Roulette Making a simple system based on statistical data

Doesn't work. Gambler's fallacy.

I doubt that he won dirt and was he merely gambling. Again, using standard deviations to predict fluctuations in the numbers is without merit unless you're trying to exploit the biased wheel.

 

Yes.

Been looking for wheels from real casinos - online - not real online live wheels with 20 seconds time to place bets wish make room for mistakes.
Still searching and find one Online Casino that provides live video feed from real Casino Table with real punters placing bets where the time between betting or lay bets is 1 minute or more wish reduce the stressful factor comparing with 20 seconds ...

 

Those who claim they can profit with every gamblers'fallacy systems available on the Internet: Law of the Third, Cold numbers that have to catch up, Horse leaders analogy, Time traveler Anal Oh Geez, you are little cocks with big mouths.

 

Just play when the table is busy and that they'll have to pay players...

 

should be easy to code. I had that rx coded 2 years ago . ( on a rolling basis that is. Which is the same) i'll see if i can find it somewhere

 

Well as a matter of fact I have.

Maybe I should rephrase as it was a rhetorical question.
I have never witnessed the exact same non hits in two cycles both in thousands of spins testing and in real play.
I can accept that it is still a possibility but in that case I would just have lost a session.

Still it is a phenomenon that you can exploit using the right layered progression.

 

You can also do the same thing with the dozens.
The same pattern won't happen in all 3 dozens in a cycle - not to mention
the same pattern repeating in the next cycle. Dare I say it works.

 

I am not sure what TG does - but my sample shows above 4 STDV playing cycles with Hot Number almost flat betting, raise to two units on each number once within one cycle and I hit two cycles in a row with no Hot Numbers once (statistical frequency) ...

50 cycles or 50 games...

PROFIT +874 UNITS
LOSS -489 UNITS

TOTAL +385 UNITS = 1000 EURO

Code:

+33    1    W     
-8    1    W
+35    1    W
+34    1    W
-9    1    W
+34    1    W
-3    1    W
-57    1    L
+5    1    W
+31    1    W

-3    1    W
+34    1    W
+14    1    W
+17    1    W
-46    1    L
+10    1    W
+9    1    W
-62    1    L
+8    1    W
+20    1    W

+24    1    W
+31    1    W
+22    1    W
+35    1    W
+32    1    W
+35    1    W
+6    1    W
-44    1    L
+10    1    W
-49    1    L

-47    1    L
+60    2     W
+20    1    W
+17    1    W
-51    1    L
+34    1    W
+29    1    W
+13    1    W
-42    1    L
+35    1    W

-5    1    W
+31    1    W
+35    1    W
-57    1    L
+8    1    W
+24    1    W
+33    1    W
+27    1    W
+29    1    W
-6    1    W

 

I wrote a sim to generate 100,000 37 spin cycles and recorded the number of unique hits for each. Here are the results --

Code:

Hits      Freq        Percent

10         0          0.00%
11         0          0.00%
12         0          0.00%
13         0          0.00%
14         0          0.00%
15         1          0.00%
16         4          0.00%
17        49          0.05%
18       305          0.31%
19      1216          1.22%
20      3539          3.54%
21      8340          8.34%
22     14750         14.75%
23     19928         19.93%
24     20387         20.39%
25     16071         16.07%
26      9550          9.55%
27      4114          4.11%
28      1346          1.35%
29       332          0.33%
30        63          0.06%
31         4          0.00%
32         1          0.00%
33         0          0.00%
34         0          0.00%
35         0          0.00%
36         0          0.00%
37         0          0.00%

Does this help? (see, I'm starting to think like a system player)

If you work out the percentage chances above and below whatever numbers have hit by the time you get to spin 35 or 36 in the cycle, what is the preferred option according to the stats - to bet for numbers which haven't hit yet, or for a repeat?

Obviously the values will change a little from run to run, but not by much.

 

Not according to the stats I posted above. Only about 20% of the time it's actually 24. It's the outcome which occurs most often, followed closely by 23. But does this actually change anything? If you do what I suggested above you could work out a chart so that you know whether to bet for a repeat or for non-hit whatever numbers have actually hit when there are X numbers left in the cycle.

 

The obvious problem with the law of the third stuff is that the normal distribution needs to be for a 36 pocket wheel in order for the players to just break even. The normal distribution says that the payout is still short!

The players expectation of the normal distribution is to still lose.

 

Of course it changes everything.

You can expect 40.32 (not half of the time, but getting close) of the time for
the outcome to be 23 or 24

Would it be fair to suggest to someone to bet on this value being 16 or less, or maybe 29 or higher ?
No, that would be foolish to suggest to someone.
So you have the proof of where the benefit is - and it's not 100% (it's 40.32%) that you'll win -
not 37 random possibilities but 2 possibilities.

I can say - if after 1 cycle (minus 1 spin since that's where the bet would be)
If you are at a value of 22....... with one spin to go...
You have the advantage of being right with your prediction by betting on the no-shows
(to this point) expecting the end value to be 23

 

Knowing the average number of spins that it takes for an event to happen doesn't enable the player to side step the event and exploit it. Knowledge of the average in relation to the payout should be a big red flag that you shouldn't expect to win!

 

I already showed you plain and clearly how using a strategy produced
1:32.3
Better than the math expected, better than your 1:36
But you don't care to understand this at all. Keep posting memes.
Pay no attention to the blue line being well below the green one - almost below it the entire time
actually - but pay no attention.

 

The distributions shows that your expectation is to come up short of the number of hits required to break even. Just add it up and you will see.

 

So with Jerome's chart - you're ok with saying to someone -
Go for the 10 to be the value, not 23 or 24 - noooo.
I mean they have 0.00 chance of winning compared to 40% but what do you care ?
You pay no attention to anything beyond 1 spin and never will.

 

My chart is actual results, not a nonsense image you found online.
You can't even back up your position by showing actual results.
A waste of time.

 

You are correct about one thing Ed, and that is that the same pattern won't repeat in the next cycle (Raindrops). But still, the same problem remains; You can't profit from this everytime you play.

 

It's the same thing with 37 numbers won't appear in 37 spins, true; but again, you can't profit from it (dyksexlic thought he could too, wich me among some friends found out he couldn't). It's just impossible.

 

This is your own problem, not mine.
If I tell you that the same pattern won't repeat - and you can't figure out in the next cycle (for example)
how to exploit this - then there's nothing anyone can say to prove that.
I could make thread explaining it again - but it won't matter.
Sure enough - the pattern won't repeat and people will say "Well how do I know ahead of time that
it won't ?" Because it Won't ! Where to bet then ? That is the easy part - to see it as a difficult task
to figure out means something else. I'm blue in the face repeating the same things while it doesn't
matter, it's always "I test this for 50,000 spins and it failed" (improperly tested) or then it wasn't enough
spins when examples are given. It's up to the reader to understand things or not.