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

Roulette A roulette challenge for SPIKE

Discussion in 'Roulette Forum' started by soxfan, Jul 11, 2022.

  1. topdog

    topdog Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2021
    Likes:
    24
    Occupation:
    Baron
    Location:
    Nordic Country Boy
  2. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    Yep, topdog. So I wonder how many regulated sessions that show all my bets will it take to validate the assumption that the "House's Advantage" must prevail and validate that expected advantage? I have already proven in the RR thread that the casinos make from 16% to 22% annually on their table games that at the most average around 3% advantage. Funny how everyone wants to believe the House Advantage is the reason people lose and that they should expect to lose if they gamble. You can lie to people and a lot of them will consider it all gospel.
     
    mr j and Rond1nell1 like this.
  3. topdog

    topdog Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2021
    Likes:
    24
    Occupation:
    Baron
    Location:
    Nordic Country Boy
    Giz, when you live long enough, you begin to realize that we have two different realities here: One that is taught in schools and textbooks, and one that many of us are completely ignorant of. I have a pretty strong feeling that this is actually very intentional. Anyway you have to come out from your little shiny box if you want to see it. At the end of the day, it's only you who prevents things from happening not others. You really can create that reality you want to live in.

    For the math boyz I say stop predicting and go with the flow. From there you will find your answers.
     
    Nathan Detroit likes this.
  4. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    2,088
    @ topdog ^ 5.
     
  5. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    2,088
    Whatever it is always shoot for having the Edge.
     
  6. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    2,088
    Those challenges are dead meat . A re;ic .
     
  7. thereddiamanthe

    thereddiamanthe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2019
    Likes:
    285
    Occupation:
    apicem rapax DNME
    Location:
    Empfire
    @gizmotron .. to at least to a point satisfy the math crowd, I'd say at least 100.000 placed bets, if not million -- plenty of excuses to overturn.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2022

  8. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    Wow, that seems a tad excessive. These are the same people that can state what the standard deviation must be in large numbers. If my average actual bets are only about 10 bets per regulated game then it would take 10,000 games. I burn the first 7 to 10 spins just to see the action. If I win all those sessions that would put me at about $500,000. It seems like the math community is not worth proving the point to them. Perhaps if the real casinos react to it first then they will take notice. It's been done that way by tradition. The casinos take notice of losses. Still, this might be the best way to start a gold rush.
     
  9. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    248
    Location:
    England
    Gizmo, you don't need to place that many bets in order to show your method has an advantage. The higher your edge, the fewer bets you need to make before the edge overtakes "natural" variance. If it's good enough, 5000 bets will be enough betting on a single dozen. For example, Spike claims an 80% win rate on the ECs, which, if true, would be many standard deviations above normal over just a few hundred bets. You know a method must have an edge if the result couldn't have happened by chance.

    Are you betting ECs, dozens, or what? If you're using a progression this complicates matters because it magnifies the variance. So a system which shows a profit may be relying on its progression for this profit and may not have an edge at all (the classic example being the martingale). But either way you can just keep a record of your accumulated wins and ignore the progression. That way, you will be measuring the true edge.
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2022
  10. SPIKE

    SPIKE Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2020
    Likes:
    867
    Location:
    midwest
    And it's very noticeable at 80%. When I play in a brick-and-mortar casino my average is around 70% which means I spend just as much time at 65% as I do at 75% to get the 70% average. At 80% I'm hitting between 75 and 85 and for some reason this is a huge improvement over 70%. 80% makes me feel almost bulletproof. There is something that happens between 70% and 80% that I can't explain but something changes. I want to make as few bets as possible to make my goal because the overkill of 80% makes you stand out and that's never good.
     
    mr j likes this.
  11. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    I've never wanted to say that I have an edge or advantage. I bet from 12 to 16 to 20 to 24 numbers at a time. It varies based on what looks good for the next bet. Also I virtual bet in that I keep a mental track of a result had I funded a bet, example: no money on red. At a live table where I'm required to place at least a minimum bet I place $5 on any of the outside EC's. That's a throw away bet that tends to average out to no gain or loss. It keeps my seat and keeps the casino happy. But my real active bet is from $18 to $20 or $90 to $100. These higher bets are based on when to use them. At R-Sim I can no bet and high bet. There are no issues with keeping a mandatory bet each spin. Given that it is not a progression it's like saying the unfunded bets don't count. The lower, keeping my seat bets, don't count. So there is a form of flat betting that equates to no bets or my higher bet. In that case the actual bets placed are no bets that don't count and the funded higher bets that do count. I hope that makes sense?

    I have stated that my only advantage is in knowing when to place the higher bets. Based on that I should be able to validate processes with a smaller sized sample. I'm still expected to lose the same number of actual spins as mathematically expected and have been saying so all along. When placing a 24 number bet it requires two wins to balance or recover any lost bet. This is done with funded bigger flat bets. So its a form of flat betting where a claim of knowing when to fund it is the same as the claim of a stock trader placing buys on moving average indicators. It's based on past performance and brackets of movement that tend to reappear. It must at some point be believable because many stock traders use past samples of support & resistance actuals to make speculative investments. All I'm doing is applying much the same principles to a Roulette table.
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2022
    mr j and Keyser Soze like this.
  12. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    248
    Location:
    England
    It's sounds like you're saying you use a two-step parlay? If you're not using a progression of some kind there would be no way to win consistently if you were losing the same number of bets as mathematically expected.
     
  13. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Well-Known Member Lineage to Founders

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    935
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica

    The house edge is why people lose. In units, the house edge is set in stone. People will lose a higher percentage of their bankroll because they continue to recycle their money over and over, while often increasing bets because they aren't satisfied with just winning or losing a little. It's not because the games are secretly rigged, or anything else. Gizmo, I'm stunned that you still can't comprehend this after so many years.
     
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2022
  14. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    Most of my lost bets are virtual bets. Ask around. Someone here might feel sorry for you and tell you what that is.
     

  15. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    I lose the correct number of bets that I should. The Math angels are all happy with that much. Yes, it's up and down with a steady amount confirming the magical mathematical expectation that you would expect, I might add. What I can't figure out is how you can be told a million times already that I choose when to not fund a bet selection. If I lose an unfunded bet selection then you mathSterbaters, (Ha ha) say that the bet selection and the result, that is part of large number expectation, does not count because of your magical math. How come you can't see this? If I place 1000 bet selections where 200 of them are unfunded lost bets then you assume that I must experience perhaps 220 lost funded bets in order to balance your house advantage percentage. Only I clearly demonstrate that you are completely wrong in this regard. And it is because of this that the math world will need to change your mind. You clearly will not allow me to change it. It will happen. The mathBoyz will wake up to this and set out to validate it.
     
    Rond1nell1 likes this.
  16. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Well-Known Member Lineage to Founders

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    935
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    16989986760_9659138d15_b.jpg


    Gizmo,

    When you make statements like "mathSterbaters", "mathboyz", etc...you're basically stating that you suck at math and that you're ignorant.
    It's very similar to what takes place in the ghetto, where the illiterate and poorly educated students ridicule the students that attend school while attempting to get ahead in life. Being blissfully ignorant isn't fashionable outside of the ghetto, and it just makes you look like a retard on this forum.
     
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2022
    David Gregory likes this.
  17. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    I know you are but what am I?

    Here's what happened. I took Algebra 1 as a Freshman in high school. Took Algebra 2 as a Sophomore. Took Geometry and Physics as a Junior. Took off campus college level AC & DC circuitry at a technical school the school district runs for gifted students. I made more money off of the Eighth grade math class and the Pythagoras Theorem than any of those other math classes. People will pay handsomely for the preponderance of the American Dream. Unless you patent something with your math knowledge the best you can expect to do is perhaps use it as some kind of engineer, chemist, or programmer. The funny thing is that all successful people are suckers for a mansion. It takes someone like me that knew he never wanted to be a doctor or a lawyer because those people are always around people when they are miserable. So I dropped out of the scene baby, like I'm hip, groovy, peace love, and incense. So I became a great contractor. Pay up or shut up. Once you are in demand the world rolls out a red carpet for you.
     
  18. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    So it's ok to ridicule you for your room temperature IQ then? I mean you just sit around looking at a pill racing around a wooden circle. I, on the other hand, am eventually sending math people to school you on what has always been the truth. It will take time. But eventually one of them will get curios enough to be the next genius.
     
  19. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    I have created and validated the failures of hundreds of whacky gambling systems on these forums for the past 16 years with my computer sims. You have recruited suckers all over the world to hunt for broken wobbly wheels. You are in the lead for retard. But, and I mean this, we like you.
     
  20. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    2,088
    Accounting 101 is the key .
     
    Keyser Soze likes this.

Share This Page