TurboGenius Gambler's Fallacy debunked (again) and roulette math.

Impractical.....maybe .
Just like MI method it doesn't win all the time. But it wins more than it loses. Just like the horse race it doesn't win all the time ( depending what you play) but it wins more than it loses. As long a method doesn't require 1000u to win 100u you'll be ok. If it requires 1000u to win 1000u ....

 

Thats still my problem, in tests I can win 90%+ of sessions but, on avg (with that one method for horse race) I am taking 38u, while a losing session can be -400-500u (winning sessions never go below -400u). That still produces a positive total P/L of 1000u+ per 50 sessions played, but I can't be sure I won't hit 3 losing sessions very close to each other and it is a bit of a grind. I could play 100u to make 38u, but that drops the win rate and the overall profit.

 

Is there any update? I kinda like MI for at home. Fairly easy with RX but nearly impossible at the tables.

 

The progression is strong indeed. Works even better in the hot horse race

 

Again you dont know maths...

For sake of argument take this simple explanation.

A number is "behind" 500 spins.

Here after the number shows exactly 1:37

10000 iterations later.

What is the average???

Ill help

10000 x 37
+ 500
/ 10000

the average is 1:37.05

Not once it went below 1:37

Nothing is due get this through your head!

 

Don't believe me.

Test this ( and not a few of course)

take the last number that hast been hit. (average will be 1:154 or so)

take a random number.

Make a list of 1 to 37 and 38+

play these 2 numbers until they have 10 hits each

note the interval.

play a few hundred times.

Will there be a difference in the interval?

According to turbo there will be a difference

 

Here Ill help again.

Did 500 games of 9 hits after the first hit and note the interval

Contenders. The first number out (spin 1) and the last number out.


LAST FIRST
1 124 1 128
2 110 2 107
3 131 3 114
4 117 4 124
5 91 5 114
6 108 6 102
7 98 7 99
8 89 8 91
9 104 9 93
10 93 10 84

So calculated how many times it got a 1 interval till 10. (no point going further)

Is there a difference in the data???

No nothing, dont believe me check yourself.

So again (and again) @TurboGenius YOUR math is wrong!

 

"Also it's clear that if you just play any random number on the table for 37 spins, you will
win 2/3 of the time you do this on average...... Why ?
Because as I explained above - a number that doesn't appear for a long time has to appear
more than once to create this average."

When I read this, I interpreted it as him saying any random number performs the same way. But that's just me...

 

Calculated? What do YOU mean with 1 interval till 10?

 

It’s not about the number that is showing once in 500 spins!
Average is not good enough.
If you start playing you don’t know what’s behind.
Where does the ball go if a number is 1/500?

 

Hello, Hal! What do you mean average is not enough? Does this apply to his example, or in general?

 

Average is 1/37 - pay out 1/35.

 

Maybe I was not clear:

Nr 36 comes at spin 1 Nr 36 spin comes at spin 2. So the interval is 1.

Nr 36 comes at spin 1 Nr x comes at spin 2 Nr 36 comes at spin 3 So the interval is 2.

etc etc...

As you can see for your self there isnt a tiny bit of difference.

Turbo CLEARLY says "Any spin count MORE than 37 means there has to be a spin count LOWER than 37"

This isnt true!

Take a number that is way above interval 37

Take a number that is way under interval 37

Start playing them both.

You could start with the first Hit or the First 2 hits or the First 10 hits or X hits.

Compare the intervals

IS there a difference???

Absolutly not!

Conclusion:

His MATH was wrong...

 

Everything after etc etc... is wrong!

Turbo CLEARLY says "Any spin count MORE than 37 means there has to be a spin count LOWER than 37"
This means: (0-roulette) let’s say we play 37 spins and one number doesn’t show up, we have one number 0/37 (read this as 1/(38 = More then 37)) 36 numbers 1/37 and one number 2/37 (lower then 37).

You’re looking for something but it is still cold.

 

Sweetheart this isnt what this thread is about. Reread the first 2 post from turbo in this thread.

His second post he even plays the last number out (with a progression ofcourse)

And i've tested and shown that it doesnt matter compared to a random number...

 

Here I quote turbo again:

So we have a number that has gone 150 spins and then shows up.
There will be a spin count below 37 in order to achieve this average.
Since the least we can have is a win on the first spin, this alone won't produce the average.
150 spins for the first appearance means an average of 150.
the next spin it shows again - the average is 75.5
So as you can see - a number with an extreme high average will HAVE to have many appearances
below 37 spins in order to offset the extreme first appearance.

Fact:

As shown this is NOT true.

How many appearances do you want to compare 10? 100? 1000?

You see compared to a random number it HAS to show a difference. Which in this case CLEARLY doesnt!

 

This is just the law of large numbers, the law of large numbers (LLN) is a mathematical theorem that states that the average of the results obtained from a large number of independent random samples converges to the true value.
There is no law that a small number of observations will coincide with the expected value.

Quote:
Here after the number shows exactly 1:37
10000 iterations later
the average is 1:37.05

So after 370000 spins that little hickup (500 behind) still shows, even after a million spins.
For the hickup to go away it has to do better then 1:37, mathematically speaking.

Now back to real life.

The problem with coding something into a computer is you see the beginning and the result. But like an Oreo cookie the good stuff is in the middle.

 

It’s all about identifying a potential number to bet on.
When you step into a casino you don’t know what’s hot or cold, doesn’t even matter.
You only bet numbers that met certain criteria (Turbo criteria).

Rinse and repeat, small number of spins does not apply to LLN.

 

Do you know the difference to look for?
You play the above and under interval 37 number, why should they balance each other out at this exact moment?

 

You still are not answering whats is being told by Turbo... Thats what this thread is about wasnt it?

Sure we could only use a small sample size. BUT and this is the BUT I never see on this site.

You HAVE to COMPARE it with a random number to see if there is a difference.

I can say it again. Take the last number out. Take a random number. Small Sample size ok. First Hit after. Do 500 tests Will you see a difference???

NO they show the same results.