toss example... you can use that as an example of lott...like ec,s and set it up to win...everything is lott..

maths and lott are your friends...choose one or the other

 

or combine both....

is LOTT part of math?...or is math showing LOTT.....or do they come hand in hand...

Do you actually need that wobbly wheel to win?

 

Wobbly wheels ? A thing of the past .

 

But again you focus on a specific outcome and no-one cares about that. You focus on the infinitesimally smallest probability to try and make a useless point whilst ignoring the distribution of outcomes which is is closer to certain.

In either case no-one is betting on those specific sequences.

The more likely outcome is to not see all 1's but a distribution with 13 numbers repeating, 13 hit once and 11 numbers not represented.

Even in the above infinitesimally small probability if someone was just betting on 1 they won in both sequences. So it became less than a 1 in 37 probability to win on and overall infinitesimally small probability of seeing those sequences.

Sorry, not sorry, to beat you over the head with observations and math.

 

6TH

This is Priyanka’s tester. The only part wrong is the cell 23+-1. Pri did say how to change, but I couldn’t change it. Too much code.

So, what it should say is 23; -1. It means if you add the expected 15 non-hits for spins 11-40 to the answer of spins 1-10, 9/10.

9+15=24 and the actual 40 spins had 23 of the starting 37.

The usual for 60 spins is 29.5 of the starting 37, round up 30 non-hits from the starting 37.

The best part of this tester is its Dr Sir anyone’s posted 100 spins.

The Dr’s posted 10’330 live spins that gives the average for repeats as

1-3-5-7; =16

So, with various sets of data; live spins, air-ball and RNG, giving 1-3-5-7, what does the checkpoints give?

1-10; 1 repeat.

11-20; 4 repeats

21-30; 6 repeats.

31-40; 6 repeats.

We have 17 repeats and 23 non-hits instead of 16 repeats and 24 non-hits. Making repeats +1 or non-hits 23; -1.

Now you can use 1-3-5-7

18 repeats you work it out.

 

This is a game by a player MakoRS nearly an hour ago.


Now how close is it to getting 15 non-hits in spins 11-40?
You know to add 15 to 10 from spins 1-10. So 10+15=25. Answer is 26 of the starting 37 hit. +1 for non-hits

Dr Sir the KFC still does it as well as it did on your 100 spins. GLOAT

 

Just when I think things may slow it becomes wilder than ever. Largely thanks to RRS flaws and poor assembly.

 

Dr Sir you definitely the top GLOAT; Greatest Loser Of All Time.

30 spins 10 repeats. 1-3-5=9 so, +1 for repeats.

 

Naughty,

Why did you go to all of the trouble to post a graph of 30 spins when you could have just posted one spin?

 

Dr GLOAT
Because you get lost after 1 spin so 60 spins no chance.

 

Dr Gloat another 10 spins can you count how many repeats in the 40 spins?


Use the average for repeats that those 10'330 spins of yours gave 1-3-5-7.

 

You couldn't have explored it very deeply if you gave up on it so quickly. I've been doing bet selection for 15 years and it's all I use. Correctly guessing the next outcome more often than not is the winning strategy.

 

I would think you could isolate numbers that are about to hit by using what you know about the EC's. I thought about it but it seems like too much work and I don't like betting the inside. Have you ever tried betting all three EC's cease at once? It's an interesting way to play, you have to get all three wrong to lose three units but if you get all three right you win 3. It seems like I was getting all three right way more often than I was getting all three wrong. I recall getting one right or two right seem to be about equal. I should look into that again.

 

I favor the 3 EC combo bets in competition with each other . Ech with its own MM.


Play at your own risk.

ND

 

I've explored the combo bets. In fact my practice software supports trying to use them. You get times when the red odds are hot so you just bet those nine numbers. But sometimes the red, odd, high numbers all get hot at once so you bet them individually like Spike suggests but you also bet big on the three or four numbers in a three way combo bet. It works when all two or three streak. I do that once in a while because the risk is low for a bigger payoff.

 

How you can say this with a straight face is beyond me.
The 10,7,6 listing is perfectly normal and expected from "random"
The 1,1,1,1,1 listing is impossible to happen on a wheel that produces "random" outcomes.
You demonstrate something that isn't "random" and then say it's no different than "random".
Surely you know random when you see it and when you don't see it. Bias wheels do not produce
random outcomes.
You said it's just as likely to see either list, but it isn't.
One can happen with a wheel producing random outcomes and the other can never happen
on a wheel producing random outcomes. Apples and Oranges don't help make your point.

 

Both of them represent ONE unique pattern.

Think of it like this with only two flips of a coin.

HH
TT
HT
TH

In the above example, there's only ONE way that it can be all heads, right?
And there's also only ONE way that it can be tails and then heads, right?

The same is true with the roulette wheel. Both samples posted within the earlier post had one and only one way in which they could happen out of a gazillion possible outcomes.

Take a look at any roulette board, and you're witnessing an extremely rare event that has happened. It's just that it's e x t r e m e l y unlikely that anyone was looking for that one specific sequence that wasn't all 1s. Understand now?


The same is also true for lottery numbers. Choosing 1,2,3,4,5,6 is just as likely to win as choosing the numbers 1,12,18,26,35,39.

 

There is nothing to see here. He is just saying that if you bet on a specific sequence of 38 outcomes you will almost certainly lose as the probability of any 38 events is tiny whilst also ignoring probability distributions as he doesn't understand that.

 

Twoup,

I'm always amused when you pretend to comprehend even basic probability. I love it when you imply that you can somehow use money management to consistently beat the game of roulette in the long term. It's side splitting laughter when you attempt to use stock trading comments out of context to explain why you feel that it works, while criticizing all of the real math experts here and on WOV.

If you'd like us to cough a kidney laughing, just start back in with why you're able to win with your binomial calculator and MM and I'll happily share it on WOV as well.

 

Where is the fault in my math. I agreed with your assessment that any specific 38 events is infinitesimally small and highlighted how irrelevant that is to betting.

You are not able to actually refute the math as any probability calculator including excel or many online calculators provide the same answers I have stated. It can all be independently verified.

I could give two fucks about WoV, never joined or posted on there and never will. There are many mathematically illerates who think they understand math but only parrot what they picked up on there, like you with your memes and copy and pasting.

Prove to me where the binomal distribution calculation is wrong to say that a coin flipped three times has a 87.5% probability of having at least 1 head. I've written out the possibilities and it's clearly correct.

Now prove to me where the binomal distribution calculation is wrong to say that a roulette wheel with 37 pockets spun 69 times has a probability of 55.96% for witnessing at least 2 hits on a number.

For the avoidance of doubt, "at least x" means x or more hits. So at least 2 means 2 or more, and at least 1 means 1 or more. Strange I have to spell this out but you lot like to turn that into EXACTLY x which is something else entirely.

If you can prove the calculation is fallacious and that excel and every probability calculator is wrong then I'll listen. Otherwise you're just noise.