TurboGenius Math and the art of describing randomness

Absolutely true!
There are many practical applications to this.
3*37=111 *2/3= 74
You will get a third hit within maximum 74 spins. Not even close to 111
4*37=148 *2/3=98.66( roundabout 99)
You will get a forth hit within maximum 99 spins.
Not even close to 148
5*37=185 *2/3= 123.3(roundabout 124 spins)
You will get a fifth hit within maximum 124 spins
Not even close to 185
6*37=222 *2/3 = 148
You will get a 6th hit within maximum 148 spins
Not even close to 222..

What advantage does this provide you with? Knowing there will be a 3 repeater in max 74 spins?
How many candidates are there for that spot? How many numbers will you have to play to get that 3 repeat?
There will certainly be more than one candidate, sometimes more than 10.
Unless you come up with a progression to cover yourself for 74 spins?

 

Who cares what the odds of a trend or pattern hitting are? Catching a win off the pattern, no matter what the odds are, is what matters. It's like getting permission from a teacher to cheat. I always like to check the odds before a perfect pattern forms up. That way I can pass it up. Gotta have that reason for staying stuck on stupid. The math is the best reason. 97% of all mathZombies are in agreement.

 

No, because the math says a number already hit is more likely in that situation. If you're tracking numbers hit and not hit in a cycle and trying to predict future numbers on that basis, you would use the current tally in order to make your best guess. So after spin #28, the chance of a number repeating is 24/37, which is obviously much higher than 4/37 (chance of non-hit number). But this doesn't give you an "edge", unless the chance of getting one of those repeaters is actually higher than 24/37. The fact that you're using past data to predict future outcomes isn't a fallacy here because your decision can be justified mathematically.

What's fallacious is pretending you can predict an outcome when there is no basis for it mathematically (or physically). So suppose you're playing a 00 wheel and there comes a point in the cycle where 19 numbers have hit. Now you cannot make a decision (repeaters or non-repeaters?) because there are equal numbers of each, so the math isn't there to justify one; 19/38 = 19/38! But if you then go on to argue, for example, that there have been fewer repeats in the last few spins, therefore a non-repeat is due, that would be a fallacy; there is nothing to justify such a decision.

 

lol, that's what all Lotto players say. "Someone has to win, it could be me".

 

Sorry, mistake there. It should have been 13/37 not 4/37.

 

If the average is 24 then the average for the not hits are also 13. If the zero is in a condition of sleeping then the not hits average is 12. It's an average. It's that large number thingy. Anyway, all this can be tested with an algorithm. He's not predicting anything. He's making the point that the numbers are there for his theory. It's what makes me want to test it. It all comes down to large number testing and what happens if there are 26 or 28 numbers in the repeat column and less than 12 or 13 in the not repeat column. All this can be researched without dogmatic opinion. Using condescending remarks like "fallacious is pretending" is amateurish. You should go right to the dogshit remark.

 

That is 100% correct. For the price of just $1 you can dream.

Also on the mathZombie front. Thanks for your service.

 

gizmo, I'm not arguing that the Law of the Third isn't a law or that it doesn't "work". It does because it's just a consequence of the fact that as you collect more numbers in a cycle the probability increases that they will repeat. There's nothing fallacious about it.

And Turbo isn't making a case that you can dream, he's saying you can get an advantage. I disagree, but we can keep it civil.

 

To Rulet

This just illustrates that random has limits and not everything is 1/37. The higher the k value, the larger the gap between what is expected to happen,and what is actually happening.

Take the k=6 in the example above. We are talking about a 2 full 37 spins cycle difference! 74 spins! You do the math.
Why does this happen?
How is it that no matter how you randomize 74 spins, you will always get a 6 number repeating?

I'm not going to spill the beans for you, you need to work this out yourself; but i will give you this to think on: you do not need to be on all 10 numbers in your example. A couple will suffice. Think that you will always be right about a third of the time.
If you fail, set your the next race.
Most people fail because they are trying to guess. There is no secret vodoo magic crystal ball method. But know this for sure: try to guess and you will fail. Put your method on Hope, and you will fail. Instead of doing that, why don't you start by noting down what works and what doesn't. Turbogenius said this in the past and it's the first step in the right direction. This game is all about proportions and the bet selection needs to smartly exploit the Law of Third. In fact, ALL winning methods have the same root in this simple observable truth.

In the unicorn reality of the spandexboys, everything is possible: hell you can see 74 spins with all numbers showing 2 times! And in order!! Give me a break...

Be smart:
Set the race(s!) and let random be random.

 

All my experience in researching these thing tells me that you are right. It will probably average out to 66% / 33% for sleepers repeaters on average in those remaining few spins if you leave out the zero. It's probably dogshit and not dreaming. I don't think it works and have the skill to find out. I just have never thought of it before. It sounds plausible. That's why I want to see for myself. So, kicking Turbo with math is fun? It's more like is this magical thinking, wishful thinking, confirmation bias, or some other weak data reference? The argument is that the math has changed. I doubt that very much. But I do want to find out for sure.

 

Ok thanks for that, beans would have been nice though.
So, I am racing my horses, is this a flat race or am I to jump my bets at times?
I see, your avatar suggest you use some kind of bet sizing strategy?

 

first for you gizmo..rs simulator doesnt represent real spins ...
2nd law of the third works not just in a 37 cycle spin..it then works on unhits uniques and repeaters in the next cycle and the next so on...
and its not excactly a third...its just the average..its the mechanics of roulette..
so lets look at the maths of it...
would you expect the repeats and unique to hit more or about the same from a rolling 37 ..betting on them would you expect the house edge to be constant...and lose to that...
if the law is greater than average on those numbers would you say your in profit?
if the law says lesser than those numbers would you expect to lose or lose in overall to the house hedge?

so maths side of it over say 100 spins...just an example mind you...how to MAYBE look at the law of the third and apply maths to roulette in a simple way for you to understand...

now take note

and probably you turbo...

roulette is like a frequency wave ...see the excel sheet i linked too...

nicksmi evalution was wrong in the explanation i posted...

there is a beginning and and an end to a cycle...

there is also a frequency to it...

there is also the law of the third..

there is also maths in a most basic form...

the law of the third is an average only...

zero is included in ANY of the three states...unhit unique repeats...

no one has ever explained maths properly...and i,m not the best but i,ll try

on that excel sheet you will notice on a rolling 37 the numbers either on unhit uniques repeats one is constant or two or mainly the three..

ie it doesn,t change ..all numbers stay the same values of hits....

so for the simple thing i,m saying lets use maths in a basic form...with a hint of the law of the third...

just want to open your eyes here..

ok ..virtually for this example if you have downloaded the sheet you will notice the unhits count stay the same as the result in the beforehand spin...

this is around a certain percentage per 100 spins....

yet the unhits that actually hit are lesser than this spin count....

which means what to you?

how can that be?

it means that either a unique or a repeat has happened....

in the rolling 37....

so what who cares...

YOU SHOULD CARE...

this example for the only explanation of maths you have ever read or heard ever on a forum is here in front of you..

spin furthest back...on a rolling basis....if betting for keeping unhits the same you bet if that furthest back unique and repeats

if spin one is unique that means you bet on unhits....knowing that law of the third kicks in on results the payout is slighty higher..depending on unhits ...do you include that furthest back spin?

that spin number disappears next spin...

you know or can work out the average ratio of of a long term previous 37 spin cycle....

you know the law of the third is average...so you should know the losing losing prospects of the house edge over 100 spins...

so if an average percentage over this 100 spins of betting on unique and repeats is losing to the house edge...it also means that spin 1 against the rolling results can be utilised to make profit...

if unhits are 33...it means a certain percentage will adhere to some part of the law of the third...not a third as i explained to turbo thats an average....

so maths will say you will win...

just on that alone...

the law of the third and mechanics of roulette are there if you understand them..


as i say its an example...or is it an hg? let you think about it

 

don't need the lecture. I got bored at R-sim and blown up. I can grind away for years and get my 3 net wins forever. Think I'll move to chop chop, Seattle and drop out of society.

 

Sorry forgot to ask something else
Kelly betting requires a positive edge otherwise no bet situation, right?
Now, what you and turbo are saying because you manage to reduce the odds in your favour from 1/37 to 1/25 you created a positive edge therefore Kelly betting can be applied?

 

a wise man once said to me..a horse race has furlongs and a finish line....set your finish line

 

Gizmo; Eugene would like those spins #23

 

Where those mine? 22 went nuts there for a while.

Yep those where my spins.

 

Yep, 22 hit 11 times in 162 spins.

 

To 6th sense

There are different applications of the 1/3 law, and you are right, applying the known stats to the three states unique/unhits/repeats we will move our knowledge ahead.
The last number(the soon to be out of the cycle 38th) is a key component into the future cycle:you will either bet on it (unhits) or not( repeats/uniques). Between 2 consecutive cycles, 1 group will remain unchanged.
Talk about creating dependency between a past number -number 38 and the future groups of (hits/unhits/repeats) as a group of numbers, and not as an individual spin. That is one way to exploit chaos.
By creating dependency, you break random.
Instead of three dozens of each 12/12/ 13 (12.3 average numbers ideal state), apply the known stats to the dynamic dozens.

All eyes on you, chapeau!

 

You will need to use a progression. Read TG post about when you need to increase it to the next level. It's a ratio between what you know should happen/ versus what is happening at the moment.
First get your bet selection right. Once you get that, using Kelly's formulae is the next logical step.