1. Welcome to the #1 Gambling Community with the best minds across the entire gambling spectrum. REGISTER NOW!
  2. Join our $5,000 Cash Giveaway!

    Win Cash by Posting and Inviting New Members!
  3. Have a gambling question?

    Post it here and our gambling experts will answer it!
    Dismiss Notice

TurboGenius More on 6-streets / repeaters

Discussion in 'TurboGenius's Forum' started by TurboGenius, Jul 25, 2020.

  1. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,080
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    I wanted to bring this thread from the main roulette section to here to add more information / test results to it and perhaps go into more details.

    Here is the original post from the roulette section :

    =========================================

    Here is a simple thread to display the proof that repeaters are actually a benefit to the
    player over "betting anything you want".
    Anyone can test the same thing explained below - you'll see the same results.
    At that point people can argue the facts but the results speak for themselves.

    Here is how the testing is done - anyone familiar with my 6 streets method will already
    know this, but to the others - something new to consider for you.

    There are 3 dozen sections, each has 4 streets.
    We are going to play a max of 2 streets in each dozen. (so 50/50 chance of winning as
    2 max are played and there are 4 available in each dozen).
    A "W" (win) will be recorded when one of our 2 played streets appears.
    A "L" (loss) will be recorded when one of the other 2 streets appear that aren't being played.
    After any "W" or "L" that dozen is finished until such time all 3 dozen sections
    have resulted in W's or L's.
    So easy ! The best that we can do (according to the "play anything and you'll get the
    same results") is 50/50.
    So what happens ? Once a street appears we play it - then it's just a matter of having
    a Win or a Loss once 2 (50%) are played.

    ========================================================
    ........... win loss
    LWL 1 2
    WLL 2 4
    WWL 4 5
    WWW 7 5
    LWW 9 6
    WWW 12 6
    LLW 13 8
    WLW 15 9
    LWL 16 11
    WWL 18 12
    WWL 20 13
    LWL 21 15
    WLW 23 16
    LWW 25 17
    WWW 28 17
    WWW 31 17
    LLW 32 19
    LWL 33 21
    WWW 36 21
    WLW 38 22
    LWL 39 24
    WLL 40 26
    LWL 41 28
    WLL 42 30
    WLW 44 31
    WWL 46 32
    WWW 49 32
    LLL 49 35
    WWW 52 35
    LWW 54 36
    WWL 56 37
    WWL 58 38
    WWL 60 39
    LWL 61 41
    WWL 63 42
    WLW 65 43
    WWL 67 44
    WWW 70 44
    LLW 71 46
    LWW 73 47
    LWW 75 48
    LLW 76 50
    LLW 77 52
    WWL 79 53
    WLL 80 55
    WWW 83 55
    WWW 86 55
    LWL 87 57
    WLL 88 59
    WWL 90 60
    WWL 92 61
    WWW 95 61
    WWW 98 61
    WLL 99 63
    WLW 101 64
    WWW 104 64
    WLW 106 65
    LWL 107 67
    WLL 108 69
    WWL 110 70
    WLW 112 71
    WWW 115 71
    WWL 117 72
    WWL 119 73
    LWW 121 74
    WWL 123 75
    LWL 124 77
    WWW 127 77 62.25% vs 37.75% 68 trials
    WWW 130 77
    LLW 131 79
    WLL 132 81
    WWW 135 81
    LWW 137 82
    LWW 139 83
    LLL 139 86
    LWW 141 87
    WWW 144 87
    WLW 146 88
    WLW 148 89
    LWW 150 90 62.5% vs 37.5% 80 trials longest streak 8W / 4L
    WLW 152 91
    WWW 155 91
    WLW 157 92
    WWL 159 93
    LWL 160 95
    WLW 162 96
    WWL 164 97
    WWW 167 97
    LWL 168 99
    WLW 170 100 62.96% vs 37.04% 90 trials WWW=20 LLL=2
    ===================================================

    As you can see, it's not 50/50 at all, it's actually staying at the same value
    with the clear benefit to the player who is playing for a repeat.
    Even if you were looking at streaks, there are streaks of Wins on average that are twice as
    long as the streaks of Loses.
    If you look at the times when all 3 won (20 times !) compared to when all 3
    lost (2 times) there is a massive difference.
    (Remember though - the Law of thirds (or whatever it's being called now) isn't real
    according to them, yet again it's obvious in the data and predictable.

    So can you win playing repeaters when you have a 63/37 win/loss advantage ?
    I surely hope so.
    Can you win when winning streaks are twice as long as losing ones ?
    I surely hope so.
    Can you win when all 3 of 3 possible outcomes are all Wins (WWW) 20 times in 90
    attempts ? While Loses (LLL) happen only 2 times in 90 attempts ?
    I surely hope so.

    So clearly repeaters can be proven to destroy the 50/50 change of winning when
    playing 50% of something.
    If someone flipped a coin and it landed on heads 63% of the time, wouldn't it just
    be logical to play "heads" ? People can argue all day that the coin toss is 50/50
    because it is - and consistently achieving 63 wins over 100 trials would seem
    impossible, yet it's not impossible at all as described above.

    Thanks for reading.

    =========================================


    So to recap - by betting a max of 50% of the available streets, you don't win 50% of the time,
    you win 62-63% of the time.

    So further data and testing has been done - to show more details :
    250 complete sessions below

    =========================================

    W W W xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (62)
    W W L xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (48)

    W L W xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (33)
    W L L xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (31)

    L W W xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (27)
    L W L xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (23)

    L L W xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (16)
    L L L xxxxxxxxxx (10)

    total sessions recorded = 250

    at least 1 win in 3 tries = 240 of 250 (96.0 %)
    at least 2 Wins in 3 tries = 170 of 250 (68.0 %)
    all 3 wins in 3 tries = 62 of 250 (24.8 %)

    at least 1 loss in 3 tries = 188 of 250 (75.2 %)
    at least 2 losses in 3 tries = 80 of 250 (32.0 %)
    all 3 losses in 3 tries = 10 of 250 ( 4.0 %)

    First result being a win = 174 of 250 (69.6 %)
    Second result being a win = 160 of 250 (64.0 %)
    Third result being a win = 138 of 250 (55.2 %)

    1st & 2nd results both being a win = 110 of 250 (44.0 %)

    ==========================================

    I think this updated data shows it even more clearly.
    You can expect at least 1 win 96% of the time by never betting more than 50% of the table.
    This 1 fact alone can have a reliable system worked around it... or you
    can use the other data to formulate your attack.

    Thanks again for reading.
     
    Wolfie, Bitrock06 and Platton like this.
  2. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,080
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    For people who like charts and examples - granted I used the worst possible sloppy progression that
    most of the time wasn't even required (sad....lol)

    Below is 30 games in a row, all wins.
    461 spins, 30 sessions for +$1,715.00 using $5.00 units size...
    so 343 units gained or roughly 1 unit gained for every 1.4 spins.

    [​IMG]

    https://roulette-simulator.info/en/user/dffbb6efd376d8dbb22cdf491e481edc
     
  3. Platton

    Platton Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2020
    Likes:
    1
    Location:
    East
    Hello Turbo. Thanks for still sharing.
    I'd like to test what you wrote in this post. I didn't understand a little how to do it.
    Session consists of 3 spins so? You say you can put on any 2 streets out of 4 in every dozen you want. As I understand it, you choose any 6 streets in all 3 dozen and put. In total, we have 3 bets for 3 dozen. If, for example, it hit 1 dozen, and it doesn't matter if we won it or lost, we remove the bet from 1 dozen. Then we already bet on 2 dozen. For example, falls on 3 dozen. Again, it does not matter whether we won or lost, we just record the result and remove the bet from this dozen. And at the end, we only have 1 dozen left. We play and check the result and this session is over, right? Or not? Because you write that a dozen should first show up and then bet. But what and where? And besides, if, as I described above, the right thing to do with removing a dozen, then what if you get into one dozen appear twice in a row? Which dozen should I clean?

    You write that "You can expect at least 1 win 96% of the time by never betting more than 50% of the table." But 1 win in 3 spins at 50/50.
     
  4. Platton

    Platton Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2020
    Likes:
    1
    Location:
    East
    I`m looking at your games now, and my question is still cleared. Thank you!
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2020
  5. Chips

    Chips Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2019
    Likes:
    29
    Location:
    A Secret Moon Base
    Ok turbo I tried the above principle with a different bet (The last one I had lying around based on your ideas.) Amazingly I got the EXACT same results as you (give or take a couple tenths of a procent.)

    So I got 62% Correct and also the other stats were spot on. (Amazing right?) (I even had 100% for at least 1 W in 3 tries.) However and this is what happens always in all my tests unfortunately. When I calculated the steps (spins) between the W's and the L's the average was 36.93 EXACTLY what the math said it should be :-(

    Now I did the same test but now picking the bet randomly! Alas the same stats show up!!! So how is this betting better than random??? In you're example it was the progression that made it tick. If you did used the progression you would have lost wouldn't you?

    p.s.

    This post is not meant to troll in anyway I just want to make things clear for myself and others. And yes I do apologise for being a complete arse sometimes but that has to do with all the frustration (no excuse I know I know...)
     
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2020
  6. Chips

    Chips Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2019
    Likes:
    29
    Location:
    A Secret Moon Base
    Nobody has any saying on my post above???
     
  7. Jono1167

    Jono1167 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2019
    Likes:
    50
    Location:
    Australia
    Hi Chips - I spent a lot of time on this about six months ago. Unfortunately I couldn't get it to work. Let me dig up some data for you.
     
    Chips likes this.

  8. Chips

    Chips Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2019
    Likes:
    29
    Location:
    A Secret Moon Base
    Would appreciate that. I have all data from all ideas presented here from T, and they all lead to 1:37 unfortunately.
     
  9. Jono1167

    Jono1167 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2019
    Likes:
    50
    Location:
    Australia
    I'm sorry Chips, I haven't been able to find the data. I'll keep looking. Here is what I found though....

    I would record WWL. At face value, this looks like a winning game. Unfortunately it was not. I would record the first win very quickly and be in profit. I would have bets in the next two dozens, but numbers would continue to land in the first dozen, meaning my profit would quickly become depleted. I would then record a second win in one of the remaining dozens. This win may or may not be enough to put me back in profit. I still have bets in the one remaining dozen, but the dozens which have already been hit, keep hitting. Turbo says in another thread that if he has one dozen remaining, he will only play it for three spins. I did this too, but even playing it for 3 spins wouldn't be enough to save the session.

    In summary, WWL sounds good but it wasn't necessarily a winning session. This happened far too often.

    I haven't given up on this yet, I will no doubt come back to it at a later stage.
     
  10. Spider

    Spider Active Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2014
    Likes:
    58
    Im sure he also states in another post to never play the last of anything, therefore maybe you should have reset after the 2 hits.
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2020
  11. Chips

    Chips Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2019
    Likes:
    29
    Location:
    A Secret Moon Base
    No worries, like I said I've all data and tested it. I found the same details you did. I tried every combination betting only if this or that occurs, trying a statistical advantage. But none were found.

    Also the same properties that Turbo said were true in different bet creations (law of third pops up EVERYWHERE) and I got the same stats as Turbo posted in those bets. More W than L. But and this is the big but, yes you can have more W than L but the cost of the L's are always more than the W's

    ALSO not only that but betting random I got the same stats for W's and L's !!! So there is no benefit in creating a strategy if random creates the same results. I asked this a few times in the past from Turbo, but never an answer. So if Turbo is saying look betting this way is better than random and the proof shows otherwise what are we doing "wrong"

    @TurboGenius could you please answer on the above, we all would appreciate that enormously!
     
  12. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,080
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    I'm not sure exactly what the specific problem is with my detailed explanation, but none-the-less here are even more spins on the same account as yet another example.
    I explained in the thread how the win rate on a 50/50 bet is much higher than 50/50.....A
    and I explained how playing all dozens would result in at least 1 win 96% of the time.....B
    So if the goose is laying golden eggs but you don't see the goose - there's not much more I can do.
    I did this session tonight using the simplest possible safe and controlled progression of +1 / -1 unit.
    Since the wins outnumber the losses, this progression can't go anywhere - it's controlled.
    I expected 1k profit in 400 spins according to my prediction before the game, but ended up with 1k in 411 spins.
    That's 200 units of profit in 411 spins / or about a unit profit every 2 spins. Above with the sloppy progression it was
    1 unit every 1.4 spins.... either way, it's a goose you can either avoid looking at or you can test properly and see the
    same results. I won't run off more examples - anyone who studies this will see how to do this much better and make
    much more than +1u in 2 spins certainly given how it performs. So the info posted by me already should be more
    than enough.

    Here is tonight's longer session -
    [​IMG]

    and the overall result -
    [​IMG]
     
    Chips likes this.
  13. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,080
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    Betting "randomly" instead of using this repeater style method does NOT produce the same results.
    You would win a 50/50 bet 50% of the time.
    If someone were betting on Red and Black (50/50ish) and you used a random way to predict -
    you would win 50% of the time.
    I explained how betting 50% or less of the table produces a win rate above 60%.
    It would be like me telling you which Red or Black and being right more than wrong - which shouldn't be possible.

    Are there losing bets ? Of course. I'm pretty sure the point isn't to win 100% of the time and never have
    a losing bet. I'd say 96% of the time being a win is pretty good though......

    As you can see even in the above quoted statistics, it's not 50/50 at ANY time.
    If the first two are W W then the third being a W is more likely than a L
    If the first two are W L then the third being a W is more likely than a L
    If it's L W, the third being a W is still more likely.
    If it's L L, then third being a W is more likely.
    A W W W happening is incredibly more likely than a L L L
    A streak of W's are more likely than a streak of L's....
    ...
    ...what more do you want ???? lol.

    There's no down side to this style of play, unless you can find one with improper play or using a dangerous
    progression that isn't even necessary.
     
  14. Chips

    Chips Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2019
    Likes:
    29
    Location:
    A Secret Moon Base
    @TurboGenius Ok first of all thanks for taking the time to test this and to show the results. But I'm afraid you are wrong, I really wished you were so right I never wished to be more wrong myself in my entire life but unfortunately the data says I'm right :-(

    Here goes

    First playing your way. Playing max 6 streets when they appear.

    I got the same results/stats as you. Meaning you were right.

    I recorded the spins between the L's and the W's. On average the result was 1:37 (just as the math says is should)

    To calculate this you need to add the spins of the L's towards the very next W so for example L (12 spins) L (12 spins) W (13 spins) the average is 1:37

    Playing my way

    Once a street appears I pick a random street instead of your street (one that is not yet taking) and play the same strategy.

    The stats were the SAME as yours. Calculating the spins between and adding leads to 1:37

    Play my way version 2

    Start with 6 random streets straight away no waiting.

    The stats were the SAME as yours. Calculating the spins between and adding leads to 1:37

    So you're way is NOT better than betting random. I wish you were right I really do.

    Now in the beginning you always said it had to win flat a progression can only used to get more profit not to dig you out of a hole.

    Now we ARE using a progression, and of course if you have an unlimited bankroll you will always win, but this is NOT due to strategy it's because of the progression. The strategy is the SAME as random.

    Again I really really wish you were right!
     

  15. Chips

    Chips Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2019
    Likes:
    29
    Location:
    A Secret Moon Base
    @TurboGenius Like I showed in the above post it DOES produce the same results. You get the SAME W to L ratio. You get the SAME ratio spins between L and W. You can test this yourself.

    Also and this is the most important question how far do you let you're progression run? To 10 20 100??? You see In real life you have to have a stoploss somewhere. Maybe you say well I stop at 20 then restart. Now you are thinking that the stoploss will save you. No it wont because like clockwork those times when you're stoploss is hit WILL show up every X amount of spins!

    Well than you might say well then I only start betting after the virtual stoploss. BAM next round you're stoploss is hit again, how is this possible due to averages. You might have 4 "cycles were you're stoploss is not hitting at all. And the next 4 cycles its hitting 10 times. This will HAPPEN!

    Now what is possible then? How can I win? Well simple to luck and a massive massive bankroll.

    See (I'm not trying to being disrespectful here, I like your ideas I really do) Let's start online where you can reset a bankroll as much as you like.

    Then we're starting with the above strategy. As the bankroll grows (do to luck this happens to) you're stoploss grows bigger and bigger to. So the chances of going bust gets smaller and smaller to. Now have you won due to "beating" randomness or to luck?
     
  16. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,080
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    Why would I do that ?
    I explained above clearly.. you win more times than you lose (better than 50/50) - therefore
    a progression of +1 / -1 will always return to 1. It's not possible for it to climb and climb.
    Perhaps I'll make another short example showing the controlled progression, but I didn't think that I would have to.
    If you don't have an advantage of some sort, a progression will grow and grow - this doesn't do that obviously
    and it can't do that - because W's outperform the L's.
     
    Bitrock06 and Chips like this.
  17. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,080
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    That's fine. I'm not sure why you picked L L W for your math, as it only happened 6.4% of the sessions....
    You could also show that a L L L did worse than 1:37 (true) - but that only happened 4% of the sessions....
    But you're not showing or using as an example the clearly dominant outcomes of
    WWW
    WWL
    WLW etc etc

    Sure, the 4% can happen, also the 96% happens.
     
    Chips likes this.
  18. Chips

    Chips Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2019
    Likes:
    29
    Location:
    A Secret Moon Base
    I think somewhere in the very deep of my brain a lights start to flicker! It has nothing todo with the above, and indeed it just needs a small progression. I will do some testing see if the idea is solid, if I think what I think it is, you were indeed right!!!
     
    Bitrock06 likes this.
  19. Timbo

    Timbo New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2020
    Likes:
    0
    Location:
    Earth
    Hi Turbo, thanks for showing this. Iv'e been reading your posts before deciding to join up and be part of the community. I've recently got back into online roulette and I remember many years ago trying out this system but only using dozens... It was flawed, can't remember how but I couldn't make it work consistently.

    I've been giving the streets a go as you have outlined above and have some questions. Does changing the bet do anything at all? Seems to me like it would just increase the risk + bring a faster outcome. Also how bad does the (what I call) the 'bell curve' effect hit this system? Or more to the point how much bankroll is needed for 1 unit bets (no progression).

    Much thanks and appreciate your work!
     
  20. Chips

    Chips Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2019
    Likes:
    29
    Location:
    A Secret Moon Base
    Well bad news, it tanked horribly (of course) programmed it, lasted a good while, ( thanks to the progression) and then it tanked and went back to 1:37 :-(
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2020 at 6:51 AM

Share This Page