TurboGenius When does it lose ?

SirNoOne, MJ agree with you.

This is where you are absolutely wrong.

All your naysaying comes down to this single point.

How to exploit the limits of random?

Hey, didn't I tell you I'm the expert. Lol

Any wheel, any casino.

 

SirNoOne,

That's approximately 450*38= 17,100spins collected.

How long to collect this sample?

Let's assume, 20spins in 1 hour.

17,100spins / 20spins = 855hours

Assume 1/3 of the day the wheel has no players.

This means the wheel spins for 16 hours a day.

855/16 = 53 days

Thats 53 days of 16hours continuous collection of data.

I have real experience collecting data from manual wheels, continuous for couple of days.

That's a tiring job, very tiring and boring with all the walking to and fro, and waiting for the next hour new set of spins.

Can you imagine doing this shit for 53days?

Which donkey did you fool to do this dirty job for you? Lol

You still don't get it.
Your old, dinosaur method can't compete with nerds playing with systems flatbetting on any wheel, any casino.

You call your dinosaur method the best with enormous drawdown when negative variance hit? Enjoy floating underwater. Lol

SirNoOne,

I asked earlier, what's your secret gypsy tune to fool donkeys?

That's your secret I'm interested in. Lol

 

SirNoOne,

Let's say you spot a defect that says #3 should give higher than odds count.

You get a donkey stupidly collect data for 53days. The count is 412.

Omg, I'm wrong.
That's 53days of shit work for nothing.

Why don't you tell us what's your success rate of your silly probe counts?

Psst.... Tip for you, the easier way is to befriend maintenance, they have the complete data.

 

SirNoOne,

How large the required bankroll to survive negative variance?

When the negative variance got larger(random has no limit) bankroll burnt, you tell shit story try convince your donkeys. Lol

Rc computer 150% edge expert does the same shit story telling. Ask Bago. Lol

 

SirNoOne,

Count how many employees in the wheel design, engineering, production floor, setup and maintenance. Thousands.

All of them are trained professionals.

The casino surveillance and security department is completely ignorant of this threat.

Btw, the number threat is not some obscure gambler. It's their own employees. That's what the eye in the sky main purpose.

Try fool a chum. Lol

 

LOL
No way, he's so good that he just looks at a wheel and scares it into being bias.
The man is amazing. One look and one raised eyebrow and a bias wheel is born.
Doesn't even need to track he says, and surely that's no lie. No.......

 

What can I say. My powers are amazing!

 

Hey! Don't disrespect dinosaurs .. those were great creatures. Potent & so big, with clashing monstrous teeth.

 

I've watched it many times and analyzed it, but I haven't come up with how it relates to roulette. 1 the experiment is most likely related to lotte, or the analogies of the races that you provided. 2 experiment, I don't fuck at all. There's a topic of 50/50. I still don't understand how to relate the game 50/50 to the numbers game, and all these videos about heads and tails, I also don't understand how this applies to numbers?
But the experiment 3 is very interesting, which you are talking about, but how can it be applied to roulette? Oh, what does it mean in general?
I've been thinking about him a lot just the last few weeks. If you think about it, then what are the ticks in that experiment. Well, first of all, random. What can we compare random in the rulek? As I see it, there are only 2 things. The first is if the ticks are a random rotation between repetitions. Then the analogy will be that the number repeats in random rotations and it is not predictable. Then we take 10 number drops and it becomes more predictable. 100 dropouts are even more predictable. But how? and a hundred drops is a lot, how do you use it?
The second case is if the tick is a random number. Well, it's not clear at all. The loss of each number is unpredictable. And what, we take 10 numbers and they are more predictable? Again, predictable in what? I don't know how to compare these experiments with roulette.
I've never understood what it means that random has limits, which everyone keeps saying. I had only one thing in my head about this, that it was Lott. But at the same time they say that random is predictable. I don't understand how at all. The only thing I remember in the same experiment 3, the cubes that were thrown out of the box, and they became less and less. This can be somehow correlated to the predictability of randomness. But again, - what is all this in roulette???

 

.

 

He ain't telling the truth (& rightly so!) .. spreading disinformation since the 80s when they, allegedly, invented the LOTT to hide behind/camouflage their AP play.

Reminds me of the famous black hacker having a speech on the Black Hat Conference (2015?).. titled Shut The Fuck Up, or something very close to it with symbols imbued within -- addressing the whole hacker community to finallt zip it out.

To summarize, in 2000s & somewhat less well into 2010s, a hacker was the apex predator; the technology has been recently new, & on top of that due to its digital nature & no physical constraints .. the cutting edge has been moving extremely quickly onwards. The authorities, even the special agencies didn't know who was hitting, how they hitting, where they were hitting .. pretty much all vague. Now imagine the rest of incompetent low-level institutions as police, etc. The whizz kids simply grew into & were the ever-evolving technology, within high-intoxication realm & pretty much no risk at all .. hidden clans lurking on hidden sites no one really knew about, even more complex to identify as entry-level equipment didn't cost that much + already a few of those banded together could wreak havoc, literally. Just btw, ^=& this was already well into 2010s guys known on AlphaBay Market side forum, some more rare & well-versed made legendary feats such as carding $10000/pop .. & could multiples in a single day over mostly unaware & unprepared payment processors such as Paypal & directly from bank accounts as well coupled with mild social-engineering, email accounts take over .. easy-peasy, golden days. Been there amidts, first hand, no hearsay. But that's just financial gains, mind that all of the transacted funds are federally or otherwise insured/backed up .. the load being on banks who anyway create money from nothing upon signature & overall backed by Federal Reserve &or IMF. The real trouble was kids fucking up everything shifting on a digital basis .. such as electricity providers, barring business & government operations ..things like that causing real harm, not that I care. That awoke the feds & similar agencies globally, that made them getting alarmed & finally starting to look deeper, organizing themselves properly .. meanwhile the kids only had fun, doing that either out of personal highs of breaking through, getting skilled, competition among themselves within the clans & anongst the clans ... which finally culminated in widespread blubbing alk over the forums .. about their accomplishments, describing how, who's more elegant & efficient -- which was, as an apex unbarred predator, the beginning of their end.

Thereof shut the fuck up.

 

LOL

 

I'm going to make a separate thread about that video and what it means to roulette.
I think it's important - strange that it keeps being taken down from video sharing sites.....is
copyright really an issue with a video that is 60 years old ?
Anyway - that part you remember is about 1/2 life of an isotope - measuring the 1/2 life, but
the demonstration was with dice and this part didn't really relate to random as we're concerned because
the dice were never replaced and each toss the count became less and less. That part still had some value
though.
The important part was where the Geiger counter was used to pick up the random radiation and then
a larger machine was used to keep count.
The single unpredictable "tick" on the count couldn't be predicted, it happened at random.
The count grows and the 10ths column of the count was more uniform.
The 100's column was very predictable.
Just because the game is "random" does in no way mean it's unpredictable.

 

Is that a lot of spins? I have some wheels with over 100,000 spins and one wheel with about 400,000 spins.

Here in the US, it's 35 to 70 spins per hour on a live table.

 

Yeah .. but once the wheel is slightly shifted .. realigned .. all those 100.000s of 5.000s go in the bin!?

& its not like that happens every two years ..

 

It is curious, but I do not see anyone intervene with interest in the thread.
It started out interestingly, but we already have at least 34 pages of spam. Thus it is impossible to read and learn. Among other things, because with so much spam, when someone asks a question to help them, no one answers, they are lost amid so much spam.

 

Above calculation of over/under bias using 95% confidence level and binomial test. The binomal test statistic provides the critical values for classifying a result as significant/biased.

Pretty simple to compute the critical values for a range of spin counts.

I also took the liberty of computing the over/under representation for adjacent pairs as this may provide pairwise opportunities. This can be extended to sectors of any size eg 3's, 4's up to quarters or thirds of the wheel although it gets pretty obvious by then.

One could also use a tighter confidence level if desired, the current is 2.5% left and right.

 

This is is strange question, because the wheel doesn't really "have" any distributions at all, not inherently anyway. I have to wonder about YOUR grasp of the fundamentals. A probability distribution says that for a given random variable X, the values that X can take, say x1, x2,...xn must be mutually exclusive and exhaustive, and the corresponding probabilities P1, P2, etc of x1, x2, etc must sum to 1. The sizes of P1, P2, etc show how the total probability of 1 is distributed amongst the possible values of X. Hence the name "distribution".

There are some special distributions like Binomial, Normal, Uniform, etc, but there are any number of distributions you could imagine and which nobody has ever heard of. As long as it conforms to the above, it's a distribution.

 

Thanks for the answer, Turbo. I got it with the cubes, thanks. As for the counter, that's what I was talking about. It is clear that this is predictable, but I still did not understand how to relate it to roulette, which I tried to explain using different thoughts about this, but I did not find an answer. I hope you can give hints in which direction to think.

 

Really. Strange?

For a roulette wheel, there are 37 pockets with each pocket having the probability to win being p=1/37, and to lose its q=1-p = 36/37. p+q necessarily equal 1 as defined and that's your mutually exclusive outcome where q is described by p. Because of this the discrete binomial probability distribution exactly describes the distribution of occurrences we can expect over n trials.

Other distributions like the normal distribution are approximations but because they are continuous they can be easier to work with when dealing with larger trials and ranges.

But fundamentally the binomial probability mass function describes the distribution of outcomes of a roulette wheel exactly.