Roulette Proof of Turbo's Fallacy

Here not important what we call - that is simply not mathematical talk.

How often that happend ?

You talk about statistical things and here you must be very precisely - cant say "Usually that happends, but sometimes - not !!! "

You must use probabilities , only then is possible to count or proof, if way is profitable or not... you that not do, can be that I know why ... or you simply not know how to calculate probabilities, or you all understand and with not talking this try something to hide ?

But this I not understand :

What you abowe wrote is simply minus game !

I hit number 1 time in 34 spins in average and still sometimes have problems with winings...if i will hit 2 times in 111 spins - that will be tragedy !

 

Over the years the issue has always been the same.

How to know what and when?

Nobody

If you don't know WHEN, then it's absurd to simply claim fallacy.

If you don't know WHEN then it's absurd to claim the entire gamblers world must certainly don't know WHEN as well.

Keep your ignorance to yourself.

 

What Turbo is implying is that he can somehow exploit "regression to the mean"...which is of course, utterly absurd.

A number could have a hit rate of 1 in 100 over just a few hundred spins...yet hit close to expectation at 1 in 38 over the next 10,000 spins and it will appear to have returned to the mean without hitting above expectation. In other words, numbers don't have to run "hot" in order to regress to the mean. You just need an exponentially larger spin sample. All that is expected of the number is for it to hit near expectation (which still isn't enough for it to show a profit) moving forward. The naïve believe that cold numbers are due to run hot in order to make up for some kind of deficit is part of the gambler's fallacy.

Again, this is and always will be a bridge too far for some people to comprehend.

 

Okay so now it's 'numbers that are becoming hot.'
How do we define this? Numbers that have gone from cold to average?
And of course, this is different to what was said in the original 'hottest numbers from 3 dozens' idea

 

Why is it absurd? System players claim to know (or at least they believe) that their numbers will arrive "soon" based on SHORT spin history. The spin history is an indicator of what's likely to happen next. However you argue the case, data shows it's not true, therefore such a belief is justifiably a fallacy.

 

Past spins are meaningless. Take it or leave it .

 

It must been hard to read and grasp what is written for some of you ain't it?
Geez.
Turbo can't explain it any better, he just can't!
It's just plain and simple. If you can't win now at this game with given advice, well, you need to start play poker or something else. This game isn't then for you.
Want to make this work everyday, everytime you play? well, that's the last part to this 200+ year puzzle. It's in the money management, how to use a propper progression and when or when to not use one. But this was also coverd by turbo, but again, nobody is reading anymore these days, clearly. You have to put some effort in it, tip 1: test tip2: test tip 3 more testing. Oh but wait, you all want to taken by the hand

 

Here is what happens. Hot numbers appear more often than cold numbers. They swarm in packets at times. In other words they bunch together in super active stretches at times. They do that all day long. It just changes from one number to another, all day long. All you have to do is have sessions where you are targeting them better than on days that you can't seem to target them very well. With a mild progression you can recover real fast from just about any long stretch even if you just end up selecting numbers that are close to normal activity. You just need a way to see each number's activity as you go along.

 

Well then, perhaps you can explain it?

 

DutchCrown, and Turbo,

I have a question for you. What determines the probability of a number winning?

1. Is it the number of pockets on the wheel in which a number can fall?
2. The distribution of how the numbers have hit over the last several spins?
3. Both 1 and 2?

 

4. Nothing. or better states coincidence.

 

Gizmo,

Do you know what an "edge" is?

Hint...it has nothing do with with a large enough number of people doing anything.

 

I know more than you ever will. There is no greater edge in this world than Yosemite rock climbing. It's so far up there that you are three times higher than the approach altitude at an uncontrolled airport. And you are still on the ground, sort of. There is no way to express that to the usual flat landers.

 

Oooooooh it's the money management! We never thought about that, my lord thats the secret we all have been searching for these years.

A. You cant use money management to win at a negative expectation game. Only if you have infinite money.

B. Casinos uses a maximum what you can bet.

Conlusion:

You cant win with money management.

 

It all depends, when that number showed up for the first time!
For example when #1 shows up for the first time on spin 89 and for the second time on spin 110, You A: didn't play that number the first 88 spins (so you didn't lost anything)
B: that number has hit 2 times in 111 spins, so it's still performing below average, but because you only started to play that number on spin 89 you still win money on that number (+15 ik units)

 

Gizmotron's Signature: "My edge is a large enough number of people doing this and producing win to loss results that are demonstrably beyond the possibility of inaccuracy."

It's my signature. Let me explain this so that even Dr. Snowman, the internet forum wrecker of Gambler's Glen, can understand it.

Your edge is knowing that you will find a bias wheel. My edge is knowing that I'm right and that my research experiment among peer review participants will validate that I am right. The Reading Randomness experiment is that research instrument. When enough people get caught using it in a casino or using it to take large enough chunks of a casino's earnings then it will begin to be too late. RR will shut down your edge. It will shut down your horde of broke dick wheel hunters. So go ahead and be skeptical. It's clearly the fashion. But don't bother trying to stop it.

 

No.

Way of mark, you've supplemented with something artificial that has nothing to do with the game, the essential piece - the origin - (of the) game's evolution.

That's like oogling the conglomerat of eye cells out in a developing baby in the womb out, placing therein a piece of iron .. & once the babe comes out .. see its the same thing. Proof that .. what?

 

Seems like they force us to play every spin....if one have a SOLID method with a certain amount of hits each cycle....and they didn't hit in the first part of that cycle.....well i knew what to do .... I know , i know It's all a fallacy and those hits that always come and the right mm on it will not work....

 

If I that will know, then will be other life of course, but nobody that know...and that is why not important, when you play when - not.

My method of choosing to play wheel or not is different and is based on expectations. If I see, that expectations are higher than 1 in 35 - I play and play all spins. But when have feeling, that it droped lower - imidially stop play...