Roulette A Challenge 2 - for Turbo M

Ed....just thinking here about a player who comes to the table and plays 37 guesses based on nothing other than birthdays and a whim.

In that 37 he plays one chip per spin. He wagers 37 chips. It just so happens he wins twice. Both wins were a number that only hit once (as expected, not above expectation)

I cant see that as anything other than luck.....perhaps I say that without thinking about it, but its a hard wired phrase I use.

How can it be anything else?

 

I would say (once all the players are done betting and we look over their outcomes) -
The only explanation why player A is ahead is because he bet on and won with numbers that showed above expectation (regardless of why he played those numbers). And player B lost because the numbers that he played never appeared, or appeared below expected, etc.
It's not being lucky or unlucky - it's just that they (for whatever reason) are ahead because they picked numbers that showed better than those numbers "should have". (sure, there's a name for this I'm sure and it's probably some long calculation with probability and all kinds of other things factored in - but not "luck"). If I can't put "luck" into a formula or calculation, then it's not a real thing in math.
The issue then becomes - How can a person pick/play/bet numbers that are going to show above expected ?
Aside from AP they would have to use a system/method of some kind. Depending on what they use and how they use it will show in their balance at the end of the session.
I see the common questions being (where most people are stuck) - just because a number was hot, doesn't mean it's going to stay that way - other numbers "down the list" are going to move up - other numbers are going to move down, etc. So those people need to think "How do I win on the ones moving up and avoid the ones moving down" - which can be done.
Also - Like my last play showed - #35 was amazing. I didn't win on it every time it showed, If I had some magical power or a time machine (lol) I would have surely played it the entire time but I couldn't. Part of not being perfect means missing out on wins but the way I play at least ensures that I'm on the best possible numbers that I can be on without knowing 100% what is coming.

 

I'm standing up for you here Turbo.....the thing that kinda pisses me off...... you ever notice, if you lost, it was because your method sucked ("fallacy")....and if you won, it was only due to luck on that day? (lol) They like to have things both ways, cracks me up.

Ken

 

Well, everyone has been told that it's impossible to beat this game.
They've been told that each spin is independent from the last and that random isn't predictable - that the house payout is less than the odds of any location appearing so that means you can't win "long term".
100 other things. At some point people will give up and agree (especially if they lost a few times) and then it's easy to just say it's luck if you win, bad luck if you lose.
I'm not sure how to show people that a session of spins might (on paper) be a bunch of single spins combined - but the math is never the same as if you lined up each spin individually and then combined that info.

spin 1 : 1+1=2
spin 2 : 1+1=2
spin 3 : 1+1=2

Then the anti-system people will say - see ? There's no difference. But that's not how this game works lol.
It won't be 3+3=6 for those 3 spins, it could be 3+3=4.3452 or 3+3=9.9233 (it's random)
They won't see that possibility - because "6" as the answer is the only thing they will believe in.
Anything aside from "6" is luck or if one player gets 9 then they are an idiot because they believe it's not "6"
and any answer aside from 6 must have come from some "fallacy".

 

Again, where's the supporting math that you claim is the foundation for the system?

 

This is a serious misunderstanding of probability, which doesn't say that house edge will necessarily manifest over the small number of spins you play in any one casino visit. Probability is a relative frequency which only approaches the math as you play more and more spins. Expectation works the same way since it's based on probability. So it's not true to say that those who "believe" the math think the game is based only on one spin (at least, not if they understand probability correctly).

Alternatively, they could play just one number for many thousands of spins. The more numbers they bet on, the less time (number of spins) it will take before the negative expectation manifests.

As for "luck", as I've said before (so you're not the only one sounding like a broken record), it is a real thing because it's nothing more than variance or standard deviation.

Look up "Gambling Mathematics" on Wiki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambling_mathematics

The luck factor in a casino game is quantified using standard deviation (SD). The standard deviation of a simple game like Roulette can be simply calculated because of the binomial distribution of successes (assuming a result of 1 unit for a win, and 0 units for a loss).

and:

As the number of rounds increases, eventually, the expected loss will exceed the standard deviation, many times over.

This is really just another way of saying that eventually the house edge will prevail over any "luck" you may have had.

As for your solution, if it really does "beat" the negative expectation there ought be some supporting math. Where is it? You keep saying that math is on your side but won't show it. Please show us the math and include all your working (otherwise you'll lose marks, lol).

Of course if you bet on the numbers which hit above expectation you will win, I mean, duh. I don't mean to be insulting TG, but come on, help me out here, lol.

 

I'm happy for you if you are winning with this method but I've doubts if such method could work for everyone under any possible conditions.
No matter whether you select to bet streets, splits, numbers...etc the main principle is flawed and please let me explain why I think so;
TurboGenius said:''My method wins because results are random...''
Now let me break it down in quarters for you, he means that in a naturally random game the distribution of the events will always be uneven/unequal, the fact that every pocket in the wheel has equal chance as any other this does NOT mean that you are going to witness 37 or 38 numbers in 37 or 38 spins every time you gamble, in fact you'll never see anything near this!
This is not just my opinion and I don't need a crystal ball to know it, therefore smaller or bigger deviations ALWAYS exist, you might wonder ''then how it supposed to balance out eventually?''
Should we worry ourselves about if/when a certain bet section is going to balance out?
It's not in our best interest to adapt such considerations, for example one day I notice Black numbers appeared 75 times out of 100 and the next Red numbers appeared 135 times out of 200 successive outcomes, this is how balance is being maintained while deviations never cease to exist.
You should never expect to see 1 black after a red or 10 black after 10 red...etc because simply doesn't wrk that way.
Back to TG's method, he starts to bet something when already hit once, thus on its average probability, this might seem sound because of the unequal distribution but let's take a closer look on LOT.
On average 24 uniques in 37 spins (38 for American) from those roughly 1/3 will hit twice or more, deduct 8 from 24 and you left with 16 numbers which will make you lose because hit only once.
BUT from your other 8 winning numbers, you'll win more than 8 times because some of them will hit 3 or more times!
Let's assume that your winning numbers hit as many times as the times you will lose from 16 one-hitters, thus 8 * 2 = 16 or (1*5)+(2*3)+(2*2)+(1*1)=16 it doesn't matter which numbers provide most wins, but the total amount of wins, as long as this total remains approximately equal with your losses you will be net loser because losses cost more than what wins contributes to our bankroll.
As a matter of fact you would won more times if you were betting a single number to hit at least once within 37/38 spins, you would won 24 out of 38 times by 38 spins (38*38=1444) - (24*36=864) = -580 units
I don't want to be the smartass but just speaking my mind and PERHAPS it would be helpful to some.
Just my 3 cents.

 

The idea is through a lengthy selection process u will find a superior one which is running fast. So the question is what if it freezes. Look we can see the superior one hit at least three time in each 37 spin cycle. Stop betting or reduce after 12 spin. U dont have have to do it. When a superior freezes the other number running in. If u get more number in the same hit line put the bet down. When one number up bomb on it.normally after 74 spin the superior doesnt behave bad.

 

This sounds like gambler's fallacy. Frankly, I don't see any way to support the house edge argument without resorting into some form of gambler's fallacy.

The guy who hits his straight up bet, couldn't care less for the house edge. Telling him that after the next 100 or 1000 (or 1 million?) spins he will eventually lose (overall) due to the house edge is like telling that "the house edge is due". The same like telling a player who bet on a number and lost that eventually he will recoup his loses because eventually his number will come. This way of thinking is pure gambler's fallacy.

 

I haven't read a single post from turbomoron

Am I the only one?

The name alone is trolling so why read?

 

He/she has sound logic and is not a troll.

 

My wins make up for almost all of the losing bets I place. It also catapults the bankroll into the profit because it doesn't take a lot of wins to pull ahead. Sometimes it only takes one.
What you said is true for flat betting. Even with wins you can lose because there's no advantage in flat betting.

Agreed. Even though he/she doesn't seem open to what's possible. But that's ok, it's a challenge. If Michaela never gets it - others will.

I have it. I'll take my deduction in points. I've actually showed it in other ways though already if people read what I posted.

 

Ed, Sorry to be picky, but I think its worth pursuing for my own understanding, rather than looking like I am trying to pin you down. Im not.

My point is this:
My gambler picks birthdays, guesses and "zero hasnt come out for a bit".
He bets 1 number each spin.
After 37 spins, he has won twice and is ahead.
Both his numbers showed just the once. They were not hitting above average.
I say its luck.

If I didnt believe in luck, I could say..."but if you look back, you will see his numbers had hit 5 times in 3 cycles."

But we dont look back do we?

He won by guessing, and his personal permanence shows his wins were not due to "hitting above average"

(not that he even knows any of this)

I would call that luck.

I would love to be proven wrong, but if you care to reply (hope you do) please stick with my example in italics

 

you are so out of touch in your pompous, self-centered world that you cannot see that the forum name of said person is in and of itself trolling

there is no gray area with you caleb. its been the same stuff you have been re-hashing. It sort of derails threads. We know how you think and how you play. Let the man speak and portray the idea. Noone really truly cares what you say when you do speak.

 

Sorry Ghost,

Often times the facts, logic, and common sense can sound troll like if you're a system junkie in denial.

 

lol there we go. good old copy and paste style response

total caleb status

noone here is asking for your facts and logic

you repeat yourself

you are a much much watered down version of mr j....but equally annoying

theres differences between system junkies and roulette hobbyists

you ruin the fun

hopefully one day you leave the forums

 

Sorry Ghost,

Sometimes the facts, logic and common sense can sound troll like to a system junkie in denial.

Turbomoron is a good guy and definitely is not a troll. Perhaps you should take the time to study what he has written, rather than judging him.

 

im not judging him

maybe your infant brain can point out where i judged him as a person

i judged the screen-name as being trollish

 

you are similar to a locust

you travel forum to forum, i see you everywhere

posting the same thing

"sorry, you cant create your own facts"
"sorry, show me the math"
"this is absurd"

you are just annoying

like a nuisance

be like a locust and hibernate a few years

 

Sorry Ghost,

You should try Roulette cc, over there are people that have all kinds of systems based on finales, birthdays, candle staring, remote viewing and some people there even believe that the earth is flat. You could be a top poster over there.

Best of luck.