Roulette Prove Triggers Don't Work.

1. Apply your triggers. Stand around waiting...waiting...waiting for that magic moment to bet. Next, look down and count the number of pockets that remain on the wheel before the spin begins.

2. Don't apply the triggers. Look down and count the number of pockets that remain on the wheel before the spin begins.

How did the two bets compare? Did using the triggers reduce the number of pockets on the wheel and increase your probability of winning?

 

I want to add something. Lets pretend (PRETEND) that the trigger thing sometimes worked.

You mentioned all the waiting.....the testers do NOT add that into their hourly totals. Meaning, their hourly NET comes way down. They never include the bad stats in with their TOTALS. Too inconvenient.

Ken

 

Anyone who codes can test and prove that triggers are useless, but they never care
to do so and accept the reality of it.

Test 1 = play RED every spin flat bet for 10,000 spins and note results

Test 2 = play RED but only when the trigger happens (Black hitting back to back appears)
So B B (bet now) for 10,000 spins and note results.

Amazing, it's the same results.
Apply each and every trigger you want, and the results are the same.
I've preached that triggers don't work for ages but most people don't listen.
The number of pockets on the wheel doesn't prove or disprove triggers working.
Math however DOES beat a math game, requires no triggers and wins - regardless of
how many pockets are on the wheel.

 

The same logic can be applied to repeaters, right?
The number of pockets remain the same number and size, no matter what numbers have hit before.

 

In the random game, yes.

On the live wheel, the number of pockets remains the same, but some may hit more frequently because of possible bias.

Math does not beat the random game of roulette.

 

I think there are subjective triggers (set up by players) and objective triggers (extracted from specific wheels).

You are right: there's no way a general subjective triggers plan could get the best of it itlr, otherwise it would have been invented by XIX century.

But certain wheels (a small percentage of them) may present a kind of low variance distribution of given outcomes up to the point where a diluted betting plan could win even by flat betting.

A possible valid trigger is always the effect of the actual randomness happening at a given specific table.
We do not want to ascertain whether this wheel is really random or not, we can't care less. What we care is the long term validity of such triggers and the best way to spot them is studying the "successions" issue.

This is counterintuitive: every single spin must be altogether independent from the previous one and the process goes on and on.
But there's no evidency that on live wheels every spin is really random and actually a perfect 37 numbers random generation is easily beatable.

 

Ken ,Turbo..........have you got any actual spins off the same wheel at least 150 ........i will show you a trigger bet that works.

 

History repeats itself? i can show you

 

AFTER you see the numbers? Well no shit, I could offer to do the same thing.

Ken

 

Hey johndexter, these jokers won't play your game so just show them anyway. Some of us trust you to present untainted results.

Like Ken said, triggers will work sometimes, and that's actually a very important point to consider when arguing whether or not triggers work.

 

Any wheel, bias or not will produce repeaters. Any random event will produce repeating events.
A defective wheel is not required... Isn't that great ?

 

Yes Turbo ........only a Crook has to cheat.

 

KEN........Try this for starters,...the first 4 numbers that hit .......bet on them every time one of them hits for 4 spins and do this for 150 spins
Post the results please.

 

??
So, we'll say the last four that hit were the 12 17 24 35. I wait until one of them hits (which might be 80 spins), then bet those 4 for 4 spins? If it does hit, then? 4 spins again? During the waiting time, on to the next set?

After the 35 comes the 7 9 18 0. Thats my next set? I guess I could be betting on multiple sets at once. After the 0 comes the 17 and 9. So I would be betting BOTH sets, 4 spins each? All the while, tracking the next set of 4? Can you fill in the "what ifs" a bit better. Then I'll give it a shot. Also, why 150 spins?

Ken

 

Hi ken......these numbers repeat and repeat and repeat,ive played them till my eyes drop,.........yes you can do multiple groups but it gets tricky getting the bets on.............................one thing to look out for is a nuisance number by this i mean a number that seems to hit everytime one your group hits.......add that number on and bet 5 numbers....

 

Usually the top hitter.

 

??
Like my example above. Lets say the first 4 are > 12 17 24 35.
For how long am I keeping an eye out for one of those numbers? Even 80 spins later?

Ken

 

hi Ken yes they may sleep,you will probably use a few groups .........trust me,it keeps you busy.

 

You can't win in the long run by just betting on them if a wheel isn't biased. It's ludicrous to claim otherwise.

Triggers are of no value whatsoever in the random game of roulette. Claiming that they can help you win is gambler's fallacy absurdity.

 

I was going to go with TurboLudicrous bet TurboGenius was easier for people to spell.
So you're ok with just chalking it all up to "luck" or "rigged games" to account for my results.