TurboGenius Gambler's Fallacy (absurd ?) Proof.

Here is what I see as fantastical. That's right up there with testicle. Every hot and even hottest number tends to have a 5 or 6 streak. Even the colder numbers have a 2, 3, or 4 streak. What I mean is that it would be nice to catch these micro trends of hot spots.

 

OK, how to tackle a hottest number's micro super hot spot. So I could grind away with a $5 bet on red or black, or I can place a $5 chip on a single number. The first bet type accomplishes nothing and tends to balance out to zero earned. But the second type bet on a hot number chaser could get you something. If I grind away most of the time with my $5 on red or black I might rack up about $10 in player card points. But if I catch a winner, just one winner for a long stretch of spins, then I more than likely will gain far more than that $10 comp added to my player card. So instead of having a burger and fries I can get my hands on a Porterhouse Steak with butter sautéed mushrooms.

 

Here you can see 37 lots of 1/37. This is what the Dr anyone mocks; the LOTT. This is Priyanka’s tester supplied in KTF topic bottom of page 80. What do you see? 14 repeats. Plus 1 for repeats. IS THERE ANY POINT IN THE 1/37 STREAM, WHERE YOU COULD SAY A REPEAT SHOULD HAPPEN? You are told to collect groups of 1/37. Thousands of 1/37 spin will show you nothing. But if you collect groups of let’s, say 185; 1/37; then you will see plenty to work with. Think of Winkel he gives reference points at spins 13-25-37. What does the checkpoint box show? Well, sorry it’s designed on blocks of 10 spins.

 

Repeats usually show as 1-3-5-7 and at 60 spins, 30/30. To see the non-hits average, reverse the repeat average. 9-7-5-3&30.

So, this checkpoint box shows how the non-hit are scoring. 9 non-hits have shown from the starting 37. Now like we’re told there’s plenty of groups of 185 spins been collected. From the 185 spin groups the next 30 spins, 11-40; shows 15 repeats are likely.

What would the distribution of 15 of the remaining non-hits be? An even distribution would be 5-5-5. But above we see the repeats average 3-5-7 or reverse for non-hits 7-5-3.

Is the group starting at 37; 37 non-hit numbers, the larger group? So, as this large group of non-hits start to hit, they gradually deplete. At what point is it getting to a 50/50 group and then the non-hit become the smaller group?

Now, if you believe the average for non-hits 9-7-5-3 and at 60 spins 30 of the starting 37 will have hit at least once. How many of the remaining 28 non-hits are likely to hit in spins 11-20; the larger group?


Now for the benefit of the Dr anyone, I’ve cherry picked these spins from R-sim.

The average for non-hits is 7 in spins 11-20. Why? Did they not start the larger group? And the plenty of collected groups of 185 lots of 1/37 shows this. Even the Dr anyone’s supplied 10’330 live spins shows this average 9-7-5-3.

With 16 of the starting 37 hitting at least once; is the larger group not now entering the 50/50 section of 21-30 where the 10 spins show it’s more likely to be 5 of the remaining and 5 repeats from the hit once.

This is Chief of the Riddler’s territory repeats If you’re good at riddles you’ll know if it’s better to bet the hit once or 2x’s or maybe there’s 3x’s to choose from. Or even bet for a non-hit. You’ll have been watching the stream or laugh; the TROT.


Now if you collect data, hopefully you’ll have an under standing of non-hits; the cold numbers.

These non-hits do have an average to hit. But there is the dreaded maximum to hit. For the benefit of the readers, if any. The 1st 19 non-hits have an average of 2 spins. Then up to 26th they average to hit in 3 spins. Then up to the 30th they have an average to hit in 4 spins.

21-30 reads 12+2; the 7 non-hits from 11-20 plus the 5 non-hits in 21-30 would equal 7+5=12. The RNG is playing fare.


Now 31-40 Priyanka made a mistake, try as I may I cannot get to show as just plus or a minus.

But what we know is; if you add 15; the expected, to the score of spins 1-10, which is 9. Then 9+15=24.

So, these 40 spins ended 23, -1 for non-hits. And that’s the score at 37 spins. You’ll be betting 14 of the remaining. So, 23 non-hits.

 

What kind of progression to use:

I do the following;
Let's say i play 6 numbers. I will track each number in it's own cycle.

let's say we use a cycle of 35 spins (for obvious reasons)

when we start betting on a number it gets 1 unit as a base bet.
when that number doesn't show up again in the following 34 spins, we do nothing. (why should we!) It stays at 1 unit for the next cycle.
When it doesn't show up for the entire next 35 spins, we add 1 unit to that number. So the next cycle it has a base bet of 2 units. It stays at 2 units until it doesn't show again for the next 35 spins. if it does show 1 time, you do nothing, if it shows up 2 times you return to your original basebet of 1 unit.

plain and simple.

cycle 1 (1 show - stay at 1)
cycle 2 (0 shows - raise with 1)
cycle 3 (1 show - stay at 2)
cycle 4 (2 shows - lower to 1)

playing this way, you are using your progression the optimal way and it can never go out of control.

 

Again, i'm just here to help, take it or leave it lol.

 

This is what you call a positive progression?

 

Playing "Cold" (once they show ofcourse) numbers has the same results as playing "Hot" numbers

yes! because you are using a progression in a possitive flow.
A: it never gets out of control (possitive)
B: it does't burn your bankroll (possitive)
C: you always (always) win when a cold number (as explained before) hits towards it's average point (possitive)

yes i call this a possitive progression.
But you still don't get it, no reason for me to waste my time to explain it further to you.
Hopefuly there are others who do pay attention and maybe learn something allong the way.

 

Yes, agreed. But it's easy to get an definitive answer -- no need to guess. The reason we need to test over more spins than you're suggesting is because in order to have some confidence that the system has an edge, it should do better than random. I hope you agree with that. A big part of statistics is to determine whether some drug, or manufacturing process, or whatever, is better than an alternative or better than chance would dictate. How? The math and theory can get complicated but it's a simple idea: the smaller the probability of something occurring by chance then more confident we can be that is NOT due to chance (ie, "luck" or variance). It isn't an exact science but a widely used convention is that if the result of the experiment or whatever is more than about 2.5 standard deviations from the mean then it suggests that the result is NOT due to variance.

You can easily find out how many spins are needed to be confident that the system has an edge by running a very simple system which bets randomly on a location. In fact you've probably done something very similar in RX already. Bet one unit on each of the 37 numbers constantly, keeping track of the number of spins. When every number shows a loss, you have the approximate number of spins needed to test a system (betting on one number). Repeat for other locations. Off the top of my head I don't know what the figure should be for a single number, but let's say it's 150,000 spins. It's better to run the simulation a few times and take the average number of spins at which every number shows a loss.

Now take your single number system which you're sure does better than random, and test it for 150,000 spins. If it shows a healthy profit then you can be reasonably sure that it's better than random because you've already shown that even the best performing random bet was a loser after 150,000 spins.

 

OPTIMAL USE OF A PROGRESSION IS A POSSITIVE PROGRESSION!

 

Up as you lose is called a NEGATIVE progression, but hey it must be great to live in lala land...

 

An up as you lose progression is called chasing your losses.

 

MJ,

I agree with you, but Turbo still has no proof of concept. Meaning, he hasn't put forth any logical statements as to why his system will work, other than the gambler's fallacy. The system testers often don't bet every spin, and tend to include the observed spins in their testing, so we should probably remind them that they should only include the spins where the bets are placed when testing.

A method needs to exceed at least three standard deviations for a very very well defined bet, or five standard deviations or more for a less defined bet. Some of them have such poorly defined bets that they really can't be tested because they keep changing the rules as they fail. The system junkies need to realize that testing systems for only 100 or 200 spins is as pointless as testing a system for one spin.

 

Some will understand that this is a possitive progression, other won't grasp. You belong to the second group.

 

Question: did you guys ever learn to read in school?
Again;
I use a progression to take avantage of the fact that all numbers i bet on (cold numbers) will trying to get back to their balance point, wich they always trying to do....and the only way to make this possile is that they need to perform above the 1/37, and when they do i always win in the end.
For all the kids out here who didn't payed attention;
When a number shows for the first time on spin 129 you can count on it to show more then 1 time in future cycles....
So the progression i use has a possitive effect not a negative effect.

 

This is your fallacy. At 37 you have 10 of the starting 37 to find. I said to Jono I’ve data showing 9#’s have missed for 22 spins hitting on spin 23.

At 60 spins I expect 30 of the starting 37 to hit. As spin 38 finds one of the remaining. It’s better to wait X spins. Yes, after all those repeats that you’d be flat betting, how big is the HOLE?

So, from collected data for non-hits I won.

Was average not right or just fallacy? The collected past spins did the job.



I did better in 40 spins

 

I know a guy who 'knows' a lot about business, in fact he graduated as a Doctor of Economics & further Masters specializing; guess what .. after that all those degrees he went straight into 'teaching' business at a certain & main economics university in the country.

Nevermind he drives a low-level car, is highly mortgaged having monthly payments on it & house, & most importantly lives on a monthly salary which is not exempt from any taxes.

Imagine, this guy is teaching generations upon generations of stucents how to do business, which at the successful completion of university degree most think in terms of getting g a job in economic field & complaining about employment atmosphere how hard is to get a job.

Have I mentioned that he never had a business in his life, never made a cent out of running a business; & his mortgaged salary hardly allows to even ponder on investments. But he most certainly likes to lost his inumerable academic paper that his reputation relies & thrives upon. I think they go for about 20-30 a pop for everyone who wants to read it ..



The other guy; he never finished high school, started a business turned it into success, smartly reinvested & drove three businesses in success in total; he also mortgaged himself on behalf of businesses to establish himself in real-estate that his clients are paying off & is now about 77% through to actual ownership on those; also on behalf of those rehypothecated he extended his real-estate portfolio further. He trained his most talented staff to do his tasks .. now he's pretty much just overseeing the company & well into his thirties has secured a sizeable passive income, his company structure is international & so structured that if anything happens .. worst at all the whole of his 'tiny' empire by a very unlikely even crushes most of it remains ensuringhis financial invulnerability.

Did I mention he's a school dropout who having not one degree to 'prove; his knowledge, ain't mentioned in any of the school books curricula & pretty much dies whatever the fuck he want, goes whereever he want & whene er he wants - at a flip of a finger. In fact, he prefets 2-3 months retreats in the wild .. African wild, Amazonian jungles, random ad-hoc travels without any preplans -- hard-core survival stuff & similar; meanwhile the fruit of his work continues to perpetuate; & if somethings really urgent he's got a satellite phone that can reach at the entrance to any ca e in the world whenever he decides to sleep the night over there.

If you saw him .. you would almost bet .. you just saw bum -- he really doesn't give a fuck; until the sound behind you beep-beeps him pressing the unlock & seeing him entering through the vertically opened doors of a vehicle .. nuff said.


Now tell me, who knows more about business, who would pass more theoretically manufactured business 'hoops' problems; & most importantly who would you listen to say you had whatever sizeable chunk of money & your (perhaps even your children) future(s) depended on it; much more so if you actually intended to start or already ran a business.


Come on man, come on.

 

I am not sure if the airball I play is a predetermined RNG as some people seem to suggest a lot of them are. Also I can bet for 5-10 seconds after ball release which kind of gives me a bit more confidence that they aren't going to cheat me. If it is RNG, then it plays great and if not, it's still just as good as a live croupier spun wheel IMO.

 

First of all I not lissen to any others ! All what I do - I created myself !

Second is that you compare practic and teoretical persons. But you do one very big mistake - in bussines very often wins simply courage, but it is the same like Martingail in roulette - you see and remember these who won , but not remember many who - lost !!!

But all that is not important - you want play in your way - welcome !!! Play and enjoy - where are problems ?
Say some try to help you , but you that not like - simply not lissen... be sure for him that is the same - you simply will do worse himself ...
But sure not for him...