Roulette The time traveler analogy

That's correct. There aren't enough spins to mean dirt.



Above, a one spin graph that proves Turbo's system doesn't work.

Your small spin sample graph of 40 spins is really no more significant than my one spin graph that proves it doesn't work.

 

I have different results.
Can you please elaborate on your bet selection?
Did you bet only on all R1 to become R2?
Or
Did you bet all numbers as they appeared and raised once they became Repeaters?
Or
Did you start by betting 36 numbers and get them thinned down as you raised when they became repeaters?

I already asked above but no one verified the selection process.

 

Turbo,
When you have the time to do so, can you please look at the questions i asked you and try to awnser them the best you can?
Thanks.

 

Maybe I was not clear enough. The whole chart are all the sessions I played. So everytime I was on a new high I restarted. Until spin 120 or so that was the last session and it went downhill from there, because like you said the set came smaller and smaller.

But I'll do a new test with a stop of a minumum of 16 numbers out. If it goes smaller I stop and restart. See what happens.

 

The selection process is exactly what you posted earlier. Except I started with 37 numbers ( makes no sense i know) but those were the instructions.

On a 1 hit make it 2 remove one 1 hit at random. If a 2 hits do nothing. On a 0 hit make it 2 remove a 1 hit. If no 1 hits are left , make it 3 remove a 2 hit etc etc

 

#1 appears on the first spin
That's great, now I have info: I know that #1 is not one of the no-hit numbers. While for example #36 could be the no-hit number.
Man, that's amazing, let's take advantage of this info, let's bet on #1.

Guess what: in the next 113 spins #1 didn't hit again so EFFECTIVELY HE WAS A NO-HITTER (absolut sleeper) FROM THE 2ND SPIN ON and #36 which was a sleeper till spin number 100, hit 4 times in the next 14 spins till spin 114.

Do things like these happen often. You bet they do.

 

What if we stop our session at first profit, then restart a new session? see how long this can hold.

 

This maybe great, but how on earth are we gonna play this in a bm setting? even online this will be a problem.

 

That's exactly what I did Eddy...

 

Yeah but you got to do as Turbo does; post only sessions where you win and forget those where you lost.

 

ok, well then this won't hold also, not even to mention it can't be played in a bm or online, just on paper. But if you played exactly like turbo said and it doesn't hold either, then i won't go on testing with it. thanks.

 

And you wouldn't be betting on it - it would already have been removed as a betting location once the other ACTUAL hot numbers took over and were being played.
Did you even read what I said ?

Then actually think and make it playable at the table - why not use locations that you can cover ?
Does it have to be straight ups ? Why not use other locations ?

I'm not sure why I post to be honest.
Between people not reading what I said and the lack of ability to take an idea and work it into something else, nased on the same foundations - there's no point in even posting.
From now on everyone should just take Sir NoOne's arrow picture and be happy with that - there's clearly no need to think about anything other than losing. Change the forum to "conversations on losing ideas".

 

Just ran it on streets (EASIER ?)


Strange thing happened....

I ended up betting on the hottest ones and NEVER betting on the coldest ones, and
couldn't help but win.

Oh wait, I must have ignored the 200 tries before this one that failed right ?
Not that any did - but hell, let's say that, it's easier than taking an idea and actually
working on it.

Yes, I'll go with that nonsense one !
This is chart 233 from my testing because the first 232 failed miserably.
If you want to believe that, then there you have it.
It took forever to get a winning chart - not on the first time I played it...no....
I can lie if it makes you feel better. I could make it lose, but only if I flip the image
over.
Let's do that from now on ! Post results upside down.

 

Sure enough, I ran off more spins and it went up up up (but then down down down - because I turned my monitor over to make people happy - can't have a winning way... I must remember that.)

 

Turbo lets be clear, we are using a progression. We did agree on that first a system needs to win flatbetting to see if it holds any truth even if it takes 1000's of spin to win flatbetting.

I did one quick test using the streets, stopped when there were only 4 numbers left, no reason to go on right? Took the loss and restarted, after 298 spins I was minus -320 units, I didnt bother to go on. a progression can go on for quit a while.

Also If you compare the above graph you'll notice you have hugggge drawdowns, if you compare this for instance with a martingale graph, you see the same similarities...

 

Turbo, you post for 2 reasons..

1. You enjoy watching the misfits squirm.

2. You really know your posts help some of us who keep working on your ideas. And I thank you for that.

Happy turkey day.

 

I'm sorry but he is not really helping, dont get me wrong I believe his intentions are right, but people are wasting more and time with ideas that are based on flawed ideas, I'll make a new post to explain the horse race anology further...

 

I read it, but it seems you have never played your own system otherwise you'd have noticed it yourself.
Every time a number qualifies as "hot", "repeater" or whatever, every time it qualifies to be bet on, NOTHING can stop it from becoming a sleeping dog FROM THEN ON.
Turbo this is so obvious, that I suspect that you don't even play your system, otherwise you'd have noticed it yourself. It's impossible to play that kind of system and pretend that you haven't noticed that hot numbers can become cold (just after you decide to bet on them). You have never acknowledged this fact. Not even a "Yeah.. you know... but it doesn't happen that often.." No nothing. You ignore the problem, like it's a non issue.

Even when you present a good scenario you don't have a solid explanation why this happens.
Say that according to your strategy, you decided to bet on 23 and the next spins are:
14
18
19
23
25
23

Be happy for a nice session, but explain to me why in the place of #23 it couldn't be #1 which was a sleeper. Why is it more possible that #23 hits versus any sleeping number? Would you sue randomness for not hitting a hot number and hitting a cold one?

 

That was really not needed - going down to SirAnyone's level of kindergarden humor, was low by your standards.
But everyone can have one or more "adolescent" moments I guess

The thing is that Im all up for spitting out ideas and leaving them for others to be inspired ( and Im gratefull since I've created a fairly succesfull system based on your raindrops idea - guess what it's on sleepers lol everything you advised against) but when you're going through the trouble of giving a SYSTEM, at least bother to explain it thoroughly.
Its not up for inspiration - you are giving an exact methodology so what you write can and will be taken litterally.

I've tested and retested your system exactly as you described (and as Ka2 played it) and it loses.
Badly.
Since one wrong hit on a number that you havent been betting on will cost you the cost of all other units you've already placed (-36) you have little to no hope to recover.

At least thats my take on it based on your description.
You havent given any more than that - if theres something more I'd be happy to test and even make something more out of it.

 

Yes, it can become a sleeper from that point on and it is automatically REMOVED from being played for that very reason thanks to the bet selection. The colder it gets - the bets are only on the hotter numbers.

Maybe read it again, I don't know.. I can't help you beyond that if you don't see how it's written and explained.