TurboGenius Gambler's Fallacy (absurd ?) Proof.

Not necessarily, if I come up to the table and start playing number 2 if it's performing well, it may be just warming up for someone else who sat through 100+ spins. Things are not so black and white in the world of roulette for some of us and maybe that's why there is such a huge difference of opinion as to what's feasible or not. If you can't see it or comprehend it, then you can't play it just the same as I don't go profiling wheels looking for bias or pay that much attention to dealers signature and so I wouldn't know if either were occurring on the wheel I was playing.

If a hot number is really hot and continues to be hot = happy days. (hopefully everyone is on it)
If a number is cold and then starts warming up, chances are as above both players could be on it.
If a number that was hot goes cold, the player who just arrived shouldn't touch it and the player who was sitting there has hopefully already made something from it.

Sure, that's a simplistic view of things but it's an accurate description.

 

Why do you need a possitive progression. It should win flat bed no? Thats with all the ideas here, it needs a progression.

Do this:

Track no spins

start with playing 5 - 9 numbers

Use a possitive progression on a number until that number shows profit, then remove that number and continue with the rest.
Do this until you have a new high, then reset everything, no need to carry on, just start over.

Will it show a difference??? I'm doing you a favor here...

 

Hello Platton, lately, I am playing a lot of airball in the B+M because of all the covid restrictions and limitations at the tables. Some people say a lot of these are just glorified RNG machines. One thing about the one I am playing for the last 3 months is that it sure does throw up a lot of short bursts of warm/hot numbers or maybe after just looking at Ayk's tracker and letting turbo's thoughts resonate a bit has made me more aware of it and so as I said above, if you can't see it / comprehend it, you can't play it or find a way to incorporate into your strategy. If it is RNG, I certainly don't do any worse than at a live table with croupier.

 

I don't stop after some profit...I carry on till enough profit...min 33% of my br.

The system above together with a hotties system(part 3,4 thread) is a winner...as in a huge winner with huge profits....

 

Ka2 fell desperately in love with SE .. loving it despite its refusal to reciprocate.

 

I mentioned this before but of course Sir Anyone said that I was wrong. I'm not wrong.
If he's at a bias wheel that he knows is bias and I'm at the same wheel playing my silly "hot numbers" -
then we will be playing the same numbers. He doesn't agree.
He'll be on the section of the wheel that is hot because he knows it will keep appearing at a rate much
higher than expected. I'm playing a section of the wheel that is hot because it is appearing at a rate
higher than expected. To say this isn't the case is nonsense.
So AP/bias players and hot number system players will both win because we are both betting on the
same numbers. He says no. I can't argue with someone who doesn't see common sense and logic.
The difference is, he needs a wheel to have a malfunction and I don't. My results won't be
as reliable (numbers stop being hot and go cold) as his where hot numbers remain hot until
such time the mechanical issues are resolved by the casino.

 

we don't need a progression, it wins flat. But using a progression makes sure that you reach your target sooner and doesn't drag on for hours on end. But no, you don't have to.
Track no spins? are you kidding? You don't play sleepers! you still don't get it do you?

 

I've never wondered why. I can't play much more than 300 spins at a time and really don't like to do that anymore. So what that 10,000 spins averages out to a useless value that you can't place a bet on. I choose to win my sessions. It takes losing streaks to balance out the win streaks that I play and target to win at higher prices. I intentionally play the obvious downward phases at the cheapest price possible. It's the same MM strategy as card counters in Blackjack.

 

Your wasting your skills on him. Cheers

 

It's no different than the naysayers who don't really know how many spins it takes to prove/disprove something.
One says "not enough spins - do 10,000 spins", one says "1 million spins is proof", one says "2 sets of 2 million
spins is proof". The anti-system people just pull up a random amounts of spins and that's nonsense.
You'd have to agree I hope.
Every "system" has a limited amount of outcomes. If you cover them all in testing - you can do it in a small
sample of spins. Like your fallacy link shows but people don't want to understand that.

So I put up a dumb little system. When you see two reds in a row, bet black.

I post a chart, you say it's not enough spins. It should be 20,000 spins to prove this works or doesn't.

No. There are only 3 outcomes that can happen !
RED RED RED win
RED RED Black lose
RED RED Zero lose
Why on earth would someone say "you need 20,000 spins to prove this !" ? It clearly shows the
people pushing the "math" as a tool against systems don't even know the math.

So another system might be more complex and take a few thousand spins, etc.
It still doesn't require 2 million spins to prove that it works or fails. That's what some people
say is needed though. Is there a fallacy for not understanding that you don't need a massive
sample size to test something with very limited outcomes ? I bet there is.

 

I tried to tell him the same thing back in the days of Gambler's Glen. He gave me the same wall of disagreement. His game is to shame anyone that does not support his quest to find "wobbly wheels" as someone here states it. LOL.

 

Think about it.
Let's say he "randomly" chooses the numbers that don't appear for the 2 cycles of 37 spins.
74 losses in a row X how many bets he made per spin. He could clearly have randomly picked
those exact numbers, correct ? In "his" case though, he begins down the road and never lost
that massive amount that he would have if he had played from spin 1.
The charts will look the same, yet he will have won and your suggestion lost.
I posted the two charts in this thread - did you even look at the differences ?

 

Just some time before you talked , that you play cold numbers, so you must decide one time, what you play ...
And if are biased numbers, then they are biased not because they are hot, but hot - because they are biased !!!

And finally biased numbers is only very small part of AP...In every spin some numbers have greater possibility to hit and such numbers are different in every spin...You can simply by looking to which numbers more often fall select also biased numbers, but that is random - can be that hot numbers are hot simply because variance...
Selecting biased numbers is not always that they falled more in past !!! And in such case good bias numbers selector can choose for play numbers which in near past was not played at all !!!
And one more - to play numbers which falled much in past, or which not falled is not big science and for sure that is not enough for win...

 

I watched "12 angry men" (1957) again yesterday and it reminded me of this place so much.
Completely off topic (or is it) but it's ok, it's my own section. Cheers.

 

Actually this thread and a few answered from TG has me thinking of a new way to look at single hottest and the other very hottest numbers.

I know that a playing window is around 300 spins. I also know that these hottest numbers have a 300 to 450 spin window. But I have never considered that you can get a view of them after they are 30%, 60% or even 90% of the way through their active hottest passage. You don't know how long they have been running hot when you walked in the door. So coming off of them when they go cold is so important. Ken, has a slick way of coming off hot numbers.

You are right that I don't need all the trudging up hill for ten hours at a session. But I did want to discover how to use a single hot number as my stand off bet. It looks goofy and almost nobody ever uses it. I typically use red or black and just try to see the dominate side. I play a cheapest table bet on one side or the other. I just look at my chart and play these bets as my bottom bet. Most tables make you play a bet in order to keep your seat. This bet works for that purpose while I'm waiting for a trend or pattern to get hot so that I can strike.

 

No he will not. He has to run a gazillion spins as he’s locked into a anal mind meld.

Obviously he can’t comprehend your step by step procedure that you posted in the MOST simplistic format.
How hard is it to comprehend
A) wait 74 spins
B) note which numbers have not hit in 74 spins
C) using ONLY those 5-10 numbers that haven’t hit bet on each for the next 37 spins
D) eliminate any numbers that you hit within that 37 spin cycle and record a profit for those numbers that hit.
E) the remaining numbers of the initial 5-10 numbers that HAVE NOT been hit continue to bet at 1 UNIT for the spin cycle 75 through to spin 111.
F) if the numbers that have hit during the spin cycle 75-111 have given YOU enough profit that YOU the individual is currently happy with then END the session. ie the new bankroll high.
G) the original poster claims to not bet on the original 5-10 numbers beyond 200 max spins.

The reason is pretty obvious.
Pretty simple method, will it fail on occasion? Yes

But you can be confident of a healthy lifestyle with the proper checks and balances in place, read mm , realistic expectations , correct bankroll AND NOT having to bet for a GAZILLION SPINS, go somewhere and get a brain. Cheers
Thanks for the post dutchcrown but your wasting your time from here on in with this lot of fools. Cheers

 

But that is very easy to check - you know better math, or it know better Joe . I even can be independent refery and find, create tasks - solving or not solving which all will show ...

 

lol, you answered in quotes. And at first I didn't understand, I thought where I wrote this, lol.
About the illegality, and where you're from, yes I understand. Lived in your country for a month home stage. Your country is very close to me in spirit, and I just like it. Okay, that's just by the way.
But you say that the RNG can cheat, like many. I've heard that a million times. But I asked a question in relation to what we are discussing now - that the number will sooner or later return to its balance. And the RNG cannot ignore the law 2/3. So how can he cheat? Even if he is there, the numbers will sooner or later return to their average appearance? And I asked a question against the background of the fact that I quoted your post where you wrote about stfu.

Hello again Eugene! The last sentence, how did I not translate it, but it turns out that you win on the rng as well as with a live dealer? Is that so, or did I make a mistake?

I will appeal to Vaddy, because a lot of things pop up in my head with him. Even Turbo started writing about balance in one of the last messages, and I'm like - damn Vaddy. These are all his words. Turbo has never written about balance before, lol.
But again, in order not to get away from the question that I asked and does not get out of my head, based on the facts that I have indicated, and what we are investigating, and what I quoted Lucky, I thought that many were hiding this point. Maybe I'm wrong. But again, I am based on the testing experience when I tested different things, but this one, especially lately, I kept in mind when testing and observed. And I really don't understand that if the number sooner or later returns to its average, and we are talking about long distances, then it can be done easily on the RNG. After all, he can't avoid the law. But you win and show, it's at small distances. Since the RNG may not avoid the law, but at the same time deceive at small distances... Vaddy also wrote about the RNG constantly that you should not trust him. At the same time, he said that the roulette air ball is fine. And no matter how much I read about the fact that it's not worth playing on the RNG, and Turbo even explained why. everything is logical there, but based on what we are saying, no. I explained why. But the only thing Vaddy said, in relation to the question I'm asking, and started asking it just this week, is why? Only Vaddy may have had a hint of this, which I didn't understand all these years until now. As I said, this is against the background of what Lucky said, this is what Eugene said. Vaddy said about the rng that in most cases the rng is not programmed for high repetitions in a row as the number #15(for example) falls out twice in a row or 3 times in a row one after the other, while on real roulette such things will happen often. And now I realize that it's not even that literal... well, and his magic number...
Sorry for the tedium. It's hard for me sometimes, I'm not like everyone else.

 

I think poster craps said it best and I agree with him . You are only playing in your own destiny, your own here and now.

With regards to player a or player b at the table and irrespective of when or how long they have been recording past spins it really has nothing to do with you and your approach to the game. Unless of course you include their records of the past x amount of spins etc.

Personally imho start with your own new record data , yes you may or may not bet on occasions the same as player a or player b but your particular target strategy will most likely be different to theirs etc.
good luck gizmo I think you have added another string to your bow. Cheers

 

Yes you are correct in your 2 graphs!

If this was the case for all future sessions, bingo we would have a winning strategy.

But unfortunately it doesnt work for ALL SESSIONS combined and that is the wall we are all hitting here now is it not.

Example.

1. A group of numbers are 20 hits behind (GRAPH 1)

We started playing that group according to your rules after they are 2 behind.

2. The group is now 15 hits behind instead of 20 (GRAPH 2) according to your logic we have had fewer losses. Absolutely right! Are we still in profit? No!!!

3. We continue with that group for how long???? Until they finally "catch up"?????

4. All numbers that are behind played until they are at 1:37 (or close above) will ALWAYS be 1:37 AFTER 10000 of spins. Yes you didnt play the 2 cycles before them, yes the drawdown is less than you would have played them from the start. You are correct. But still it would not give you a profit, so whats the idea behind it all?