1. Welcome to the #1 Gambling Community with the best minds across the entire gambling spectrum. REGISTER NOW!
  2. Have a gambling question?

    Post it here and our gambling experts will answer it!
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Discussions in this section are assumed to be EV- as they are outside of the Advantage Play section. For EV+ discussions, please visit the Advantage Play section.
    Dismiss Notice

Roulette More on that so called Fallacy.

Discussion in 'Roulette Forum' started by TurboGenius, Jan 4, 2019.

  1. Sharptracker

    Sharptracker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2018
    Likes:
    290
    Location:
    Belgium
    Translation: Come on guys, i need so much to be bootlicked...
     
  2. John Blerg

    John Blerg Well-Known Member 👹 Troll 👹

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2018
    Likes:
    189
    Occupation:
    Founder of CalAsia Proven Baccarat Wagering Method
    Location:
    Self Banned Troll
    that sounds so much like men sex, i sure hope U are not about to post the videos like RG did of men masturbating themselves on here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  3. Sharptracker

    Sharptracker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2018
    Likes:
    290
    Location:
    Belgium
    Hey John, do you at least realize that you're the only one that talks always about gay stuff ? If you're trying to make your coming out, go ahead! You'll feel better bro...
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2019
    mr j likes this.
  4. Bago

    Bago Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2017
    Likes:
    326
    Location:
    Mars
    John read too fast and saw: buttlicked :D
     
  5. Sharptracker

    Sharptracker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2018
    Likes:
    290
    Location:
    Belgium
    Well to be honest, i chose to use the polite way:D
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2019
  6. John Blerg

    John Blerg Well-Known Member 👹 Troll 👹

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2018
    Likes:
    189
    Occupation:
    Founder of CalAsia Proven Baccarat Wagering Method
    Location:
    Self Banned Troll
    what about Stu in the Hangover 2 when he seen what he fucked and it was boobies with a swinging thingie??? He said he was not gay. Maybe R19 has some direction on all the Asian TS's TV's in Southern California and how they effect the straight public by their failure to disclose!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????????????????
     
  7. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    2,088
    Just think how much time and money is being wasted chasing ONE dingle number .


    ND
     

  8. Nathan Detroit

    Nathan Detroit Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Likes:
    2,088
    correction : chasing ONE single number .



    ND
     
  9. John Blerg

    John Blerg Well-Known Member 👹 Troll 👹

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2018
    Likes:
    189
    Occupation:
    Founder of CalAsia Proven Baccarat Wagering Method
    Location:
    Self Banned Troll
    i think Stu referred to it as a dingling thingie in the movie, thought that is what you were referring to!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!??????????????:D:rolleyes:o_O
     
  10. Sharptracker

    Sharptracker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2018
    Likes:
    290
    Location:
    Belgium
    _
     
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2019
  11. Mako

    Mako Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2018
    Likes:
    429
    Location:
    Irvine, CA
    This post is what anyone testing this theory will run into if they're doing it properly. What Bago demonstrated is accurate.

    So the question becomes, how do you overcome a number or location that is -STD, and continues to be -STD despite it having hit once after being extremely cold, and you betting on it at a loss?

    The answer thanks to Eddy is multiple numbers/locations.

    You're not betting on just one number or spot, because yes, obviously one of them can stay at -STD for hundreds (or more) spins. Your endurance, or BR, eventually runs out, you have to leave before the bet location returns to 0 STD...which it will, always, 100% of the time.

    As Caleb demonstrated, all numbers/locations will return to their averages over time, whether it's 1 in 37 or whatever, and since the payout is wrong you're getting further and further behind.

    The challenge then is being on the number/location that does hit more often than expected, returning to 0 STD while you're on it...and having that single (or multiple) numbers/locations covering not only the losses of the other bet numbers/locations that are -STD are are not returning to 0 STD at the moment, but also enough to generate a profit as well.

    That's why it requires a thousand-unit BR to generate a hundred unit profit, because as Jacob's testing how shown, there will be large downdraws as you throw bets at multiple spots for a good amount of spins that aren't performing, while waiting for the one or two or whatever spots that will ultimately hit above expectation and carry the session to a positive profit.

    If you believe Eddy is actually playing this and isn't one some ego trip (I personally do), then he must have developed a money management progression that is flexible, and can adjust on the fly based on how far (or how long) the downdraw goes before a single location heats up enough to power the session to a positive.

    This is why he says it's impossible to lose, because it would be nearly impossible for all locations on the carpet to be not only behind on STD, but to remain behind, for hundreds of spins.

    So the question of "impossible" comes up then, and lets say you develop your own flexible MM system, you monitor and then bet multiple locations as they appear (long cold spells at -STD, then a hit, then you stay on them), and what sort of "impossible" is it?

    Is it the sort of impossible that say hitting 37 unique numbers without a repeat within 37 spins is? Where it's mathematically possible but has never been seen by anyone on this forum, not even in Caleb's own 1M+ database of actual spins?

    Or is it the sort of impossible that say hitting 20 or more reds or blacks in a row is, which a few of us have seen personally in real life, let alone in spin databases where it occurs frequently, and is out there looming to destroy a BR once enough betting spins are performed?

    The answer is in testing, it's in throwing as many real world documented spins from bi-directional wheels as possible at the question, along with developing the optimal MM approach to enable enough exposure to recover prior to table limits or BR going to zero. And then comparing those results to a purely random bet selection as Caleb frequently mentions (and I agree with) to see if your -STD bet selection is providing a better result than just selecting either numbers or locations at random for the flexible progression.

    Eddy has said he's done this for 90+ sessions (days) now, if we take that face value and convert it to spins, he's probably averaging around 150 spins per session. That's a total of say 13,500 spins or so. If he's achieved his goal of +100 units over that entire span per session, then his total BR would be sitting at around 9000u....enough to lose and be wiped out nine times on nine days and still be a break-even minus the cost in time (significant of course).

    That leads me to believe that this is sort of "impossible" that is highly unlikely, meaning it would pass the "one hundred people enter a casino and play Eddy's method...how many leave with +100u that night?" test that most systems don't.

    Eddy if I've mispoken or miscommunicated anything in this post feel free to correct me. Personally, though I haven't done much work yet towards seeing if this is something that can be beneficial, it seems like there's something to this. It all lies in the MM, and figuring out a flexible or dynamic approach to the bet amounts that allows you to survive until the win.
     
  12. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Well-Known Member Lineage to Founders

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    935
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    Mako,

    Who is Eddy?

    They need multi thousand unit bankrolls because they're running up as you lose progressions (chasing their losses) and then stopping when they get a win and then saying, "See, I won!" It has nothing to do with the quality of their bet selection whatsoever. People have been betting in that way since the beginning of the game. If you really want proof that they system is worthless, then just flat bet it.

    You have know way of knowing in the random game whether a number(s) will continue to stay cold and below average or whether they will hit above.

    You need to look at the game via probability rather than fallacies.

    I'll let you bet using my simulator sometime. It can bet every law of the third scenario you can imagine..such as numbers below expectation, numbers at expectation, numbers one hit above expectation etc and it will provide the max drawdown, STD details etc. You'll need a Skype account to play it though.
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2019
  13. daveylibra

    daveylibra Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2018
    Likes:
    14
    Location:
    England
    Mako !

    Another great post by yourself, very interesting and in-depth.
    But don't you wonder why Turbo said he "couldn't lose" with a different method, and is now
    recommending doing this?
    Why switch if you have the HG? It undermines confidence in this method, no?
     
  14. Half Smoke

    Half Smoke Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2018
    Likes:
    50
    Location:
    Rockville, MD
    The best way to respond to those who falsely claim that negative expectation games can be beaten either with bet selection or betting progressions is not to respond at all. I'm not a Bible thumper but I do like this one and now follow it and wish I had followed it my whole life

    New Living Translation:


    Do Not Answer the Foolish Argument of Fools, or You Will Become as Foolish as They Are
     

  15. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Well-Known Member Lineage to Founders

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    935
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    I've made that point a million times. They usually respond with the basic nuh uh, or they respond with a graph showing how they won over the last 16 spins.

    The wheel can be beaten, but the random game can not.
     
  16. Mako

    Mako Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2018
    Likes:
    429
    Location:
    Irvine, CA
    Eddy = Elvis. You're right, this method would require an Up-As-You-Win progression, because the player could never be sure which of the locations is going to be hitting at a higher than expected rate as it returns to 0 STD, he'd have to be on all of them (all -STD locations), and the progression would be required to make up the losses from the locations that aren't returning at that moment.

    Right again, you have no way of knowing in the random game whether a number will continue to stay cold and below average, or whether they will hit above. Eddy/Turbo contend that negative STD locations, particularly those that are far off their expected hit rates for a given session, will ultimately return to 0 STD. They believe that more often than not (enough to generate a profit over time) one (or more) of the -STD locations will begin the climb back to 0 STD while they're betting on it.

    I'm not saying I "believe" or "don't believe" verbatim what is being proposed per se, what I am saying is that there's merit to testing the claim as all -STD locations, all of them, will absolutely return to 0 STD over time. No location will stay at a much-lower-than-expected hit rate given enough spins.

    So we know the hypothesis has a basis in fact, or "math" or whatever we want to call it, as 1-in-37 is 1-in-37 after all. Now...whether that can be translated into a profit through a flexible or dynamic progression on all -STD locations within a short timeframe (say 200 spins as Eddy is saying and Jacob's tests are showing) is unknown, hence the need to test and see. No harm in that.
     
    trellw24 likes this.
  17. Mako

    Mako Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2018
    Likes:
    429
    Location:
    Irvine, CA
    Thanks buddy, appreciate the kind words, I always enjoy your ideas and tweaks to methods that spark your interest...

    I don't worry about Turbo's apparent "flip flop" here, as far as I've seen over time he has always maintained that his "MI" method works effectively. I don't believe he feels it's as efficient as playing fewer than say 6 numbers for repeats on a 1-5-25 or 5-10-15-20-25-30 progression, which can provide a much higher net return per hour than the MI variants, but I do believe that in his mind the MI variants do work.

    We've also seen both Eddy and Turbo mention previously when something they're doing hasn't worked, or failed long term, which tells me that they both would likely pass lie detector tests on what they're saying in this particular thread.

    That doesn't mean what they're saying in this thread is actual, or true, it just means that I believe that THEY believe what they're saying...right or wrong. I recall Eddy detailing a spectacular failure a couple years ago, where he had performed some 200+ sessions simulated and won each, then got wiped out the very first time he attempted to play the method at an actual casino.

    That honesty previously leads me to believe that he believes what he's saying here, again, right or wrong.

    The only way to find out if the idea has merit is throw spins at it and see how it plays, that's my basic contention. :)
     
  18. Bago

    Bago Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2017
    Likes:
    326
    Location:
    Mars
    Mako, your cold locations won't be cold for other players, depending on how many past spins you have tracked. The wheel does not reset when you get a sit at the table. So you cannot affirm that you are betting on locations that have to catch up to the mean. This is gambler's fallacy. Noone can know at any moment what are the real statistics of the numbers/locations.
    Of course the more locations you have chosen, the more likely you will be on one that is hitting above average, but you are also losing more money on the locations that are hitting below average, so it does not change anything.

    Past statistics are of no use in the random game of INDEPENDENT EVENTS. Roulette is NOT Blackjack, nor Russian Roulette, the odds do not change at any moment whatever happened in the past.
     
  19. mr j

    mr j Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2015
    Likes:
    1,815
    Occupation:
    self employed
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WIS
    Good point. They won't judge you here John. I probably will but get it off your chest. Open that closet door and say hi to the world !!
     
  20. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Well-Known Member Lineage to Founders

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    935
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    There's no merit to the testing. It's been tested to death since the beginning of the game. Here's an example...REAL wheel 30k spins. (I actually have over 100k spins on this wheel)

    upload_2019-1-22_13-39-36.png

    After 30k spins would you want to be the poor fool that was still chasing the number 5? The hit frequency is 1 in 47.32 and it's at 5.61 standard deviations below normal. Betting on cold numbers that are "due" is one way by which the player can theoretically lose at rate that actually can exceed the normal house edge.

    In short betting on cold numbers with a standard deviation below normal is a really BAD IDEA! If you're going to chase numbers on the live wheel, then at least bet on the hotter ones.
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2019

Share This Page