For the sake of argument, I'm going to call this The Turbo Paradox. I'd appreciate a comment after careful consideration. Others are more than welcome to comment as well. Here is the Paradox. - There are only so many possible things that can be done here, each and every one ends with a negative result in my opinion, aside from the way I do it. But if you have a suggestion, I'm open to hearing it. So what's to be done ? (I'll include my commentary as well) A) I do what I'm doing. I post results and "hints", nudges in the right direction to everyone equally and it is up to them to work out the rest, test, etc. and make their own decisions. If I can help, I do. (this is how I handle it now) This means I'll take a load of sh*t constantly from some people, others who don't figure it out will be upset that they didn't/can't, etc etc. It's not entirely fair to everyone but there seems to be nothing that is. B) I explain only to certain people the exact process with details and examples, more or less like giving the complete recipe to a secret formula. (unfair to do so with only certain people and not everyone in my opinion). C) Post openly to everyone in public the exact process with details and examples. (this isn't an option in my book and never would be.. the results literally could mean that nobody wins in the end. The process of the game itself could be altered to defeat how it's done - yes, it can be. And with that knowledge "everywhere", that's no doubt what would happen. I don't see this as a win for anyone.) D) I post NOTHING. (the misfits cheer... "FINALLY"). This isn't in my nature. I've been at this since I was a teenager and that was 3 decades ago. Someone can start from this point instead of spending that same amount of time going in circles with the same flawed ideas like is being done on other forums by some members. I don't see this as an option, but it's always an option. I continue to play it myself and tell no one past what I've already said openly. =============== As you can see, this is a Paradox in it's true form. There's no answer here that benefits anyone/everyone/no one. I'm sure my trickle of info here and there is frustrating and annoying, and it is to me as well. Sounds like BS ? It isn't. It legitimately bothers me if I see someone headed down the wrong path. I see in another thread people working on it - that's great ! I can always nudge here and there with the expectation that anyone who does work it out won't describe it step by step just as I haven't... but I have no control over that. That means I have to be careful and post each comment only after thinking about it and how it could effect the outcome. This is what I do. Yes, that makes some people think it's all nonsense, and it's expected. And the easiest answer might seem to be to have a qualified third party mathematician yadda yadda yadda - of course - and that leads back to C) because this info would just end up being public regardless. So while I have spoken to people about it who would qualify - it doesn't mean I gave all the info to them with specifics. Sure this might seem bizarre but play along if you wish to. Everyone seems to have their own individual criteria for what is proof and what isn't. I've heard from 20 million tested spins (4 times over lol) to demonstration of a few spins in someone's house on their wheel - to exposing the details in the open so someone else can test it - to playing at MPR for example where there still doesn't seem to be random/fair play and the method would be exposed. So here lies the problem. I've posted results from RX. I've posted results from Parx Online. I've posted results from Roulette Simulator. I've posted results from Casino play via entering all spins into RX to show results. I've posted more than enough hints and clues and pointers in the right direction, but I could still do more - just not much more. None of these of course count as anything to the skeptical crowd, and they have every right to be. If someone says it's possible while everyone has said it isn't, then Occam's razor fans will of course think the simplest explanation is the right one - which is that I'm full of it. I'm ok with that - and using "A)" above as I always have. I'm curious as to your detailed explanation considering the "shoe on the other foot" for a moment. What path makes the most logical sense to you ? If it's something other than "A)" above, then by all means let me have it. Cheers.