Roulette Undeniable proof for the "repeaters"

Thank you for making a lame excuse for your parade of baloney. The title for this thing is Undeniable proof for the "repeaters"

So far it's deniable proof. I have a better idea. Make the bet selection rules clear enough to test it. NOPE, CANT HAVE THAT. It's other peoples fault for not trying to understand this baloney festival. There is proof of one thing though with regards to repeaters. This is another repeat of a Turbo system.

 

Spoiler: Don't click here if you are an asshole.

OK, you are an asshole.

I told you not to click here.

Nice trick Turbo. You aren't completely worthless.

 

No, the long term is not in your favor.

By the way, the probability of winning your bet is only 12/38 not 50/50, and the house payoff is short of what the probability of winning says is fair. There are just two tooo many numbers on the wheel.
So in the long run your expectation is to lose.

 

Umm, no.
Back to math class for you

 

Eugene squeezed those 12 numbers and made the best of it .


On my part no invite to consider an EC opportunity .



ND

 

You are really getting more pathetic by the minute! Where is the Proof? Where is the Data? Oh wait you probably need people again to test your silly systems that are based on absolutely nothing!

Playing a street once it appears for a max of 2 in each dozen, where is the mathematical data that this is better than betting at random for a street?

You really losing the last of your credibility with the remainders of your fans I think. Posting stuff like this really shows you're coo coo in the head.

 

what is the difference between horse manure and bull shit ?

 

He plays up to two streets per dozen. If he get a hit on any of the streets he bets on that dozen, he put a W, removes the two bets on that dozen and dont futher play that dozen. So that dozen got a W and now he focus on the remaining two dozens.

Lets say in the next dozen he bets two streets but the next spin hit a street on that dozen he didnt bet on, he removes the two bets on that dozen and put a L.

Same thing happened in the third dozen, so a L again, so WLL and the next "game" begins.

 

This is not related to math - here is related to arithmetic. count till 12 or till 18 or 19 not need math. So, or you wrote not clear, or wrote bad...

 

I made this incredibly clear - so that means
the replies are either trolling (of course) or just lack of understanding
of simple data
But that's ok, again.......
Playing a MAX of 2 streets per dozen (there are 4)
That means the win rate of 50% at BEST is expected long term.

Now clearly everyone can see (and test for themselves as well) that the win
rate is 62.96% (it has stayed at this level and will continue to do so).

If you want to look for some other data that shows it being 50/50 - it isn't there.

The instances of WWW (3 wins in a row) happened 20 times compared to 2 times for LLL
As I said, this data alone is proof but I decided to show more details.

Winning streaks of 8 vs losing streaks of 4 - nowhere are we getting 50/50 results
despite betting 50% of the locations in any dozen.
So fine - that's the final explanation, and no more feeding the trolls.

 

This is all great data and such, but will this grand us a profit everytime we play? how should we approach this, wich progression? you can post all you want, but none of us here will test it, because it's incomplete.
We wanna test it, but then we need the complete rules to do so, but that's not gonna happen, so why bother to post this thread anyway, just to show us more data? we don't want data. Merry chirstmas to all members by the way.

 

On roulette are no streets are simply numbers - why then simply not write how much numbers you bet - will be simple and clear.
What you name as streets are on the table and as we understand that street have 3 numbers, so you max bet 12/38...
If you claim that have a chance to win 50/50 then street must have 38/2=19 19/4=4.75.
So somehow your street must have 4.75 number
Funny...

 

Wait - so if someone says they play a dozen bet, it's confusing to you if they don't say "I play 12 numbers" ?

I though Sir No One said you were the maths expert. I'm confused now.
A street bet is playing 3 numbers.
So when I say I play a street bet that means I'm betting 3 numbers.
When I say I'm playing a max of 2 streets per dozen, that means I'm
playing a max of 6 numbers per 12 number section.

That means a "best" possible outcome of 50% as 6 is 50% of 12.......

If you're still with me -

If these results are too complex, then there's no other way to explain it more clearly for you.

And why ?????
If I play 2 streets per dozen (psssst, that's a max of 18 not 12). That's just simple math here.

Umm no, you messed up the math of it before you even started.

This is why some people can't be shown anything lol

 

Don't forget that Turbo has explicitly posted that any results that don't match his are deemed illegitimate by him, even though he refuses to give details on where/how exactly his method(s) can be tested.

I would love to know who is still falling for such blatant trolling from Turbo.......other than Turbo himself.

 

So true !

Playing a max of 18 numbers (2 streets per dozen) out of 38 possible outcomes -
it is expected to return results of 47.36% win rate and 52.64% loss rate.

47.36% win rate vs -

And you're going to tell me that with an advantage like that you can't win ??????
I'm starting to understand that this isn't a roulette forum at all discussing how to win -
it's just a troll playground where no one understands how to win and clearly don't want to.
Which is fine, it's not a waste of my time - the posts will be here for people who
actually understand math.

 

First of all you are not showing the clear rules. You said you have proof. Well show the clear rules and i will show you proof!

Second whit such a small sample size you could get skewed data like that! A bigger sample size will show differently. But is always small tests with turbo, cherry picking and showing screenshots of graphs going to the roof with a progression or big unit size, yes you always do this. Look I made 15000 profit. While it was only 15 units of a 1000 for example.

If you really have balls you show some real data!

Also why do you think there are so few people responding to this thread? I dont see any fans here? I believe most are finally see you true identity. And are fed up with your bogus claims and tales and so called hints!

 

Don't let this man fool you!

Either he is terrible at math and understanding of how numbers are counted, or he is making you all fall on his bad premises on purpose!

Here is the explanation of how he is fooling you in this particular thread - he is doing the same in all others, but I don't have time to explain it all now... Maybe one day I will find time to debunk all his terrible claims.

Here, he is playing MAX 2 streets per dozen - first he plays the first street that hits (3 numbers) and then if another street hiys in that dozen he plays 2 those streets (6 numbers).

So, he is playing 9 numbers - not 6 - it's not 6/12 chance to win but 9/12 or 3/4 chance or 75% chance! If you win - you win 6 units per dozen... But if the third street hit - you lose 9 units!

Shame on you, Turbo!

 

I can't edit my previous post...

So, all in all - Turbo is playing max 27 numbers out of 37 - not 18 as he claims

 

It's Christmas.

Turbo's not trying to scam anyone. He's merely sharing his opinion on his systems. His math sucks a bit, big deal.

Systems are risky, so don't play them with a weak stomach.

Merry Christmas everyone!

 

Sighs

The clear rules were posted, explained and even with video demonstration. It gets no simpler to explain.

Actually longer tests show better results... As you can see by the win/loss ratio - it's in the player's favor.
It's moving ever so slowly more and more away from 50/50 - but enough spins of a test are completed.
We could go on forever - showing the player's advantage (but who would care about that)

The trolls are here, emails and PMs are relevant. The kids crying about what they don't understand in the above posts is exactly as expected.... so where is the problem ?

LOL
Wow.
Now playing 6 numbers has been turned into "it's really 9 numbers" when no... it's 6 numbers total.
Yikes.
The ignorance here is amazing to behold.
Wait !!!! If I play 1-12 on spin #1 and then play 1-12 and 13-24 on the second spin I'm ACTUALLY
playing all 36 numbers ??????????? lol.
If the trolls are going to speak up - for God's sake make some logical sense.

Show me where I'm wrong - I can wait. You can't do it.... but I'll still wait......

If you guys wanted to make a logical argument you could -
by stating the truth -
The first time a street in a dozen appears, we bet on it - now the next time that
dozen appears we have a 1 in 4 chance of winning, but if not then we are now
betting on another street so the next time the dozen shows up we have a 2 in 4 chance
of winning (50/50). So you might want to say (like Bozo up there) that it's 1/4 + 1/2 but
that's not the case is it ? no.
The only argument you can make is that repeaters do work and change the math, just as
I've demonstrated... but we won't hold our breath for that to happen