TurboGenius When does it lose ?

So at RS I have been just flat betting on numbers catching up.
It's been since yesterday - taking breaks (spins are slow) and coming
back now and then to play a hundred or 2 hundred more spins.....

When does it lose ?
The anchor of the house edge is supposed to be getting heavier and heavier as I go
higher and higher into profit.... Strange though because it isn't.... at all.
I can't lose it back, that would be impossible - I wonder why. Limitless random I suppose.

12 individual sessions so far, every single a winner. 1,420 spins and no loss - just steady
climbing until I decide to call it quits. I already will have the "Most rounds winning" stat
on the site by far...

So when does it lose ? When does that fallacy show it's ugly head ?
Someday I guess, right ? Surely the higher my balance goes - the more and more
I'm just doomed to lose it all back.....ok.

$5.50 per spin average, over and over, session after session.....

But nothing catches up... it's all a fallacy and foolish system junkies beliefs.
There are too many pockets on the wheel and all the experts throughout time have said so.
1+1=3 and the cow jumped over the moon.....

 

TurboGenius, I salute you for putting in the effort to play that long session.

 

Hey TG, How many numbers did you play simultaneously? Did you always use the worst-performing number? Did you start betting them after a hit?

 

Just a question.
How do you determine the numbers to catch up. Is it after a 37 cycle. The graph doesn't look like there's a lot of no betting parts to determine the number or numbers to catch up.
Thanks.
Just another thought, how you track this in a B+M. Perhaps need to look at AYK's rolling 37.

 

Again thanks for showing this @TurboGenius.

In my recent post I showed how to calculate how the house edge is non-existent in the short game until the win is locked up, the math shows getting a hit within 69 spins is +ev and better than 50%. You're exploiting this very same feature with additional rules which make it more efficient.

I wish the rabble could understand the short game vs the infinity viewpoint where variance is eleminated and the theoretical probability is realised.

 

What unit size are using to get $5.50 return per spin. I calculated an optimal per spin return of 0.2797 betting flat to 69 spins units with no additional logic or bet selection. $5.50 is approximately that ratio on a $20 unit size so I'm curious.

 

I'll post the details when I'm done this insane long session lol

2,100 spins and still going. That house edge is gonna get me... or not.

 

I salute your stamina. I was in “express mode” tonight.

 

Do you tell us what you're playing
or do you keep it a secret. I absolutely believe it's true because I've been there. I'm so far ahead of the game I couldn't possibly lose. Just a suggestion of it is ridiculous.

 

Nah I'll post everything I did and people can go through the spins on RS too.
I'm just not sure how many spins I'll do for the total lol.
The site doesn't log me out for inactivity I hope.

I'm honestly curious how long it goes and if it does drop back to where
it's expected to be. Since I put little effort into how to bet and why - It's
already well past what I expected.

 

Where are the naysayers?

SirAnyone, MJ, Benas, Nathan Detroit?

Why are they hiding?

This fake crew can write all they want.
But they can't refute evidence.

Readers can chose to believe their nonsense or believe this evidence.

This is not even a choice.
It's stupid to reject evidence.

 

Finally hit spin #3,000

So around 8 1/2 hours of time on the site (10 seconds per spin) spread out over last night and today...
more to go in the morning. I actually thought (small dip in the chart) that the house edge monster had
come to take his cut, but nope - it just picked right up and kept on going like nothing happened.

So now at 3,000 spins the profit is $5.05 per spin average so that hasn't changed much.
This would be about 20 casino visits for me at 150 spins per visit average.

 

SirAnyone - not enough spins
MJ - cherry pick
Benas - Rsim don't pay
Nathan Detroit - he writes the most silly

 

Keep up the good work. Of course the naysayers will have some explanation to explain away any inconvenient evidence.

My money is on "Statistically insignificant". But hey it could be "luck" or "Photoshop" that wins that bet.

But they just hand wave at the math (with postcards and memes!) when it would be very easy to show calculation flaws or mistakes.

Funny I haven't had any of them provide any calculations of their own to refute what I have posted in detail.

@Median Joe to some credit made an attempt to understand the binomial distribution calculations and eventually understood I wasn't claiming anything fallacious, but he did take time to actually get there.

Unfortunately then he claimed house edge is paid on every bet win or lose. But that ok noone including me is infallible to making mistakes.

We still haven't got common ground on the session to session connectedness, which I say every session is independent and does not carry over any baggage from the past. Positive and negative variance and house edge is crystalised within the session and results in a net positive or negative bankroll adjustment.

 

Why the negativity surrounding Turbo. I always considered him one of the the workhorses of roulette. He's always looking for something new, he's relentless. I learned a lot from him back on GG. I got off GG 11 1/2 years ago and here's Turbo doing just what he was doing then. But so am I I guess, I play roulette every day either online or on RX. It's like chess and golf, you're never done learning. Just today I'm seriously looking at columns and dozens. I've always been against anything that doesn't pay even odds. Bet a unit win a unit. I think there might be a way to exploit 2/1 bets. Time will tell

 

The best way to respond to naysayers is to provide evidence.
Ofc it takes effort to play these sessions.

Naysayers say "waiting for trigger" is useless.

In this series of sessions I play "waiting for trigger".

The pics are posted to show full transparency.

 

Last session.

I wrote there are many "ways" to exploit.

The principle used is the same.

Once you get a solid grasp of the principle you can reverse engineer any winning systems betting.

This strategy I play is a modified version of a very popular strategy that remain unresolved to this day. EVERYONE knows this strategy. Still trying to understand/decipher the clues/hints.

 

I forgot to post the history list.

 

Great. The reason why the naysayers have been silent about this so far is because there's nothing really we can say. If you're doing this for your own curiosity then fine, but it isn't really necessary. As for any system, all we need is the rules and everyone can test for themselves. But if all we see is yet another chart heading north, we (and this includes everyone, not just the naysayers) can only sigh and wonder what the point is. Here's another:



Now, I'm not going to tell you how I got these results, but pay attention, this is important! :

You need to understand the math (I could even give list of books -- how helpful of me!)
The solution is in this forum
I am an EXPERT on systems
Nobody else has such a great system
You need to read up on entropy
Read Bob's post in this thread again
blah blah blah

Irritating isn't it? Nothing of substance there at all.

Now, I know Turbo's chart isn't one he made at home, but is from Rsim, which does give it more credibility. But as I'm sure anyone who has created systems knows, it's really not that hard to get nice results using a progression on a few numbers over what is still a relatively small number of spins.

 

@ Lucky fella, those charts you posted look terrible, but thanks for posting them. At least you're being honest.

@ TwoUp,

How can you possibly end up with a +EV when the probability of a hit is 1/37?

The chance of getting 2 wins (which is what you need to make a profit) in 69 spins is 27.3%. The probability you mention is P(X>=2), which is wrong.