Roulette 37 people go into a casino - and the house edge appeared.

Well, I'm glad you stated what side of the road you are on.
I was confused a little because you said you were open to possibilities and other ways to win,
or I misread that.. So you're clearly in the camp with "nothing works other than bias wheels, VB and
computers", which is fine.
I've proven that I can "predict" outcomes better than expected, and I've explained how.
I've also proven that "random bet selection" vs a good bet selection are not the same and shown
testing to prove that.
So that leaves - you reject what's shown and you are content to not change your beliefs.
Which is fine too. It's always good to hear the other side.
I've also shown how every single player (in this thread) can leave in profit - but even
that is rejected because "It's only 1 spin", etc.
So nothing is going to change your "opinion" (and that's what it is).
I am curious though, honestly - why certain posters are so dead set on stopping
(or trying to stop) any mention of what works. Don't worry, the silly system players
aren't a threat to "AP" - which I might add is less and less reliable anymore.. and in
the future won't even be a "thing" other than in memories. It's so easy to combat any
advantage that isn't based on math and random. But it's the road some people want to be on.
When I see a dead end - I tend to turn around and try roads I haven't been on before.

 

Pretty sure none of the readers who don't post on here for whatever reason don't really believe a word of what Turbo says. It's only the needy and greedy sycophants who buy into it!

I mean where do you start with the above post?

You have not proved no such thing, lol.

A 30 spin sample is really convincing, not!

No, some of us are trying to point out what doesn't work!

Clearly not true because as one door shuts, another one opens regarding AP. The wheel unfortunately will always have 37/38 pockets (even 39 now in some places) and so there will always be a shortfall for system players.

The irony here shouldn't escape anybody who still has all their marbles intact.

In fact all the above from Turbo is just double talk. You kind of have to agree with Dr Sir Anyone Anyone that this is just all some kind of elaborate joke otherwise it's a sad reflection of someone who has wasted 15/20 years of their life and the only way they can justify it is to convince themselves and others that they have beaten roulette.

 

Jerome: I recommend testing the particular hypothesis in this thread manually.

You could easily write up a quick script using downloaded spins and see where it takes you.

Not because I believe this is an infallible method, I haven’t done enough testing to draw any conclusions other than surprise at how closely small scale tests using different spins line up with Turbo’s example.

I would say the same to Caleb, just throw it in that 1993 DOS simulator you run and see what it spits out.

It’s one thing to say “the math books say you’re wrong...”, but put them aside for a day and disprove the theory yourself manually. It’s relatively easy to get results for, good or bad.

 

Mako,

Sorry, but the math says Turbo's full of shit. His 37 people go into the casino should be renamed to, "37 people go to the casino with a time machine." Turbo seriously sucks at math and logic. For starters, when does someone quit in his example? The answer requires the time machine of course.

Regarding the simulators that I use. I have several. Most were designed by a friend that's a software engineer and professional player as well. They're for professional use, not the hobby stuff like RX. You forget, you guys play in the pretend modes, I play professionally in the real world.

 

Mako,

When are we going to have our challenge? Come on over to Philly this week and we'll meet up with Turbo at Parx.

 

Guys,

You may think that we're the only math guys that think Turbo's full of shit, so you should really post his "37 people go into a casino" on the wizardofvegas forum, where other math guys, mathematicians and actuaries hang out. Then report back if you find anyone there that doesn't snicker and giggle.

Good luck, because you're going to need it!

 

Let's try another one, with a 00 wheel this time.

In the first cycle, 25 "players"/numbers won and were removed. (that was predictable lol)
This means in order for another to be removed, it has to appear twice in the next cycle...

In the 2nd cycle, 3 "players"/numbers won twice and were removed, others hit once
but stay of course. Only numbers appearing 3 times will come off in the next one.

In the 3rd cycle, 1 player/number won a total of 3 times and was removed.

In the 4th cycle, 2 players/numbers won a total of 4 times and were removed.
So far 31 out of the 38 numbers ALL made a profit.... but it's not possible I'm sure

In the 5th cycle, 1 player/number won a total of 5 times and was removed.
Now 32 out of 38 numbers ALL made a profit... still not possible

In the 6th cycle, 1 player/number won a total of 6 times and was removed.
Now 33 out of 38 numbers all made a profit....

7th cycle, none removed

8th cycle, none removed

9th cycle, 1 number removed for showing 9 times.

10th cycle, none

11th cycle, 1 number removed...
Now 35 numbers out of 38 have all made a profit...

12th cycle, none

13th cycle, 1 number removed for showing 13 times.
Now 36 numbers out of 38 have all made a profit...

What's left ? The #2 which needs 4 more wins and the #34 which needs 3.....

But why not end it here ?


It's nice how every single number is drawn towards it's expected win rate.
Oh wait - "it DRIFTS" back to it's expected win rate.

 

Let me clarify. My position on roulette systems (specifically bet selections not based on physics which are claimed to do better than random picks) is only in line with the "establishment", namely what logic, math, and mathematicians say (and the fact that casinos are still in business). I guess I'm just not a rebel in that regard, lol. As far as I'm concerned the case is closed, and until further evidence comes to light it's going to remain closed. That means I don't spend a second of my time searching for a winning bet selection, but it doesn't mean I will dismiss what others regard as good evidence. I think that's more "open" minded than some who wouldn't even bother to look at the proposed evidence; they would just dismiss it outright.

But you're not making it easy for me to stay open minded in that sense. A couple of times I've asked you for more details which you haven't provided. I need the data in order to run statistical tests which will tell how likely it is that your results are due to chance. The fact that you won't give me the details adds weight to the theory that you're just jerking people around and stringing them along. It's not as though this data could remotely help someone in reverse engineering your system (I asked for the number of numbers you're betting, but even if you're betting differing amounts of numbers, the list of bets doesn't have to be in the order you actually made them; I would use the list to get an average or weighted average). So the fact that you're being so "unhelpful" tends to make me think that you really don't believe your system works, and that this will be exposed if it ever gets out (rather that you're afraid casinos will change roulette).

Not really. I explained in the thread one reason why your test was flawed (incidentally, the average wasn't 37/100 out, it was 63/100), but also, there were only 20 data points, which obviously isn't enough to prove anything, and of course, the test wasn't done under "controlled" conditions, and nobody has replicated it (nor will they ever be able to, because your system will forever remain a secret).

So in summary, your evidence is just too weak. Give us something real and you might start getting some converts among the "misfits".

 

Mako, I'm happy to do that but I'm having a hard time finding what the hypothesis actually is; did Turbo recommend a system based on his "37 go into a casino" concept? If so, I can't see it.

 

Sometimes in life you have all the ingredients but not the recipe.
I'm not posting the details in some silly effort to "convert" anyone.
Either you look into it or you don't - which is perfect actually because
only people actually interested will profit from their own work.

"This" thread displays something amazing. I showed you clearly something
by example and could do it 100 more times but it won't matter.
Unless you have the ability in your head to think "What if... I did this..."
and then tested that - you'll never understand what the potential here is.
That's how it works.
You're clearly convinced that it isn't possible, and my job here isn't to
convert anyone - it's to help people who are trying to win.
There is a point to everything I post, perhaps in your mind you read word
for word and spend no effort on it and then move on - that's your loss.

 

So a bunch of people read this thread and they each come up with ways to play,
knowing this information...






and there's always going to be the people who think this.............
"I don't have to waste time testing anything or learning anything, because
I already know what's going to happen"

Wikipedia told me so.

 

Turbo, Jerome is right... Just think about one thing; If all those pockets weren't identified with a number, the mechanism of the game wouldn't change at all, but you would notice much more quickly that the only issue is there's 37 pockets and you're paid 35+your current winning bet, which isn't in the player advantage.

The day you can make this simple note, you directly understand that all the rest/ways is a waste of time.

 

BINGO BANGO

 

You've posted enough details for the recipe several times while shouting that you have it from every roof top. Originally it was to bet each number that hit above expectation up to four numbers. Then it changed to be bet each number that's two hits above expectation...up to an average of 2.97 numbers. Each time you post it, we quickly prove that it fails. Then you change the recipe again (while pretending not to do so), and then you again shout that you have a winning recipe, but that the real recipe is a "secret". If you're saying that you're not trying to convert anyone, then does that mean that you're just an attention whore?

 

Dont attack the messenger. Later you will have to swallow. Be civil

 

thank you for this it makes me think differently about the game

 

BRAVO TURBO !!!
Ya no puedes dejarlo más claro, creo que eres una excelente persona que comparte tanta información con todos, ¡espero que la vida te devuelva todo lo que haces de una manera excelente!
No lo sé, no lo entiendo, ya que incluso aquellas personas que niegan y hablan mal de ti pueden desaparecer de este y otros foros, porque lo que has mostrado es innegable, has dejado a todos los de AP y VB en ruinas. Estoy seguro de que todavía están captando toda la vergüenza que deben sentir por dentro.
Por mi parte y muchas de las personas que te siguen, aunque no comentamos mucho, estamos muy agradecidos y, si alguna vez vienes a Barcelona, me gustaría conocerte en persona y agradecerte en casa con una buena comida española. !
Saludos

 

BRAVO TURBO !!!
Ya no puedes dejarlo más claro, creo que eres una excelente persona que comparte tanta información con todos, ¡espero que la vida te devuelva todo lo que haces de una manera excelente!
No lo sé, no lo entiendo, ya que incluso aquellas personas que niegan y hablan mal de ti pueden desaparecer de este y otros foros, porque lo que has mostrado es innegable, has dejado a todos los de AP y VB en ruinas. Estoy seguro de que todavía están captando toda la vergüenza que deben sentir por dentro.
Por mi parte y muchas de las personas que te siguen, aunque no comentamos mucho, estamos muy agradecidos y, si alguna vez vienes a Barcelona, me gustaría conocerte en persona y agradecerte en casa con una buena comida española. !
Saludos