TurboGenius Informational : What are your chances of winning ?

Ha, yes, and this is the easy first part of the tests...wait until the concepts in this thread (or any other of the great threads that TG and others have contributed to) begin to fail after being successful for dozens or even hundreds of attempts....that's when it's maddening.

But eventually you'll lock on to a certain tendency or occurrence that happens 100% of the time, and fits within any table betting limit even when a progression is applied to it, and the light goes on...and then it's about refining it, trying to get to the most perfect version of whatever it is, before going out and "making your millions" as smart assed Steve likes to say.

The mantra that can sustain you during this testing is that, yes, multiple people are winning daily, MUCH more than any losses they may incur along the way, using DIFFERENT methods that are not exactly alike...which means there is more than one "perfect" way to win, more than one needle in a haystack...use that to do "just one more test" whenever you feel like giving up.

 

I have close to 12 spiral notebooks filled with tests...and testing ideas.. one more test ain't ever gonna hurt me lol

 

In all my past 35 yeard I never ever tested. I went right to the firing line the casino .


IJust studying in the method was enough to proceed .


An open mind and common sense .


P.S. I brought the ptoper BR to the table and rat holed the net winnings instead of replaying them .

 

The biggest problem that system testers have, is that they don't really know how to correctly test.




1. They don't bother to put forth a proof of concept. Meaning the logic behind why the system should work.
2. They tend to look forward and backwards in the data, curve fitting the results. (Like Notto.)
3. Degrees of freedom are not limited because test parameters aren't defined, enabling the human element to contaminate the results, making it virtually impossible to ever collect statistically relevant results.
4. Too few spins are tested. (Some people foolishly test and post spin samples of only 50 to 500 spins.)
5. Most can't code and don't have access to someone that will code for them, causing subtle errors to consume the real results.
6. Most refuse to learn from the past and the mistakes of others and continue to recycle the same systems over and over and over and over...

 

The only test that works is actual play. Everything else falls short.

 

Gambling doesn't necessarily prove that a
system works.

 

But it certainly disproves it in a hurry and sometimes that's all you need. If it's working it's working until it stops working. Testing for long-term results is very overrated. You're better off looking for the right time to play your method, make a unit or two, and get the hell out. People treat casino games like they're factory conveyor belts and they are Henry Ford. If you can just get that assembly line tweaked just right it'll do nothing but produce money. Casino games don't work that way.

 

In a hurry likely means that you haven't given it a chance.

 

Who said it's in a hurry and who said you only tried it once. Sometimes there's a procedural failure that you can't even uncover in testing. You can only find it by actually playing it in a real casino.

 

True

 

To be fair. It should win flat bet right? I mean if you compare your chart with a chart using a martingale you get a similar chart deep valleys and an upward trend.

 

I'm not sure. You said in a previous post that if we know in X amount of spins we are always down (for example) 10 bucks, then a slight progression could put us up right?

Remember, for years turbo said an aggressive progression was needed. Only recently did he say you might win small or break even if you play flat.

 

True but looking at this graph I see huge drawdowns just like martingale its just an observation. But agreed when you now the max of something then a progression is an option. At the moment i'm still looking for flat, because thats easier to test. @Mako said it could work flat right? (even if it takes 1000's of spins i dont care flat is flat)

 

Lol I need to learn how to code

 

Ok I did some programming this afternoon...

Test A.

How big of a difference it would be if we wait a virtual first spin in our new cycle and then play that number? ( this is a possible repeater)

Result after 1000's of cycles: No difference

Meaning I programmed both playing a random number and playing a virtual spin and then bet that number according to the rules at the beginning of this thread.

It had the same max streaks, It had the same 0 hits occurring in streaks (for example 4 numbers played in succession so 4 x 36 loss) I tried different options to see if there was a difference in the data. There was none.

Test B.

How big of a difference it would be if we wait till a first 2x and use that number in our new cycle?

Result after 1000's of cycles: No difference

Meaning I programmed both playing a random number and playing after there was a 2 hit (I also tried 3 and 4 and 5hits) and then bet that number according to the rules at the beginning of this thread.

It had the same max streaks, It had the same 0 hits occurring in streaks (for example 4 numbers played in succession so 4 x 36 loss) I tried different options to see if there was a difference in the data. There was none. I also compared test A with test B. Again no difference.

I want to test Test C as well. But I'm not sure what exactly to do. You want to play after the top number is established so after the results are in for the complete list at the beginning of this thread?

@Denzie and @Mako did you compare your tests with a picking a random number? Because until now there is no difference.

 

Damn I need to learn to code hahaha. I only got 30 cycles haha.

I assume top number after 1st cycle ka2

 

your graph is a lot like mine that i,m still continuing....ive gone a slightly different way than the norm to hit a repeat....certainly not hotties in a race...

this is the best quote of the day my base bet is 1 but used that in increments now its a 10 unit basebet

 

That looks great
I'll give it another spin or 2 somewhere these weeks with a better bet selection than the one I used before...

Cheers

 

well that looks extremely positive! well done 6th sense. Did you use the info in this thread? Or did you use another method?

 

ok will try that keep you posted.