TurboGenius Advantage of Repeaters explained - part 3 - 2020

Profit here's last 20 spins

 

Turbo can you run these in RX and show the matches please.
Thumbs up

 

As soon as I saw what Turbo shared today, I immediately remembered this post at the same moment. I've reread this topic so many times from the beginning to the end, but that's what infuriated me the most. Because I don't understand how you do it. And I've been thinking about it for weeks and haven't been able to find out. And even though they asked you then, you didn't answer. And now I immediately realized what it was, and came here to look... now everything is clear... so much pain inside...
I've had the same ideas a lot in my life, but I've always stopped at how to choose a number to delete. It turns out it to no need or there is no way how to choose... And then Turbo says there is a way to choose... more pain inside...

 

Gigi and others.

I started betting 1 number. That number changed to #13. At some point it went too 2 numbers. And eventually 4 numbers.

So, here is one view, below done as part3 for repeats.




The profit was made from zero. But the question is would you be betting it?

Is seeing the top 3 of the laps any benefit. Of the riddles reply 9, chief mentions 4-5-6. Would you be betting too many numbers?



The blue arrow shows the path the numbers will head. The hottest number is #21. You can see the R2 that want to go R3.

It’s harder to see the matches, like in repeaters topic; but you can see less numbers to bet. It’s bit like a Mr J bet; you bet the R4 and any other that go R4. The part you have to decide is how many.

The red is the 2nd cycle showing the cold numbers from the starting 37.

At 60 spins there’s usually 30 of the starting 37 showing. 10 non-hits to hit with 3 spins too come. Would they be non-hits?

 

Does any body know how to track the top 3? Remember he riddles you; if you bet the leader or the top 3, you are doing it wrong.
Dr Sir you ask me how i make the bet selection? I suggest you read all 3 topics. Do you think I'm going to tell you? After months
of different styles of play.
Now depending on how you track, should keep your numbers down.
Staking; until you can see they are predictable use a low unit of choice. When you can read the top 3, then start adjusting your unit.
I still can't get say 9'000 unit win; but I have plenty of opportunity to leave with 500 or 1000 unit win. I suggest take 1st profit or a
small win target.

In Turbo do you remember; Shank's that way you're better of taking small wins.

Thanks for reading. NBN

 

Reply 985; one of those ways of tracking to me is wrong.

 

______

every single Mathematics PhD on the planet will readily state that a negative expectancy game cannot be beat by betting streaks, any version of the Martingale or by scoping out patterns from the past

but TurboGenius and a few others on this forum have proven that that is incorrect

obvious Turbo is one of the greatest gamblers in the history of the world

it's so unfair that he has not yet received worldwide recognition for his brilliant proofs

he should really receive THE NOBEL PRIZE for what he has accomplished

it's truly amazing - and everyone here should be truly grateful for their large wins and large bankrolls that he has enabled


.

 

Since math is evolving a true math PHD would never outright dimiss what is presented. They would do their own investigation. Most have never applied all ideas converged into what Turbo has posted. Even mistakes applied differently are highly successful. Look at post it notes as an example.

I applied the base Turbo concepts to my local pick 3 lottery and have had tremondous success, I have yet to see any books, theories, etc applied this way ever

As for Turbo being the best gsmbler ever, he doesn't gamble. He knows what always happens. Besides I have yet to see anyone with even a simulated account hit $2,500,000,000 anywhere.

 

Oh really? Where's the proof? Where's the math that proves his method works? (Graphs are not proof.)

 

That's not true. If you disagree, then feel free to post it on the wizardofvegas website, where by the way, there are plenty of actuaries/mathematicians.

Regarding his pretend play account. It's easily done, and Bago did it a couple of years ago to show how easy it is when you can reset a gazillion times like Turbo has done.

 

I figured you would pop in Caleb, I see your Oppositional Defiant Disorder is in full swing .

So what you are saying is that the math phds on WOV, don't check and do their own work, they just rely on what others have done? Thanks for letting us all know not to trust them!.

Have you ever tried anything posted, to see results with your own eyes? Or do you just contradict because of your disorder?

If people READ everything Turbo posted rather than gloss over it, he laid out everything. Just put the puzzle together and furnish your own proof rather thsn counting on others.

 

No, I'm saying that they will say the same thing that I've said repeatedly, and that is that his method doesn't work, and that there's no mathematical reason that it should work. And there's no math supporting it on this forum either. Like I've said, feel free to post it on that forum and get some unbiased opinions.

I've read his game, and it's just that a game. There's no reason for any of it to work. There's no sound logic, proof of concept, or supporting math for it.

Sorry, just the facts.

 

I've posted this once already ... some of us are just different ..

what's paramount is the ability & effectiveness , not titles

 

nimo...i don,t know why you argue with dsa..he is a peanut...he,s only trying to get someone to bite....

 

I'm not arguing with him, if I unleashed a verbal tirade that he deserves, he wouldn't know what hit him. I'm just playing with him, trying to get him to post a meme I may like. Like my grandfather used to say about some people. "Son, you will encounter this from time to time in your life, you can't do anything about it, you can't fix stupid" Truer words were never spoken.

 

Performed .. a miracle !? Ow well, fine ......... we just keep walking.

With the bow cutting bubbles in water .. which others have so much to comment on.
Most if them would stop the ship .. just to be recognized & rewarded (=owned).

 

Ok, got it. You read it, can't comprehend what was posted so didn't try anything.

If you want to talk logic, explain a platypus, unlogical but it exists. Or better yet, you think roulette can't be beaten by a system, so you spend countless hours and YEARS on roulette system forums. Where is there logic in that???

As for math, the negative expectation is based on all possible outcomes, all up and down the bell curve. Since no one can play all possible outcomes, we each only play a tiny place on the bell curve, so the negative expectation math goes out the window.

I go by observed reality. Random says all the numbers can spin chaotically, I observe they go to their average. Why do numbers that repeat become 3peats? I observe they do. Why at the end of 37 spins, do the unhits equal the repeats, every time? Math says they shouldn't I observe they do. Why do repeats form in a 1-3-5-7 averages in 10 spin block just like Notto says. Math says they should be random. Why aren't intervals spaced further apart? Random math says a number can miss a billion spins. I observe them maxing out around 750. Big difference.

I'm not a math genius, but I actually test things for myself and observe the outcomes. Reality beats theory every time.

 

Not years, decades.

All possible outcomes, means 38 possible outcomes with a payout of only 35 to 1. This means the house payout is short, and you will lose in the long run.

That's exactly what probability and the normal distribution predict. Some numbers won't hit at all. Some will hit once, some twice, and some three or more times. There are more ways for this to happen then there are for each number to only hit once, and again, this is what we expect. Again, this is what the probability predicts. Unfortunately a number that's hit three times is no more likely to hit than a number that hasn't hit at all on the next spin or the next series of spins.

The math is not wrong, you just haven't observed enough spins. The longer the run, the more spins you'll need to watch.

Your reality is myopic. You've only witness a limited number of spins and are still very short on experience..

Again, feel free to post your wild claims on the wizardofvegas forum and get some unbiased opinions.[/QUOTE]

 

Nimo,

Here's the link. wizardofvegas.com

Be sure to tell them about Turbo's system.