1. Welcome to the #1 Gambling Community with the best minds across the entire gambling spectrum. REGISTER NOW!
  2. Have a gambling question?

    Post it here and our gambling experts will answer it!
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Discussions in this section are assumed to be EV- as they are outside of the Advantage Play section. For EV+ discussions, please visit the Advantage Play section.
    Dismiss Notice

TurboGenius When does it lose ?

Discussion in 'TurboGenius's Forum' started by TurboGenius, Nov 14, 2021.

  1. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    248
    Location:
    England
    Great attitude. So someone could be posting drivel for years but they're worthy of respect because they have "paid their dues", whereas a newbie who actually knows what he's talking about is ignored. I'm reminded of ND. He's been on the forums as long as you, but his posts are mostly one-liners and cliches. They seem quite random; sometimes they're pro-system and anti-math and at other times the opposite. Actually, I think he might be a bot.
     
    mr j and TwoUp like this.
  2. SPIKE

    SPIKE Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2020
    Likes:
    865
    Location:
    midwest
    Pretty much, yeah. Live with it..
     
    mr j and gizmotron like this.
  3. Luckyfella

    Luckyfella Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2020
    Likes:
    288
    Location:
    Japan
    SirNoOne can't simply claim correlation without proving. He is simply guessing. Lol

    I wrote he has done zero work on providing proof of causation.
    SirNoOne dare not refute this. Lol

    Why won't you asked SirNoOne for proof of his bs claims.
    Save the novice and ignorants as you usually do. Lol
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2021
    thereddiamanthe likes this.
  4. SPIKE

    SPIKE Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2020
    Likes:
    865
    Location:
    midwest
    Ken has been around on the gambling forums
    for a really long time. You? I didn't think so.
     
    mr j likes this.
  5. Ka2

    Ka2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2019
    Likes:
    192
    Location:
    Netherlands
    I've tested this sorry it just doesnt work. Yes you get a hit 52% of the time. But due to the payout you lose in the long run (flat betting)
     
    TwoUp likes this.
  6. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    Actually over the years we know who goes to a casino for real and puts money on the line. You can tell from what they have said regarding having real playing experience. People that last in this game do so because they have playing experience and know how to keep going. It can take as long as 6 months for a progression player to blow up and then consequently disappear. You new guys are like new bootcamp solders thrown into battle. You aren't worth anything until you have experience. Being a paper or computer theorist player does not count. Flogging the house's advantage doesn't help either. What you will never learn is that you can lose the required number of bets and still come out on top just by knowing when to bet big or to bet small. And all I get are crickets. My experience tells me that I will never get a mathematical argument regarding knowing good timing while using mathematical expressions or algorithms. It's math that does not exist yet. These are the dark ages of math. Standing on the dock yelling at others and telling them that they are going to sail off the edge of the world does not make standing on the dock the greatest thing since sliced bread, to mix metaphors.
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2021
    mr j and Nathan Detroit like this.
  7. TwoUp

    TwoUp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2020
    Likes:
    328
    Occupation:
    Unknown
    Location:
    Nowhere
    Independence is a requirement. And I never made any mistake with binomal calculation.

    Explain why the birthday problem is incorrect. Explain why 23 people in a room do not have just over 50% probability of at least two people having a birthday on the same day, assuming 365 days and a uniform 1/365 probability of a person having a birthday on any given day.

    Forget roulette, forget gambling. Explain why the birthday problem is wrong.

    Then explain why cryptography is wrong to consider the birthday attack as a means of beating the brute force true odds of guessing.

    I am waiting for your answer.
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2021

  8. Benas

    Benas Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2018
    Likes:
    156
    Occupation:
    Looking for peoples who play better...
    Location:
    Ania,PL
    I read several times but did not find that Joe said that this problem is wrong. Can you copy-paste where he that say?
    In my understanding, he talks about absolutely different ...
     
  9. TwoUp

    TwoUp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2020
    Likes:
    328
    Occupation:
    Unknown
    Location:
    Nowhere
    So you agree with the probability and @Median Joe says you're wrong.

    Remember it was not my paper or my method but I provided it to get people thinking in a direction where they can have favourable probability. And yes there will be variance that results in drawdowns as we are dealing with random events.

    However there are more things to solve, it's one part of a line of thinking and not on its own a money printing machine. And no one going to give anyone a turn key solution on a forum.

    The math on the birthday attack has been done to death because it was necessary to ensure lengths of hashes in cryptography are sufficiently long to stand up to guessing. Everything you do on a daily basis with your phone or computer uses cryptography that was developed to be strong enough in the face of the birthday attack.

    The birthday attack provides a shortcut and we can't just sit back and rely on the strength of the true odds probability to resist brute force guessing.

    Compare betting without birthday attack as the brute force guessing attack and you're back at 1/37 or 1/38 probability for a hit. When covering a suitable number of recent pockets the probability of a collision/repeater in that cohort is defined by the birthday probability and is much better than 1/37 (or 1/38) of a single guess. Of course you do have to cover additional numbers so the probability has to be better but clearly 7/38 is not 56%. The paper also showed that 11 numbers (12 spins) is over 85% for a collision/repeater.

    Now to be very clear I am referring to the event probability of a repeater, which is a different event than a ball landing in a pocket. I have to say this because the clowns think I am saying the probability of a ball landing in a pocket magically changes when I point out mathematical truths.

    They like to keep ignoring that I'm referring to the probability of a different event as they can't/won't understand there are different probabilities for different events but mostly don't like math that contradicts their narrow understanding.
     
    TurboGenius and Luckyfella like this.
  10. Ka2

    Ka2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2019
    Likes:
    192
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Sounds reasonable. But you see I can only test what is said here by you and by others. The 7 last hits will lead to 1:37. Not only that but it has the same characteristics as an single number. What do I mean by that. For example:

    On average a single number can sleep for 150 spins. (sometimes longer but we are talking averages) You get these same average results as betting 7 numbers. ( meaning 22 spins of 7 numbers equals 154 spins)

    So comparing the 2 there is no difference. But I'll have a look in what you said.
     
  11. TwoUp

    TwoUp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2020
    Likes:
    328
    Occupation:
    Unknown
    Location:
    Nowhere
    Well below he says I'm wrong.

    He doesn't realise the probability of a ball landing in a pocket is a different event than the probability of a repeater. Because of this he says I'm wrong and gets confused about probability. He will ignore math he doesn't understand including the birthday problem and die in his ditch over the simple thing he understands, one pocket 1/37.

    Is the probability of getting a seven the same as getting black?

    Is the probability of you having breakfast in the Whitehouse/home tomorrow morning with old Joe the same as getting 23?

    It's a typical mistake for him to make as he gets lots of things wrong including binomial probability, and house edge. He goes on with nonsense, vigorously waving his hands to save/hide his face when even children can add up and he can't.

     
  12. TwoUp

    TwoUp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2020
    Likes:
    328
    Occupation:
    Unknown
    Location:
    Nowhere
    Well when he asks questions and can't be bothered to read just a few posts back and comes back with that kind of nonsense response he deserves wrath.

    Fuck him and fuck you for defending him.
     
    mr j likes this.
  13. Benas

    Benas Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2018
    Likes:
    156
    Occupation:
    Looking for peoples who play better...
    Location:
    Ania,PL
    Can you point or mark, what is in his quote wrong?
     
  14. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    248
    Location:
    England
    @ TwoUp, nowhere did I say the birthday problem is wrong. Try reading what I actually wrote. It's also true that in 8 spins the probability is over 50% that there will be a repeat, but this isn't at all the same as saying that if you see 7 unique numbers then the chance of winning in the next spin if you bet on them is over 50%! It's the same mistake as before because you're confusing the probability of a series with that of a single outcome. If you're betting on 7 numbers the probability of a win can't be anything other than 7/37. Put another way, in the next spin you're looking for a match with one of the last 7 numbers, and there are 7 ways it can be done out of a total of 37 outcomes, therefore the probability is 7/37.

    You could create a system around the birthday problem, by waiting for a number, betting on it, and continuing to bet up to 8 times on successive numbers. But as anyone who has tried this knows, it won't give you an edge, because the returns from the system will vary depending on when the repeat occurs in the sequence, if it does at all. You will indeed win in > 50% of sequences, but what's impossible is that you will win 29 chips that % of the time when betting <= 7 numbers. That's absurd, as common sense should have told you.
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2021
    mr j likes this.

  15. TwoUp

    TwoUp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2020
    Likes:
    328
    Occupation:
    Unknown
    Location:
    Nowhere
    His statement is wrong for referring to the probability of a different event and then claiming I am referring to his event. No I am not.

    I am referring to the probability of a repeat/collision as defined by the birthday problem which is fundamental in probability theory.

    From Wikipedia:

    In probability theory, the birthday problem asks for the probability that, in a set of n randomly chosen people, at least two will share a birthday. The birthday paradox is that, counterintuitively, the probability of a shared birthday exceeds 50% in a group of only 23 people.

    Based on @Median Joe logic in his post he would say it can't be 50% because it's 1/365 probability to have a birthday on any particular day and only 23 people is 23/365 and we don't magically get different number of days in a year based on who is already in the room and who walks in the room next.

    @Median Joe is wrong for taking the probability and contorting it to something else and also ignoring the mathematical proof provided in a reference paper and which can be independently verified with a birthday problem calculator.

    Even after providing an example calculator he ignored that too.

    He still IGNORES THE EVENT I am referring to and spouts out a bunch of incorrect assertions about the probability of a different event to that which I described UNABIGUOUSLY.

    It is DELIBERATE AND DISENGENUOUS and completely incorrect for him to assert otherwise and continue on this path when it has been explained exactly what the probabilty the event pertains to.

    I repeat for the avoidance of doubt.

    I am referring to the probability of a repeat/collision as defined by the birthday problem which is established probability theory and NOT the 1/37 (or 1/38) probability of a ball landing in a pocket.
     
  16. TwoUp

    TwoUp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2020
    Likes:
    328
    Occupation:
    Unknown
    Location:
    Nowhere
    But I never said that. That's your misinterpretation of the paper I provided. The paper clearly shows its over a series of events.
     
  17. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    248
    Location:
    England
    Sigh. This is what the professor said in his paper, as anyone who has downloaded it can see for themselves :

    Garbage. The bet does NOT win 29 chips in 54% of sequences. To repeat : it DOES win in 54% of sequences, but NOT 29 chips.
     
  18. TwoUp

    TwoUp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2020
    Likes:
    328
    Occupation:
    Unknown
    Location:
    Nowhere
    No I have not confused probability of single events and series. I have been very clear about binomial probability distribution calculations and what they are over a set of independent outcomes.

    You're at it again trying to twist what I have said.

    I proved you were incorrect with house edge being paid on a loss. Everyone makes mistakes and thats ok.

    I proved you were wrong claiming exactly N is mutually exclusive with N or more in binomal probability calculation.

    I laid out the truth table for 3 flips of a coin and it was so plain even a child can count up to 7 yet you argued that it is not possible to get at least 1 head in three flips of a coin 7/8 of the time. You said it has to be 3/8 which is the probability of exactly 1 head in 3 flips, not 1 or more heads, and that is a very different probability as 3/8 vs 7/8 are very different probabilities.

    You also argued that it's not possible that seeing 1 head in three flips can be 7/8 as the probability of 1 tail in 3 flips would make the total probability more than 1. That was a mistake to assume they are mutually exclusive events in the distribution. They are not, they are both possible.

    So if you want to keep making incorrect assertions or twisting what I've referenced or said that's your perjorative.
     
  19. 6th-sense

    6th-sense Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2019
    Likes:
    66
    Location:
    Uk
    I can confirm that if you are talking about constantly betting the last 7 Numbers out,,,with or without the repeat it doesn't give any advantage...
     
    thereddiamanthe likes this.
  20. 6th-sense

    6th-sense Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2019
    Likes:
    66
    Location:
    Uk
    Nor does 8,,9,,10,,,etc all the way up to what you want,,,
     
    thereddiamanthe likes this.

Share This Page