Roulette I have a fun roulette question

To bet 7 numbers you had to place a bet on 6.
To bet 6 numbers you had to place a bet on 5.
To bet 5 numbers you had to place a bet on 4.
To bet 4 numbers you had to place a bet on 3.
To bet 3 numbers you had to place a bet on 2.
To bet 2 numbers you had to place a bet on 1.
And finally to bet 1 number you had to place a bet on none.

 

yes that's only if you had to gamble, to have fun... As we can't talk about AP playing

 

I would bet on 8 numbers at the end because it is within 8 spins that a number has the max probability to repeat.

 

The subject " GLOBAL EFFECT" was published right here at Gambling Forums by GIZMOTROn 2 during the month of June 2017 . .


Five pages of postings .




ND

 

It was published way better at BetSelection.cc back in 2013. I first introduced it to Gambler's Glen back around 2006 or 2007. It's been the laughing stock of mathBoyz everywhere. I believe their witch doctor diagnoses "fallacy" as the ailment.

 

I think "fallacy" (as an explanation) is vastly over used. Its the GO TO word.

Ken

 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Jump to navigationJump to search
A fallacy is the use of invalid or otherwise faulty reasoning, or "wrong moves"[1] in the construction of an argument.[2][3] A fallacious argument may be deceptive by appearing to be better than it really is. Some fallacies are committed intentionally to manipulate or persuade by deception, while others are committed unintentionally due to carelessness or ignorance. The soundness of legal arguments depends on the context in which the arguments are made.[4]

Fallacies are commonly divided into "formal" and "informal". A formal fallacy can be expressed neatly in a standard system of logic, such as propositional logic,[2] while an informal fallacy originates in an error in reasoning other than an improper logical form.[5] Arguments containing informal fallacies may be formally valid, but still fallacious.[6]

A special case is a mathematical fallacy, an intentionally invalid mathematical proof, often with the error subtle and somehow concealed. Mathematical fallacies are typically crafted and exhibited for educational purposes, usually taking the form

 

Gizmo,

When you use the term "mathboyz," it implies that you're not one of them. In other words, you're basically bragging that you're ignorant.
Using your jargon, I just have to ask... are you one of the "readingboyz?" Or are you illiterate as well?



FYI...in the real world, you don't want to brag that you're a fool. People will take advantage of you.

 

Watching Trump LIVE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Good reporting from Singapore . Interesting to watch .



ND

 

You bet I'm not one of them. Good guess. They are also the mathNazi's too. Just a bunch of pseudo, neo-posers, that have just enough statistics and probability and have cut and pasted them into a presentation to impress the easy impressionistic among us. I don't claim to be math oriented when it comes to knowing that systems don't work. I use computer algorithms based on actual real testing to give me my education. I create original things on my computer in order investigate methods and tactics presented by others and including my own inventions. Do I think you are stupid for VB, DS, and biased wheels? I don't think that you should expose that to the world seeing how you are a one trick pony, like Barney Fife and his one bullet in his shirt pocket. You know, "fallacy." You are now on the clock too. Time to put up or shut up regarding the global effect. It's actually impossible to see the effect in Blackjack, Craps, and Baccarat. They only have one data stream to see it in.

 

Gizmo,

By your own admission you really suck at math and are poorly educated. This means that your testing and programming skills are probably questionable as well.

My suggestion is for you to get an education. In the real world it's not cool to be stupid.

 

I got one fuck head juice. I took Algebra 1 & 2, Geometry, Physics, all before the end of my junior year in High School so that I could go to the technical school offered by the school district during my senior year. I took a three hour per day off campus course in AC & DC circuitry. Now this is back in the day of slide rules. I did everything in long form arithmetic and provided the class with the only full floating point numbers. Do you know how hard it is to keep up with the slide rules regarding electrical based physics equations? I'm not the dumb shit you guessed I was. It's seams you are terrible at "probably" guessing too. So you are not only an ass hole but a degradation by your own description, a not cool.

 

No, I believe your original claim about being stupid. I've yet to read a post of yours that demonstrates that you have even a rudimentary comprehension of basic probability/statistics.

 

So dementia is your excuse. If you check the way back machine Mr. Peabody you will see that I did all the basic stuff back in 1995. You half ( not have) to be kidding too. I can enter any simple math equation into a single line of code and it will execute in a calculator App that built for just that purpose.

(1 / 37) = 0.027027

(1 / 37) * (1 / 37) = 0.00073

I can go on figuring out the odds. Why do the work of a functionary when I can have a simple mechanical brain do the job.

Now buzz of Xander, ha ha ha! You are shut down.

 

Everyone can easily find the odds, but the more important is to get what a negative edge involves... mean you cannot reverse a negative edge with a progression, with hit and run and so on.

Actually bankers should suggest people to place money with a negative expectation, i 'm sure it would work

 

OK, that covers the head in the sand populous movement. Now explain the positive expectation during an actual global effect. It would be helpful if you actually saw one in action to be a REAL participant in that discussion. I'd be a real fan if you can refute this without playing the victim card or trying to "RESIST" it with tired out rhetoric that is in fact a past and heroic main stream idea. Try.

 

The problem is that you created x system and you observe it, then you don't know why you'll get a positive or negative result and might think that it is due to the system.

Let's see what a no system play would give. Invite 37 people and give them a single unique number to play all spins on the same table. There is no system, there is no hit and run, there is no progression... still, around 13 people will be positive. How can you explain this? This is just variance and we cannot say that it is due to a system.... We would want random to be fair but it is not! and obviously when you'll win you'll think it is due to you or your system, not to the fact that randomness hasn't be fair to everyone as you should think.

 

Gizmo is math illiterate. He's not going to comprehend what you've written.

 

He should code it to see. Personally if i d see around 13 players win after 100K with no system, i'd seriously start to think if the variance is not fooling me with my system.

After 10k/50K/100K/250k etc etc there will be always around 13 positives peoples without progression/hit&run. But between those spins all players will crash, not because of the edge actually but because of swings that their bank won't bear