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 R-Sim - Giz2 - Reading Randomness Validation

Discussion in 'Roulette Forum' started by gizmotron, Jul 13, 2022.

  1. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    Hmm, perhaps he self destructed too? He will need to explain. I don't see him there anymore.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2022
  2. Naughty but nice

    Naughty but nice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2019
    Likes:
    229
    Location:
    UK
    upload_2022-7-23_20-22-35.png
    This was on R-sim sometime ago.
    Then he said he was Predictor Pro and this was there. But now gone.
    If he's going to prove something again, he'll say who player name is.
    There's plenty of Turbo somethings on there.
    Why the #12 is it the only 1st dozen that had not hit? 1st chair?
     
  3. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    It's a hot number based on whatever the Race Track of Horse Track method is.
     
  4. topdog

    topdog Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2021
    Likes:
    24
    Occupation:
    Baron
    Location:
    Nordic Country Boy
    I saw some massive losses on his latest runs so I think this is why hes deleted his account ?!

    That kind of style where you mostly try to quess right numbers by a 1 number bets is doomed to do some deep drawdowns time to time.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2022
  5. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

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

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    931
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    At what point to you guys step out into the real world and play for real?
     
    Nathan Detroit and gizmotron like this.
  6. Naughty but nice

    Naughty but nice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2019
    Likes:
    229
    Location:
    UK
    You are even thicker than this plank, DR Sir
    upload_2022-7-23_22-7-55.png
     
  7. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    248
    Location:
    England
    So there are two ways to fool people into thinking you have a winning system: either reset or create another account. If anyone wants to show they can win consistently they should refer to ONE account which has zero resets.
     

  8. Punkcity

    Punkcity Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2020
    Likes:
    1,279
    Occupation:
    CEO, manager of sublease my account name.inc
    Location:
    Troll tag team one accounts head , Skipptophia.
    Lol rlmao bleeding from my eye sockets I’m laughing so hard. Lol
     
  9. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,791
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    Just so you know, the account I used had zero resets and almost 100 sessions played with thousands of spins.
    It was there as a demonstration and that's what I did. It showed wins at a much higher rate than the ratio needed
    to win (1 in 35 accuracy) - many wins came only a few spins after the "predicted" number was bet on.
    The chart looked perfect.
    I mentioned how different numbers of horses + different number of laps made the results less or more accurate
    and gave examples of that as well.
    The fact that you showed up late to the demonstration isn't my issue. I deleted the account because I made my
    point and demonstrated it... and as is also predictable, it wasn't enough for some people. For others it was.
    That's how it works.
    If you'd like me to do it again I might, but it's a waste of time really - whatever "proof" is required won't be
    enough to satisfy anyone who doesn't understand why it works. If you understand why it works, you don't need
    the demonstration.

    But don't take my word for it
     
    Median Joe likes this.
  10. mansi19896

    mansi19896 Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2018
    Likes:
    42
    Location:
    kalimba
    why you deleted it , would like to see and learn myself, how you winning with numbers - and did your wheel showed FAIL in software ?
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2022
  11. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,791
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    Just did this - last explanation.

    untitled.png

    10 horses, 5 laps.

    The first horse finished on spin 81 (16.2 average, better than 1 in 35)
    2nd horse finished on spin 118 (23.6 average, better than 1 in 35)
    3rd horse finished on spin 142 (28.4 average, better than 1 in 35)
    4th horse finished on spin 161 (32.2 average, better than 1 in 35)
    The other 6 horses are irrelevant
    Flat bet only.
     
    Rond1nell1 likes this.
  12. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,791
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    I have seen RX give a "failed" result for RNG spins for wheel analysis if that's what you mean.
    It can happen after a lot of spins as well (my argument with Bago where I was wrong).
    It's rare after a large sample of spins for RNG to produce a failed test, but it happens.
     
  13. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,791
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    It wouldn't make sense to someone looking at it because "why" I picked the numbers that I did isn't obvious
    to someone looking at the charts or the game play. It just makes a nice chart that is useless without the explanation.
    I think Gizmo mentioned using hot numbers to pick/predict the outcomes but I wasn't doing that. More of a group of numbers
    that combined finish better than the 1 in 35 needed.
     
    gizmotron likes this.
  14. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,791
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    From the man who records thousands of spins before playing at a table.
    Hypocrite much ?
    Do you suggest people not test their ideas before going to play with their money ? I hope not.
    And who cares if they test things for 30 years before they go play with $ ?
    Unless you're a crash test dummy, jumping into something without testing and knowing all of the possible
    outcomes is just plain dangerous.
     
    David Gregory and Rond1nell1 like this.

  15. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    3,040
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    That's what I'm doing. But I messed up. I tried to do 12 sessions in a day. I had a good streak of wins going until I got lazy. That is my weakness. I've been experimenting with high bets and crashed a few times. I have one more experiment with high bets I'm going to try but I'm also going to stick to one or two sessions per day. Anyway, no excuses. This will take several months if not years.
     
    Median Joe and TurboGenius like this.
  16. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    248
    Location:
    England
    I don't agree that the chart would be useless without an explanation. But ideally you would also need to give some details such as how many placed bets, how many numbers you were betting, and how many wins/losses. The kind of data that could be used to determine whether the results are statistically significant. You can't get that information from a chart, but even so, with enough bets (I'm not talking about hundreds of thousands, but a few thousand at least), and depending on how smooth the chart is, it should be enough to satisfy all but possibly definitely DSAA, lol. So it's a shame you didn't just leave your account as it was and post a link to it here for future reference.

    So you would provide a list of all bets made and the result, but not the actual numbers you were betting. That way, your bet selection wouldn't be revealed but I could use the data to do a simulation, replacing the numbers you bet by random numbers (or a fixed group of numbers). If none of the simulation's results (run multiple times using different random numbers) were anywhere near as good as yours it would demonstrate that your bet selection is superior to a random selection.

    e.g.

    bet 1 : 1 number, L
    bet 2: 1 number, L
    bet 3: 1 number, L
    bet 4: 2 numbers, L
    bet 5: 3 numbers, W
    bet 6: 2 numbers, L
    ....

    You need this level of detail because it won't be enough to say you were betting X numbers "on average". Using an average won't give as reliable a conclusion from a statistical point of view. So ignoring the L/W registry, you could think of the above as a system to be followed: bet 1 number for 3 spins, then bet 2 numbers, then 3, then 2,... and of course nobody would expect such a system to win without knowing which number(s) to bet on. It would be worthless as a system, but statistically it would be useful and with the W/L registry anyone could recreate your chart. Anyway, it's just a suggestion.

    And as for explanations, you've said, understandably, that you will never post a step-by-step guide, which is the only explanation worth having. Personally I don't find your horse-race analogies and other math explanations very persuasive. Not complaining, just saying.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2022
    TurboGenius likes this.
  17. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,791
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    This was posted pages back

    It's 1 to 3 numbers and flat betting with $50 chips.

    It dropped at the end but not by enough to matter - I showed how changing the horse count and lap count gave more unfavorable results.
    I agree though, more detailed data could have been posted.
     
    Rond1nell1 and Median Joe like this.
  18. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    248
    Location:
    England
    Turbo, do you recall how many bets you made to get that chart?
     
  19. Rond1nell1

    Rond1nell1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2021
    Likes:
    55
    Occupation:
    Croupier
    Location:
    Brazil
    I simulated with this result and arrived at this configuration.
    I don't know where I went wrong, but my information doesn't match your stats. If you can shed some light for me! @TurboGenius

    upload_2022-7-24_13-4-12.png
     
  20. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,791
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    I can't give a definite number, lots of wins were when I was betting one number and it hit on the first couple of spins,
    other times I went to 3 numbers and won. I'll redo and take data better.

    I wasn't doing the first to 1x, 2x, 3x with those games. It really had nothing to do with repeaters at all but a
    horse race where a number hit so the next number in the sequence would be played next.
    The number of horses were the number of sequences and the number of laps were wins as the sequence played out
    and completed.
     
    Median Joe and Rond1nell1 like this.

Share This Page