Roulette The GUT/Law of the third nonsense.

The history of the game. If people would just read on it, then they wouldn't be distracted by nonsense, like the law of the third/GUT.



The reason it doesn't work is because of the following:

1. The dealer doesn't block a number from hitting once it's hit.
2. The same number of pockets remain on the wheel from one spin to the next. (Look down and count them.)
3. The odds of winning remains unchanged from one spin to the next.
4. The house payout is short. In other words, the payout out on a win will always be short of what the true probability of winning dictates as being fair. This prevents the player from being able to "step outside of probability" and exploit situations like the law of the third/GUT absurdity.

The numbers don't know if they've been "crossed" or if they should hit again, because they're not self aware, and they don't have a memory.

Over the years, many people have tried to test silly systems like the GUT, but along the way they find themselves playing the "if" game instead. "If I would have stopped here. If we would have bet this crossing instead. If we would have continued. If we would have bet more here." The "if" game is basically curve fitting. Sometimes it's intentional, but often times it's unintentional and the result of ignorance and denial. Whenever such systems are coded, the results have proven them to lose...as expected. Unfortunately this leaves the system designers claiming that it's not possible to code such a system because it doesn't take into account the "human element". In reality, what they really mean to say is that it doesn't enable the player to curve fit the testing results or lie about the results.

If you really want to beat the game, then read on the history of it. Don't be distracted by the nonsense. You can't side step probability in the random game of roulette.


-Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

 

You know we agree on almost everything. But sometimes not.

Random is predictable. It produces patterns - those patterns can be (and are) exploited.

"The numbers don't know if they've been "crossed" or if they should hit again, because they're not self aware, and they don't have a memory."

You're talking about individual numbers - charting spin by spin.
Over a group of spins, random produces highly predictable patterns - like anything random that is charted.
I posted a video from the 60's in another thread. Isn't it interesting how the random event at hand can't be
predicted - yet it can be charted in groups and show a predictable pattern ? No ? That thread only has 38 views - shame that people won't pay attention when they should be. But that's not my problem.

 

TG

This post reminds me of why i like you.....

 

The law of the third is like saying the law of 18/37. Simply knowing that roughly half of the numbers will be red/black in no way enables you to predict which is more likely to hit more frequently on the next series of spins.

 

This reminds me of the problems with the original paranormal research at Duke. If clear cut significant results weren't found, then once-removed predicting was examined as a kind of hit. Then negative results were considered as a kind of hit. The data was analyzed after the fact for patterns, and the patterns were presented as evidence.