Roulette Undeniable proof for the "repeaters"

You literally said that this thread could have stopped at your first post........which would have meant that nobody would question you by posting any responses (strange idea for a forum).

Again, you don't like something, so you redefine it to meet suit your narrative..........much like the mainstream-media.

So I guess that makes your posts Fake News.....

 

Yes ! and now 9 pages - again you post nothing to verify nor refute what the thread is about.
That is called trolling - or a lame attempt at attention seeking as you hang on my every word.
I'm flattered.
A forum is for discussion, yet you haven't discussed the topic - only your strange analysis of
my assumed mental disorders. LOL.
But please go on - I'm not sure why but if it makes you feel relevant, then it's good for you to
keep going. Perhaps it's some kind of personal therapy for you that I'm not aware of.
Oh wait, I'm running away and not posting anymore - isn't that what you said ? lol.
The issues you have are with yourself..... start there..... come back when you are stable.
(free advice from a non-professional)

 

The reason that Turbo keeps posting that it's not a "system" is because he has no system or method.

His whole approach is simply a theory that he hasn't been able to turn into a winning system or method yet, which is why he doesn't post it. Go back and look at the few threads where he claims to post an actual system/method, and you'll see him explicitly say that it doesn't win long-term (this is his out in case anyone tests it).

Can you imagine someone seeking as much attention as Turbo not posting a winning system if he had it?

He would love nothing more than to do a "told you so" victory lap on each and very forum.

"the best and the crucial question of this thread".........Who would still trust a word that Turbo says???

Don't fully explain the idea = plausible deniability when anyone questions his results/claims = Scam!!!

 

Have a nice day

 

I play numbers, not streets and not dozens and yes if I play say 18 numbers I hit till 60%. But the essence is that my advantage comes from other...

Read what I wrote. If follow how you described - you simply will win less than you will lose and the sum of all wins and losses will gave minus ...

 

Turbo, if you have the edge - it literally means it's already winning. You don't need a system to improve anything - if you have the edge you already won.

Edge is what's calculated at the end of a session(s). If you have the edge, it literally means you won more than you lost.

That's my point here... You don't have the edge if there's a need to create a "system" around it to overcome the problem with spins hitting outside your target dozen(s).

You can say "This has a POTENTIAL to create the edge." But until it's winning - casino still has the edge - and I bet it's the expected one

 

And yes, Turbo... I don't troll nor I have any other reason to sabotage your ideas.

I read all you wrote on this forum and other websites just because my expertise is statistics. I wondered wjether you really managed to predict and conquer randomness.

Conquering randomness would improve humanity in ways you can't even imagine. That's why I am involved in this. I'm already relatively rich - money is not why I am involved in studying roulette. But because effects of randomness are quite evident in this game - and if you win in a game through understanding of how random works (which is funny even to say because of a nature of word "random") and if I understand how you did it - the last thing I would do with that info is to open amd play the game for the sake of earning few bycks.

 

Personal Forums ????? What next .?

 

I think it's great - most forums do this already...

I suggest you take full advantage of such a situation (and others) and make your own "space"
to discuss your own approaches to the game. It would benefit everyone.
I have the feeling though most won't use it - much like the AP section where no AP players
post... which would require them to actually show something of value with all of their claims.
It's just a wall they can't climb because they have nothing to contribute.
But alas, those who use it will be doing the readers a favor and share their knowledge.

 

Personal spaces in forums are in many places, that is not new.
But that still not protect when somebody sees that others not understanding, for example, math and use that in his purposes to grow up his ego...

 

I've certainly imagined it and explored it - it would (in some ways) change the world.
There is however the pesky problem of something being "random" or not.
We can achieve only "close" to random with roulette - by definition it's NOT random.
With the mechanical influence, the human influence - the ball and wheel, dealer for example -
it makes this not a random situation at all.
But by all definition it's "close".
As far as using the same principles in other areas (lottery perhaps or weather, or natural disasters,
lightning strikes or tornadoes - or any other thing people claim and recognize as "random events" are
not even close to being random. So there's a fine line here concerning what could be affected and
what couldn't by being able to predict "better than average" such things.

We seem a lot alike, I like that.

 

Ego has nothing to do with winning or losing at roulette.
The only people with Ego issues are the ones pointing at others, claiming the problem is with "them"
and never once noticing they are the actual problem.
You can always start a forum/blog/site and explain to everyone who listens and teach as many as
you can - but that's too much work I guess.... unless you were sincere and that was your goal.
I also would never edit or remove any post that was contradictory to what I said in my own "space"
as you seem to assume I would. If it went on and on then of course it's not going to be allowed.

 

+With the New Year let us also make a new beginning on the roulette forum .

 

who knows...
But are peoples , you point exact where is their mistake and they still not understand , not want to understand , or want specially not understand...
But time solve all ... and point who was right

 

We're not even sure whether random exists at all - whether random is truly random, or we don't know a cause which produces a certain event.

Regarding casinos (real wheels and (P)RNG), we managed to create a machine learning model which with small data set (no more than 1000 numbers) manage to predict the continuous distribution with quite high accuracy - especially on older wheels and cheap RNG. To put it in the context of roulette — ml model picks up continuous distribution of how many numbers hit how many times (how many numbers hit once, twice, three times etc) and predicts how the shape of that distribution over next spins. So we know what group to bet on over next spins with high accuracy (whether some of the numbers which hit twice will hit the third time for example...)

I can easily open some cheap roulette site and destroy them as most of them don't have a budget to use high quality RNG which reseed often etc etc (I explained it in simple terms, there's more science to it), so it's easily predictable without having to record millions of spun numbers.

But what you did Turbo (hopefully) is something else - it doesn't matter whether roulette you play is perfectly random, as you can't possibly do all the calculations required to understand the skewness of the continuous distribution (no human can). Somehow you "broke" into the core of randomness and you manage to complete random patterns which are not detectable by any algorithm or machine learning model (not even deep learning models fed by trillions of numbers.)

If you are not faking it by screwing simulators - you don't even understand what power you hold in your hands.

 

Time to bow out of this asylum ??

 

No reason to -
Just start your own section and educate others.
You can share what works, and more importantly what doesn't - it could help a lot of people.
Just a suggestion, I would love to read your posts.

 

As a professional what would be true random by definition?

Chaos and random is everywhere but as science progresses some phenomena seem.. less Random.

In Roulette the fact that given a structured group of numbers is "bound" to have sets of repeating values rather thatn unique ones is by definition exploitable.

I wonder: have you read any of the threads on GUT or KTF and WTF in which some really passionate people have managed through the use of continuous statistical observation to set some kind boundaries of what a random seed of numbers can produce?

Both them and Turbo are "acting" by the same principles.

 

........or we could just stop letting the inmates run it.

Imagine what these boards would be like if everyone demanded that OP's were honest with their threads.

No more "hints"........or "teases"........or "lessons"........just the pertinent information. Either put-up or shut-up.

GLC was the gold-standard for this, and provided nothing but value to the .cc forum.

But for this to happen, members must stop blindly trusting in those who have proven themselves to be untrustworthy. Nothing starts with a lie, and ends with the truth. If we really want to beat the game, then we'll have to act accordingly.

 

The GUT, KTF, KFC...won't work, and for some obvious reasons. They've been debunked over and over, yet newbie after newbie comes along and recycles the same garbage over and over, rather than taking the time to read on the basics.

Some friends of mine started the rumor that the law of the third worked, way back in 1982, when they used it as a cover story for VB play success when they were back roomed by gaming. Back then, it was called "Phillips Law of the Third". Word of their success spread wildly across newspapers at the time, and unfortunately the cover story dupes foolish people to this day. Another popular cover story used by other APs is to say that the "law of large numbers" enables them to win.

In order for the law of the third to work, the wheel would have to have only 36 pockets for the player to break even and only 35 for the player to show a profit in the long run. At that point random guessing would produce the same results.

Past spins do not determine the results of future spins, rendering ideas like the GUT as silly. Yes some numbers hit two and three times or even more over 36 spins, because there are more ways for the numbers to hit in that manner than there are ways for each number to only hit once. It is not exploitable in any way whatsoever because you have no way of knowing which numbers will continue hitting and which ones will stop hitting.





For the newbies that still have their minds stuck in the cage you can view the results of tests run by a poster named Konfused. He ran a few millions sims several years ago when a delusional poster named Winkel first claimed that his system (GUT) worked. The results of the tests proved that his system performed no better than random guessing.