TurboGenius Gamblers Fallacy The Final Verdict?

According to your own logic (everything is 1:37) it should! Do not worry about numbers staying behind, you don’t bet on them, maybe they go another 10 cycles of not showing up. There are no repeaters without some numbers missing in action, you have to focus on balance. Some numbers go out of whack for a little while, you have to feel the waters.

So once again forget those max gap kind of things, don’t waste your time with it.

 

The difference is in the way you look at it. Then you play it with your understanding and interpretation of the clues TG gave on this forum.
If let’s say #1 is behind and your random is #0, you start betting them and yada yada yada x amount spins go by. Then you crunch the numbers and it’s 1:36,69.
Well then sorry that’s not the way it works. That random or any number could be the next sleeper, so this is nonsense. But where there are sleepers there are also repeaters.

Maybe focus on Naughty but nice, then some TG in mix with it. Read some 6th-sense, luckyfella, moneyt101 on the other forum.

 

Ooooh , no I didn't. Damn. I thought it was a thumbs up. (Graps my head while shaking it ) lol

 

Check " the limits of random 2020" ... this displays it nicely how everything is drawn back to 1:37 . Given enough time it will. IT ALWAYS WILL. Now if you track numbers till a few of them are not just cold but ice cold....you can't lose unless you have no idea how to bet. Now if I'm on those cold numbers and you randomly pick one of the hottest numbers by accident that going straight back to 1:37 ... guess who's making the most money?

If you play TG's MI systems vs a randomly picked numbers system...I know who I'm betting on ...

 

I believe you D, you don’t have to convince me.
I just don’t wait for 2+ hours before those ice cold numbers show up.
Hot or cold, doesn’t matter.
When you step inside a casino you don’t know how cold or how hot the numbers are.
Only thing that matters is how they behave once I start playing, my playing field is just a tiny part of this big ocean of waves going up and down.
To win you don’t have to be on the hottest or the coldest, hottest is not the same as #1 horse in my play session.
I don’t win every time, sometimes I take a small loss. The law of large numbers is set against you.

 

Then you would agree there are rules right? if x happens then do y etc.

Or do you just go along with the "flow"

 

2000 Sessions

NON HITS played from 75 till spin 111

4,91 Non Hits numbers on average 4,911 Hits on average

RANDOM

6 Random numbers 6,166 Hits on average

 

Hi @KarlAtwo, My results are identical to yours.

 

Thanks for double checking!

To bad still no response from @TurboGenius

 

Whole point of this thread by the way was that according to @TurboGenius there should be change in the data, he said that himself no riddles no clues. A number that is behind should "catch up" better than a random number. So if thats the case there should be a difference in the data (according to turbo)

 

Perhaps re-read part 3 KA2.

 

What kind of difference are you looking for? Because there is a difference, I wrote some sentences applied basic math and the difference is there.
When you are coding what are you looking for? It is not a actual race, you don’t know when the catch up begins!
TG is likely not gonna respond to this question, answers already been given over the years.

 

It’s a horse race analogy!
According to the Oxford Languages this means:
- a comparison between one thing and another, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification.

 

why don,t you try and make your own set of rules up? and go with the flow....

lets look at your IF x happens.....

in your case its repeats.....X = REPEATS...

if a repeat happens THEN do Y...= MORE REPEATS ON SAME NUMBER

combine Y to the FLOW....

for experimental purposes lets PRESUME FLOW is set out in rrbb fashion..last 18 numbers out....repeats they go to the front of the list....to give a single result...so a true 18 number set out....this is not a cycle bet but continious.....

TRACK and bet any repeated number that shows on ayk tracker that is in this 18 unique number group...tracker set to say 74 spins....stop betting repeats that drop out of the 18....

these can take up to 15 to 37 and less spins....but gives you an experimental way to choose repeats

do this for 74 spins in this experiment....

how does this compare going for just the hot numbers alone? try that too...

stuff like this thought process helps you think what to drop and what to keep playing...some repeats can come in and out of play during this process..

what happens if you go to 111 spins etc...

all i,m saying is set some parameters up instead of blanket betting...

 

With all respect dont you think I've tested a lot of variations and combinations lol.

Point is yes you get very interesting results but you are never guaranteed to pick the right number(s) a lot of times you will win but when its takes longer and you need to drop number(s) the loss of these spins need to be added somewhere and if we add these lost spins to next win the average is 1:37

 

@Denzie is our data the same as yours?

 

He said yes before and sent you on further quest.
If plain betting around fallacy isn't something you think will work start with a different angle.
As Denzie and some others pointed out the 5x-8x zone seems to be one of the sweet spots, start with identifying a window of spins where majority of "matches" happen. Lets say you identify 5x to 7x 90% of times have 2 matches in 30 spins window. Wouldn't that be good enough to build a system around?

 

Of course I'm still not settled on one way, flat cant see anything working long term, with a balanced prog, more likely.

 

There is that I suppose if your going to climb through each stage betting all the repeats..
If within 74 spins you are only concentrating on two repeats and above and if it's taking a while for numbers to drop off that would mean repeats are hitting in that time frame ?
Would you then on next cycle to spin 111 then jump to betting 3 repeats and above using same methodology?
You need a framework to base your method on ..spin count and distance has to be involved...and a form of selection

 

One simple question:

What do you do with the spins when you got no hit? Do you keep them separated or do you add them to the next win?