TurboGenius When does it lose ?

Interesting post. The entropy of isolated systems and Shannon entropy is a very very fun way to look at Roulette outcomes. I hope someday it becomes more than just fun for me. lol.

 

Guys, the key to make money is your bet must hit higher than payout.

You just need one bet whose probability is higher than payout. Just one bet.
Repeat that same bet over and over again.
Your bet wins in the long run everytime.

Do you think that higher probability bet sits on sleeper after it hits first time? Ok for the next 37spins. If not, next next 37spins...and so on.

Why don't someone explain by way of math calculations why after the first hit the sleeper shall hit at higher rate than payout?

This is hard explanation isn't it?

------------------------------------------------------------
Why don't we see the betting problem this way,

Bet when the probability is naturally higher than payout?

When the numbers pool increase the probability to match rises. When there's no match up to the latest point the probability rises. No match the probability rises again.

All we have to do is some testing to find the optimal point when to bet what numbers that gives the best probability to win. Repeat this same optimal bet over and over again. The result is you place high probability bets on the correct numbers at the correct time.

I told you the math, showed you the graph. You just have to figure out how to do use it for roulette outcomes.

I also told you you can't use hotties, sleepers and normal. That's the problem for EVERYONE.

You need a new definition or classification. That suit this birthday paradox math. Figure out this new definition then do some test to see if you get the same graph. If it does then you know you have applied the correct definition. That's it.

------------------------------------------------------------

Instead of arguing on forum, write the best naysaying post, or write codes to determine whether the sleeper rtm better than payout after first hit or not, or whether the super hot gives super rtm.

Read that people.

 

With all due respects thats semantics. Again let's pretend we would not have to wait that long. Would the sleeper be the better bet? I think @TurboGenius and others would agree it is?

You see the reason I ask this is very simple.

Let's say the answer (after testing) is YES betting in that manner would give you an edge. That would be an HUGE breakthrough, would it be playable? Hell no, but thats beside the point! We just found something to work with, can you make it smaller, what can we do with this information.

 

My answer is when it's time, number 9 will repeat like crazy (what @TurboGenius did test in his latest strategy). The problem (already mentioned above) is false alarms. You start betting on it when it's not time yet, and I still have no other logical explanation for this event.

You can plot thousands of graphs for sleepers, they get back to 1/37 with very close repeats. Actually, it makes sense, because it cannot go back to 1/37 with 37-spin cycles of no hits or one hits, so you will see many cycles of 37-spins with more than 2 appearances of number 9 in them.

To exploit sleepers, you need to find a way not to play no hit cycles or one hit cycles or play less of them.

 

SirAnyone will reply with his usual, you can't win with luck strategy.

MJ spit out his coffee, more tissue!!!

Attracts Benas and ND sarcastic mocks.

 

I really like your postings lucky they form new ideas in my head thanks for that!

 

And now for some math...

The reason you can't win is because roulette is the devil.

If you add all the numbers up 0 through to 37 it totals 666.

That's why, you're doomed before you start.

 

It gets even scarier when you find out adding 0 to the rest doesn't change the result

Fuck this, I need a break.

 

This is something we can agree on and is the essence of value bets in sports betting. It's an undeniable truth. For Roulette there are two options (or maybe a combination of the two) :

1. A location on the layout and/or wheel which pays higher than the implied probability.
2. A time when some location pays higher than the implied probability.

Unfortunately, both are non-starters for the random game. There's a lot of talk here about how timing is the key. So when to bet is more important than what you bet on. But for timing to have any meaning in this context, past spins should indicate future spins. But they don't.

With AP, the options do mean something, otherwise, forget it.

 

Most important is where to bet...second - how much to bet... if will have the huge edge but will bet small... nothing good will be, plus if you will start bet higher when the edge temporary is not on your side, - finally can be in minus, no matter to advantage in overall ...

When to bet is almost not important, because exact knowledge of when the ball will land in the covered zone and when - not - no one has...

 

Yeah, that sounds all nice & cool & proportionate - in short correct.

But one thing you haven't mentioned is that that 1/...however many has the equal probability of occurring on any distribution cycle, might as well be the first. Bottom line the most unlikely event is not pushed to end of the line awaiting thede, in other words, the actual distribution manifesting ain't ordered from more likely to least likely.

Another is that potentially two of such unlikely events could show up two times, congested in one meta-cycle. Or thre ..


Now at the same time, I ain't going as far as saying that there can be an infinite or even 10 of those consecutive in a row .. that I acknowledge the significance of what you are saying .. that one, even two three or four such events over time .. won't have a catastrophic effect to a well-designed system; even extend it more significance that such event would incur only some time/cash retrograde movement to reimburse with further play.



But then again this same applies to all events, even those other losing that are way closer to the average, & the above example illustrates the extremest of the extremes to convey the significance of what you're saying ie. exaggeration.

To get it extremely secure in terms of certainty would be very costly, even undoable after a certain point due to the table linits. So what's the in terms of 9s necessary to run pretty much smoothly regarding roulette -- which degree of 9s is a threshold to strive to &or design the system around.

 

I agree, but for the system player the timing is important because it's all he has. Actually, "timing" isn't really the right term, because what they mean by timing is the "trigger" or pattern which signals what's likely to hit next (so they believe).

 

You to are using same timeline different timelines .. or better Shank is congesting time - using mutiple timelines - in one the one set in (=flatbet) he is using rng programmed timeline flowing at a quicker rate(≈progression).

A few posts ago I mentioned something along this line mentioning the progression & inflection point.
Its very similar concept; the reason I am pointing to it is that you @Shank a couple of posts avbove talked about an inyeresting progression phenomenon resulting in a paradox; its similar to the above, just the dimension of the rate is achieved by using more numbers or positions(=progression).

& inflection point .. is what its relevant to to be used efficiently.

 

I understand, but maybe the point is that "time" or "trigger" really does not give many benefits.

I do not know how to say more right, but are good car drivers and bad car drivers - but they all are drivers. Maybe the same is with system players?
With VB players that is for sure ... I know several, who think that know VB, when really do not know ...

System players usually use a kind of martingale, with increasing bets when lost, all who say that do not usually lie ...

Even if players have no abilities to use VB - are ways, which still can work without significantly increasing bets, but slight help in chances to hit.
But I never read at least some mind about that...looks that here nobody knows about such kind of system play...

Ok, I saw some methods very slight similars, with name - parachute, but that us very very far...

 

Starting with betting on late number that has now/recently appeared expecting heightened back-to-back + potential next hits as in increased/congested appearance frequency:


Grouping numbers for one .. to secure a better-expected average.

Using higher district positions for two eg. Q to begin with .. to secure a more balanced method
[that besides the focal numbers if you prefer seeing it from su standpoint includes other numbers as well].

Using deeper districts for three - eg. STreets for a limited amount of time/spins, ≈proportional to the Q hit profits already secured, to benefit from the temporary compounding effect & securing the better payout on its next number appearances by
a) using a deeper district which naturally has a better payout with the same number of positions (=progression's dimension of progress in risk)
b) using less positions focusing/pivoting on that number/position that hit back-to-back (=progression's horizontal dimension of expanding/reducing the numbers played)
c) a combination of both (compacting progression's horizontal & in-risk dimension simultaneously)

all three abc possibilities being contingent on the exposition, or what an individual game is asking of (to get in) positive→ reset the accumulated he amount (meaning the losses + outstanding accumulated he being repayed/recovered)=restart

 

18
10
7
6
13
28
28
35
37
12
17
11
13
37
0
22
2
35
37
24
7
37
25
37
19
1
37
16
6
24
20
11
27
7
28
17
31
27
25
32
3
8
36
11
25
13
14
19
2
10
32
7
13
35
30
4
5
0
36
32
35
30
37
14
34
7
5
3
12
4
14
1
28
14
26
31
33
16
5
7
15
37
10
0
37
25
28
34
6
22
12
34
23
23
17
21
24
6
13
36


This specific sequence, above, is incredibly rare. 1/38^100. or 1.051091e-158. There was only ONE way it could happen, but it happened!!!!

And it's just as rare as having witnessed the sequence below. Because, again, there's only ONE sequence like it that can happen over 100 spins. Every time you look at a roulette board, you're looking at a rare sequence.

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

 

↑

yes & no

you're missing the point

to transcend your yes & be more accurate .. there are types of distributions with similar propensity of happening .. thus grouped

some groups stand out as super fucking rare & to turn the notch even higher ≈impossible to occur (your11111...) due to reality itself incorporating mechanisms that tend to prevent singularity/absolutism (one example being genetic deviation)

meanwhile, others grouped become linearly ordered much more likely


just look at @TwoUp's EC 3-7 example

 

& stop limiting the views .. >>
you'll never get further if you limit as such ↑↑



1+1=1
1*1=1
1^1=1

2+2=4
2*2=4
2^2=4

hmmm .. look at the phenomenon -- all 1 or all 4
according to you

3+3=6
3*3=6
3^3=6

but no .. there's a change already in the first-order of the change, & the change in the second-order of the change

3+3=6
3*3=9
3^3=27



>> which is what your purpose is, to blind or keep near-blind, ideally maintain near-blindness
where all that sings in symphony are your notes of memes

 

here is what - brilliant mind? Or genial understanding math ?

 

You'd be amazed how many gamblers don't understand it though, and who believe money management is more important than bet selection.