Roulette Ask Me Anything About Betting the EC's (Even Chances)

Maybe not, but you must still have rules, although you may not be able to explain them clearly, even to yourself. Such "vague" systems can still be coded using fuzzy logic.

 

Are you betting the even chances and want to know the length of the longest losing streak? or do you want to know the probability (how many numbers covered) such that the longest losing streak is 3?

For the former, there is no theoretical MAX, only decreasing probabilities than losing runs of increasing length will occur.

 

LOL. I may be lots of things but feeble I am not.

 

The only thing that's left, really? You want to make your ridiculous point so badly that you post laughable crap like this? My method is based on observation and study over a long period of time. I compare what I know from my observations with what's happening currently and I make a guess as to where it's going next. Because when the outcomes are in a certain phase and are playing my game they tend to be very repetitive and do the same kinds of things they did when it was in this phase before. True random, which roulette is not really, is very chaotic. The outcomes in roulette tend to be more common and routine than chaotic to the practiced eye.

 

Nope, no rules. I compare what I'm seeing with what I've seen before and make a decision to bet or not. Has nothing to do with rules has everything to do with observation and comparison. Roulette moves in and out of phases like a sine wave and you can become very familiar was some of the phases and they can become very reliable sources for educated guessing.

 

lol, whatever. At this point it's just a semantic hair-splitting and you are arguing just for the sake of it, just like you insist that systems and methods are different. Your "educated" guesses are based on past observations which is to say that you claim to have identified certain conditions when outcomes repeat. Those conditions are rules, but call them what you like if it makes you happy and in your mind pisses off the mathboyz (it doesn't, it just makes you look retarded).

 

So it's not about betting or not, it's about where to bet!

Imagine there are two players sitting at the table and one of them is Nostradamus, who can see the future 30 seconds ahead.
Would it be a question for him when to bet or not to bet?

Obviously not - he would only be concerned about where to bet.

It's roughly the same with VB players. They know with some probability where the ball will land...Better player - the higher probability that his prediction will be right.

 

I can tell you that I had an acquaintance on forums who claimed to have developed something, that helped him "see into the future".
He was not a gambler and hardly ever played roulette, but to test those abilities he visited a casino a couple of times and said he won, only quite small.

 

If there are "phases" that you claim which are "like a sine wave" then any "signal" embedded in the wheel outcomes can easily be distilled through any number of signal processing methods, neural networks or hidden Markov models could be used to classify the "phase" to replicate your claimed "unbeatable method."

But anyone with an engineering or math background already know these features that you claim don't exist in random unless the wheel is not being maintained.

Of course you think impossible! It's impossible for machine, or math, roulette is soooo much harder than that.

Well I agree it's impossible because you're a liar, but it's not impossible to implement a classifier based on the "methods" you claim work.

You fail to understand modern mobile devices and communication systems (what are known as spread spectrum) are built on methods that encode signals beneath the noise floor so that they are in fact resistant to noise. It takes a lot of computation to recover the signal in the noise:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noise_floor
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_spectrum

Given that we have the methods, it is child's play to find your alleged signal in roulette outcomes as modern communication systems are orders of magnitude more complex than a simple roulette wheel.

Again those with knowledge of signal processing and AI know that you are full of shit. Because we could all beat roulette applying what we know. But the signal is not there.

All your claims are based on complete ignorance of science, math and technology, you think you have some special magic but the modern magic we use for wifi and 4G and 5G communication is a marvel that shrinks super computer signal processing capabilities into low power devices that run in the palm of your hand. You simply cannot fathom the math that is used and the trillions of calculations required per second to distill a high bandwidth communication channel from the ether. A 5G modem chip processes 7,500,000,000 dataframe instructions per second to provide a bandwidth up to 20 Gigabits per second.

A Netflix HD movie uses 7 megabits per second, so a tiny 5G modem chip which is so small they embed it in the die of the mobile phone processor can pluck 2,857 Netflix movies out of the ether per second, and stream that data into the palm of your hand. Of course you need super computer processing to drink from that kind of firehose and that's exactly why a modern phone has 8 cores and an AI chip that can do 32 trillion operations per second just on the AI processor. That's 32 thousand billion operations per second. Then there are the 8 cores that can also process trillions of operations every second as well.

What on earth could need so much computation and math? Could you even begin to describe a process with that much math and computation per second? Of course you can't. But everything we do with technology is more complex than a roulette wheel.

Don't for a second think you are doing anything that is not trivial to apply modern signal processing, AI and computational power to. The unprecented communication and processing in modern mobile technology is so transparent to you that you have no idea it's even there, but the engineers you despise for using math and science do know and use the math and science to deliver what you take for granted.

 

I changed the last message, wanted to delete it at all, because when I wrote it something strange happened...

 

It's really really late here this is as far as I can read in your really long post about nothing important. I beat roulette through observation and experience, learn to live with it.

 

The nursing home has a curfew for the residents?

 

Benas ,Winning in a casino is not so difficult .Either roulette EC or inside bets .

 

Joe

Below is a section from one of the sessions you ran and commented on. However, this is where the betting should have been different. It is an example of watching for and placing bets according to a Pattern Combo. Starting from the 3rd bet down, the pattern produced was E O O E O O. The next bet should have been E at stake 32 in keeping with the pattern and it would have been a win. The next bet would have been a win also because an O would have been bet in continuation of the pattern.

Is this kind of bet selection even possible to code because there are sometimes many different Pattern Combos that arise during a session that are to be bet accordingly as demonstrated below? Thousands of Pattern Combos arise when testing a million outcomes. How do you account for placing the correct bet according to those patterns?

2 E E W 39
1 E O L 38
2 O E L 36 2 losses in row, therefore next bet is skipped (virtual)
0 E O L 36 no bet (stake = 0) This is another loss so switch to betting opposite (bet E)
4 E O L 32 This is another loss, so immediately switch back to betting the same as last (which is O)
8 O E L 24 Another loss.
16 E O L 8 2nd loss, so next bet is virtual
0 O O W 8 This is win, so DON'T switch to betting opposite, but continue betting same as last (O)
32 O E L -24 First loss
64 E O L -88 BUST! 2nd loss, and this is a bust. The next bet would have been virtual.

I tried to explain this in the rules I sent you, but it was left out to simplify the coding which invalidates the results. Following is what was included in the rules:

Examples:
XXXOXXXO Most likely bet X
OOOOXOOOOX Most likely bet O
OXXOXXOX Most likely bet X
XXOXXOXX Most likely bet O
XXXXOXXXXO Most likely bet X

The above are what I consider to be Pattern Combos and must be bet accordingly.


.

 

Are you sure?
I live from winning 20 years, but I always hard fight and looks like every year is harder and harder...I have some of my old videos with predictions, so now I predict better, but to win for me is harder...

 

You must himself all very exact to describe, so create rules.
You know programmers get quite big money, but the biggest money gets to those who can create tasks for programmers.
I am not a programmer but I was that who prepared tasks for programmers and thought through algorithms...

 

It's not only possible but relatively easy to code this. Rather than using a series of IF-THEN statements, a look-up table would be better in this situation. This is a list of all possible patterns that would trigger a bet, and which is scanned every spin and compared with the last X outcomes. e.g. XXOXXOXX if found in the last 8 outcomes would return a O, which is the next bet.

The hard work is not the coding but finding the patterns you want to include and bet on to continue. How far back do you want to look for a pattern? Spike uses 12 spins so given that 80% of his bets win maybe you should copy him, lol. This means you will have to trawl through 2^12 = 4,096 possible patterns which will take a few hours. I've attached a file containing all these patterns. The pattern doesn't have to take up the whole 12 spins. e.g. you might have RBBBRBRBBRBB in which only the last 6 spins has formed the pattern RBBRBB, so your next bet would be R. Or BRRBRBBBBBBB would trigger a bet on B because the dominant and most recent pattern is a streak of B.

Just mark alongside each pattern what bet it should trigger (R,B or N - "No Bet") and I'll write a program to generate some test results.

 

In any case, he has to make up his mind and think of something to call it when there is something.

I am afraid that David will finally say that he can identify from the picture what should be bet, but he can't describe it...
I remember one case when I tried to write a program in a similar situation and every algorithm which I suggested for finding patterns was not good for customer...

 

The furthest back I can bet a pattern is 6 outcomes, not 12. Any pattern that starts with 3 or more of the same outcomes can be elininated, I most likely am already betting that as a streak.

 

If the same number of pockets remain on the wheel from one spin to the next, then why should one pattern be more or less likely to hit than another?