Roulette The horse race analogy and set completion

Ok, so reading some here and on other forums that there are still people that don't
understand what's going on here - and I can understand that.
I decided to make this thread and then be done with it as far as explanations and examples.
It should clear it up for those who spend any time thinking about how this works.
To those who don't still, then there's nothing else that I can add to it that would help.
I'm going to use an example - simple.
It only takes logic and common sense to see what's happening and I'll make it as simple
as I can so that if anyone wants to argue - they can do so with others but not with me.
I don't like using math to explain things, and I don't require millions of spins in order to
show why something works. This just bores everyone.
The million spin testers love what they do - and when they find something that might work....
they test another 10 MILLION spins to make sure.. and then maybe another 10 million.
It's nonsense. Just about any method or system can have it's value understood or it can be
dismissed with a small sample of spins. It's a calculation of how many possible outcomes there
are vs how many times you try it. So millions of spins are never needed.

Being able to understand that this is a game of multiple spins and not 1 spin though
is a requirement.
If it wasn't - then sure... a person can point and say "there are 37 or 38 possible
outcomes and the payout is 35 to 1.. case closed, you can't win at this game".
And fine for them - they have their answer and can never hope to win, never waste their
time thinking beyond that. Not possible in my view to think that way.

So back on topic.

The example I'll use is a set of 6 numbers (I used the dozens to show clearly how a set of
3 acts - that's been covered). Sets of 4 I prefer to play, because the larger the set - the longer
it takes to get a new number to play, but the more accurate the prediction will be.. etc.
(has already been said)

So the table has line bets, I'll just use those. This is an example so there's no need to
put more into it then is needed to show exactly why this works.
Please remember that most roulette players assume there are 6 line bets - but if you've read
my posts throughout history you know that there are actually 11 and not 6.
Testing software knows this - most people should know this... yet they only see 6.

Same for all of the other inside bets that contain multiple numbers bet on with 1 bet.
So I'll use the line bets for the example.

Here are the results from only 10 test runs, are more than 10 needed ? No.



What info is there here that matters to anyone ?
The winner - the set that wins the race......has 6 numbers in the set.
Each number in that set (on average) shows in 6.35 spins (each).

Now the logic and common sense has to kick in (or not).
If I know (because you can know this...) that on average a set of 6 will complete
before the others.... and you know that when it does, each number in that set
will appear 1 in 6.3 spins.. and the math expected for "any" number is 1:38 (American)
and the payout from the casino is 35 to 1 - then if you understand this, you are
fine.
Think of it like a math equation but without a complicated formula.
You know 6.3 spins is the average for each number in the winning set of 6 to show. (no debate)
You know a set will win and show before the others. (no debate)
You know if a set has 5 that have already appeared and only 1 left to appear that
the last number in a winning set will appear incredibly below the payout ratio... then you are fine.

or think of it another way (for the nay sayers perhaps).
We sit at the table and I say 5 of these 6 numbers on my list have shown up
and only 1 is left.
I know that the average is 6.3 spins per number in my set IF it's the set that wins...
I know that there are 11 possible winners in this game but my set is only 1 step away
from winning and the others are not.
Well - logically you have a very good number to bet on now don't you ?
Can another set win first ? Of course. Is this relevant ? Not really, no.
I can play any number on the table if I want.
Now the naysayer might say "Heck - that last number might not show up for 300 spins !!!!!"
Well, then we wouldn't have an average of 6.3 per number in the winning set - and we
already know that's the case... because our data and bets are always on the set that wins.
Didn't other sets complete ? Of course - and didn't one of those win then ? Of course.
Can I bet on more than 1 number ?? Of course.

It's all back to the horse race analogy with the horses running randomly down the track.
We know a horse will win - we know it will win well, well below the math expected and certainly
well better than the house payout percentage. This "has" to be the outcome thanks to random.
Now if your horse is 1 step away from winning and you can place a bet... no one would
logically bet on a horse that is behind this lead horse. If another horse did meet up with the
leader - guess what ? It's roulette - you can bet on both horses. There's no way to lose
because you know that whichever horse wins - it will win better than the house payout.

The same with these sets of numbers completing.

 

Can you "ignore" a few misfits? Just long enough so that those who want to test and learn from our tests don't get this thread derailed? Lol

 

Yeah..no dont get it now.

I think this messed up my head even more (I mean after Naughty's graphs that is).
Or I'm burned down from reading too much on repeaters (other thread) and everything is a mess now inside my head.

I will need an example of this one in action (spins) if anyone would be kind enough.

 

What are you confused about bro?

We have 11 sets right?
One will win first correct?
(I think I'm right on this part) it takes an average of 6.3 spins for a number to show in a winning set if it is the winning set.

So as one of the 11 sets "pulls ahead" and only one number in the set remains, we bet on it.

 

Ok I will test this and see if the light will go on. But unfortunatly the pictures are missing? (red cross) so what are the 11 line bets?

 

Can you not see TurboGenius's attachment called Line Statistics in post #1 ?

 

No I cant there is a picture with a red cross??? Tested it with different browser same result

 

Aye that much I already got from the previous thread (horses analogy) and tested thoroughly with that in mind.
However as I've already posted I came upon cold numbers sometimes and even 2 of them in "winning sets".
And when I say cold I mean more than 37 spins (that is solved with progression).
According to Turbo it must work flat bet (progression is for faster upping your BR).

I dont know I think there's much more here but I just cant point it.

This:

That would account for repeaters?
So when we have a winning set bet all six of them to wait for respective repeaters (if the appearance gap is bigger than 6.3)?

Im not a native English speaker, but I think that "will" is referring to repeaters in the winning set.

And if so, when other winning sets come as we wait for repeaters, do we bet them as well?
So you would have to bet more than 4 numbers at a time.

 

It's about the last number in the WINNING set. You bet that number. Could someone post the picture again of the line bets? So I could test them?

 

Thank You!

 

You mean you bet the number aiming for a repeater when the last number appears?

 

No IF I understand correctly you bet the number that has to complete the set. So set 1 is 1 2 3 4 5 6 and number 1 2 3 4 5 has fallen you bet nr 6

 

Turbo, what program you use for such a tests? also RX? But it does not show when last number came out from line bets.

 

This is how I understand it too Ka2

 

As I've already explained above I did that a few days ago and posted the results in other thread (didnt use lines, I used sectors to make sets).
Again I say that you would come up with "coldness of the last number" sometimes (more than 37 spins).

Also I tried with repeating the last number that came at a winning set (the missing one) with good results up to a point when again coldness arrived.

 

The way i see it, (and I could be totally off the mark here) is i have a set of 37 spins.. in the 37 spins:

#5 came up 2 times
#2 came up 2 times
#10 came up 2 times
#1 came up 2 times
#19 came up 2 times
#12 came up 2 times
#23 came up 3 times
#22 came up 2 times

as Turbo always says "what do we know will happen"..
We know by spin 111, one number will repeat 4 times
We know by spin 148, one number will repeat 6 times

at spin 38 i was on #23 which hit on spin 47. Thanks turbo

Two things are most improtant to me and if im right then i know im headed down the correct road. I could be wrong on both or maybe just one, I dunno.

1.) Turbo has found something that will happen within a fairly short timespan (2 cycles or less) and capitalizes on it by using positive progressions. Yes i know in the ramblings for misfits thread he is flat betting.. My opinion is he wants to prove a point. This pattern happens frequently enough that you can flatbet. He probably always uses positive progressions when playing because it will take less time to reach his goal. As time goes by, he knows this pattern will form, upping his bets.

2.) Knowing what Will happen and what wont happen are more important than covering the board with chips because there were/are 10 numbers that repeated. knowing what will/wont happen allows us to "refine" our picks. Would anyone here like to join me on figuring this list out? Maybe then we can ask turbo if we are headed in the correct direction?

i was aiming for 4 units per day. over time, upping my minimum bets it will compound and make more than enough... Know what the problem is? I dont know if i will be up 4 units or down 2 units at the end of my session. Because im trying to base my bets off of individual spins. Well now that I KNOW what HAS TO happen based on finite numbers on a wheel, im aiming for a lot more than 4 units a day lol. thanks again turbo!

 

Turbo wrote the sets had to be composed with different numbers and now there are always the same 3 numbers repeating on two consecute sets, what a circus.

 

i see bago is in here...turn off the lights and maybe he will walk away.. and please dont respond to his posts.... for the love of whatever you believe in lets not let this thread die lol.

 

It's not about a number repeating,
It's about a set of numbers repeating as a group - the last piece of the puzzle is the single number that is needed
to complete the set. 1 set will always finish before the others, and each number in that set (on average)
will show well ahead of what's expected (and much better than the payout ratio)