TurboGenius When does it lose ?

The server determined to refuse all non-optimal types of questions .. question returned to the sender with included suggestion .. create questions that form the complete answers.

 

Twoup and Turbo won't answer that question because it will negate their arguments against the gambler's fallacy.

Logic... it's always in the way!

 

Question;
Does anyone have the max number of spins it took when all numbers returned to 1/37 ???

 

There is never a situation in the game that every number is at 1/37. Maybe you are asking what is the max number of spins that it takes to see each number at least once at 1/37, right?

 

Expecting a direct answer to this kind of question, if there is any, is foolish, isn't it?

 

i could build that for you its easy.

 

according to the math they should hover arround that 1:37 very closely

 

"Hovering around 1/37" means the sample size is significantly huge. In this situation, the smallest numbers make a huge difference. When a number is at 2.75% and the spin counter is at 10k, it means that this specific number must have hit around 270 times, but it's hit 275 times, which means it's 5 hits ahead of what it "must" be, 5 hits mean 5 cycles of 37 spins, it's 185 numbers ahead, or it will need 5 cycles of not hitting to go back to 2.70%. If you had started playing that number when it was exactly at 2.70%, your hit rate would be much higher than 2.70%, and probably you would be temporarily rich. Don't let the LoLN fool you. We need to be detail-oriented when it comes to statistics.

Peace out.

 

exactly!

 

So the number of pockets does NOT determine the probability of a win ..
Takes out 1. & 3. .. it must be two then!?

lol

 

As far as I know @TurboGenius he does this paramountly for the satisfaction combined with those who are willing to incorporate/apply; naysayers are just a by-effect so they should not be even regarded at the posts &or at making any decision.

 

You asked a good question.

Let me ask a question too.

Is regression to the mean 1/37 the only strategy to exploit?

Btw this was the question I spent a lot of time to investigate to get the understanding wtf systems betting is all about. That's why I ask you guys this same question.

 

unlike your description originating in describing the unsolved insecurities of yours =seeking recognition, seeking acceptance, seeking approval mostly being projected outward ..

a private forum is an atmosphere &or environment where the (unnecessarily disturbed is void) the work proceeds focused at maximum resources to result efficiency

your assumed, allegedly very important & significant role, is replaced with the bottom line, to be precise what's under itself

 

Yes, you can. The first spin = win is the proof of that.

 

.. ONLY if you stop betting at the first appearance of either of the options (whatever you staked for) & refuse to continue betting for the third of three spins, thus not av=ccounting for it.

 

I'm 100% certain the casino security experts are aware of such simple strategy.

Am I clear enough?

 

Again, I'm sure you won't be helping anyone to find the answer to his question if there is any, but for the sake of the conversation here, I share what I know.

Regression toward the mean is not a strategy itself. It's an event getting formed over a large number of random trials. There are infinite ways for this event to get formed, therefor exploiting it means exactly predicting random, or picking ways that are more probable. While all the ways are equally probable, it's mathematically impossible to pick the one (or ones) that are more probable to happen because obviously, none is more probable.

Although, me being active on a Roulette forum, looking for better ways to select my bets is paradoxical at the core. I don't care, it's fun and sometimes promising. I see people with no monetary intentions claiming to have a strategy to select bets in a way that they get better hits than mathematical probabilities. They might be seeking respect, but that doesn't make much sense since it's all nicknames here. However, human-being is very complex. All in all, I choose to believe them and be entertained at the same time . We all love this game at some levels, don't we?

You asked if regression toward the mean is the only concept to explore. I'd vote for no. At least I have explored many other routes. I'm going to name a few here:

- Bet selection: Includes regression toward the mean, all kinds of repeater-sleeper, and Turbo's concepts.

- Strategic approach: To forget about bet selection and bet according to a wagering plan, like I'm playing a strategic video game. To be honest, this has been the most successful approach so far, and I assume this is how the game is supposed to be played.

- Random vs. Random: It's self-explanatory. I guess everyone has tried this to see if the game can beat itself or not. The answer is or not.

- Non-random: We all have been there, haven't we? Priyanka, rrbb, VdW, Arithmetic Progression, Erdos-Szekeres theorem,... the list goes on.

- Pigeonhole Principle: Vaddi, Dyksexlic, and a lot of my own efforts.

- Crazy scary voodoo: Stuff like Tesla's 3-6-9 bullshit, vortex math, precognition.

- Cracking RNG: It's related to hacking. No luck, and I'm honestly happy about it. I don't like waiting for feds to show up at my door.

- Statistical Curve-fitting: No luck so far, but I like to investigate this a little bit more. I think I have underestimated this.

- Mathematical Probabilities / The extent of the possibilities: TwoUp has written a lot about this concept lately on this forum.

- Entropy: This had the most fun for me. Entropy Maximization has been the only way that I could find to exploit this concept. Roulette wheel (no matter RNG or B&M) is an isolated system. It needs maintenance to keep the entropy at the max. I bet that the entropy is at the max and the maintenance is done properly, it's just I have not been there to know it. It's complicated. Had no luck tho.

- and a gazillion other methods... I just can't remember at the moment.

I hope I have answered your question. @ Everyone: I'd be more than happy to share what I know if you have any questions about the above and if you find it useful.

Cheers.

 

No, i mean let's say for example 0 pops up at spin 118 it now has 1 hit in 118 meaning still 3 hits behind it's 1/37 average.
All numbers catch up to the mean at some point im time, my question is do we know when all numbers get back on track 1/37 ???
at spin 370 2 or 3 numbers will have hit 10 times while others are at hit 5,6,7,8 or 9 hits. They now need to hit above average in the upcoming cycles to also reach 1/37.
Did i just explained my question better?

 

Yes. But your question has many answers. When a few numbers have higher hit rates than 1/37, there must be a few that have less hit rates than 1/37.

Our brains tend to think of it in a linear way, like when some numbers go hot, they go back to normal, and they live happily ever after. It's not like that; Think of it as a table of numbers, sorted by hit rates, hot numbers are at the top. The changes don't happen in a linear way. The behavior of the numbers on this table is fully chaotic. Think of it as the movement of the gas particles in a room. You won't witness one behavior twice in your lifetime.

So let me wrap up this way: the numbers will catch up on hits (1/37) eventually AND individually. It doesn't happen all at once. You will never ever witness a balanced game in your life. I bet that.

So, your question must be either:

A) What is the max number of spins needed to see all the numbers at 1/37 at least once?

or

B) What is the max number of spins needed to see one specific number to catch up to the hit rate of 1/37?

 

A

And to be more specific, we remove a number once it gets back or at 1/37. Now how long before all numbers are done?