1. Welcome to the #1 Gambling Community with the best minds across the entire gambling spectrum. REGISTER NOW!
  2. Join our $5,000 Cash Giveaway!

    Win Cash by Posting and Inviting New Members!
  3. Have a gambling question?

    Post it here and our gambling experts will answer it!
    Dismiss Notice
  4. 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 sub-forum.
    Dismiss Notice

TurboGenius When does it lose ?

Discussion in 'TurboGenius's Forum' started by TurboGenius, Nov 14, 2021.

  1. Benas

    Benas Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2018
    Likes:
    84
    Occupation:
    Looking for peoples who play better...
    Location:
    Ania
    I am too late with this , not saw last MJ post:)...
     
    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone likes this.
  2. TwoUp

    TwoUp Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2020
    Likes:
    122
    Location:
    Australia
    I understand hypothesis testing and spelling perfectly well. It's you who doesn't even understand English or the proper methods.

    Why you would use an approximation test over an exact test is bewildering.

    The chi-squared p-value is only an approximation. The actual distribution of the chi-squared statistic is discrete because in roulette outcomes it's a binomial distribution. Your chi-squared statistic is the square of the corresponding Z statistic in a normal approximation to the binomial.

    I already wrote about how many samples are needed for a normal distribution to adequately approximate the binomal distribution.

    Amature hour SirNoOne.

    And to think I have just helped you improve your bias estimation scam computers.

    Back to back 1's is about 1 in 70 million event so it's pushing the limits of the expected probability distribution.

    Six-Sigma confidence is 99.99966% and the gold standard for announcing scientific discoveries where something is not explained by random chance and other factors.

    You are past that level of confidence with almost 8x9's.

    Again understand probability distributions and hypothesis testing and you can use the binomial test to evaluate if an observed sequence is significant or not and is not explained by the null hypothesis (i.e. it falls outside what is expected by the probability distribution). In simple words you can test if it's random or not to whatever level of confidence you require.
     
  3. Jefra

    Jefra Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2016
    Likes:
    19
    Location:
    World
    OK, here we go.
    First option:
    Recent test on RX, 36 spins. Go for repeater.
    upload_2021-11-25_9-40-6.png

    Enough is one repeat and you end as winner. This is Turbo's category. So play what happened in past. Same do AP players.
    Once happened in online casino 11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11,11, #11 came out 10 or 11 x in a row. Turbo would kill that sequence! (question is only if such sequence would happen when someone would play #11 very strong ;-)

    So, instead 10x11 could be 1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1 . Who cares if this is random or not. Important is only what you played if such sequence happened!!!


    Option 2:

    If you play all except last
    upload_2021-11-25_9-48-0.png

    OK, are some variants for this way.

    So guys, what you saw or what you did not saw can have important end result, and it is- to win or not to win. Only this matters, doesn't it??
     
  4. Ka2

    Ka2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2019
    Likes:
    106
    Location:
    Netherlands
    As said before I agree with you the odds are staggering. BUT...

    AGAIN...

    That's beside the point.

    The whole discussion is about.

    That both strings happen on AVERAGE every billion gazzillion trillion zillion spins. And according to you and others the one with the 1 is not random and the other one is. WHICH is simply NOT true :)
     
  5. TwoUp

    TwoUp Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2020
    Likes:
    122
    Location:
    Australia
    I didn't say it was not random. I said it was pushing the limit of what we expect from the probability distribution. It is way outside the statistical expectations of the probability distribution and that is a mathematical fact. I gave you the benchmark gold standard in science as a point of reference where a result is not explained by random chance and is considered SIGNIFICANT. This is why confidence intervals were invented and are used universally when using probability. You ignore this like a clown with your gazzilions and bazzilions.

    Random means we expect an equiprobable outcome for all numbers. The distribution of outcomes will closely approximate that over sufficient trials (that's what the binomial distribution calculation is for, it tells us what we can expect with a defined level of certainty).

    Now there will always be variance but there are levels of confidence in what we can expect, sigma or standard deviation is what the world uses to tame probability and make decisions with confidence. You say it's meaningless, yet depend on it every day for survival.

    The math itself says that 5 x 1's over 5 spins is very rare (1 in 70 million event) and far less probable vs NOT getting 5 x 1's (its 70 million to 1 against).
     
    TurboGenius likes this.
  6. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,484
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    Wow, woke up this morning with lots of reading to do - but DAMN.
    I got to this quote and had a good laugh to start the day.
    So you don't have people track spins from a suspected bias wheel before you play it ??????
    Seriously ????
    Just wow. I understand that putting out BS like what you said might look impressive to the
    new people around but everyone knows well enough that you have people track spins, hell you've
    even said that was why you are on forums in the first place - to connect with people who could
    help you with this obvious problem.
    It's hard to take you seriously anymore.
    You need spins/data to verify a suspected wheel is bias and to provide the info on where to attack it.
    Even if you found a wobbly wheel on your own - without the data you have no idea what that
    bias is producing without the data. So you collect data.
    In that data you will also know that the wheel is not producing random outcomes.
    Why ? Because random has limits - which you deny. Outcomes can be charted and show
    the exact bias which you deny. "Fitness" is the catch phrase ? So you can say the wheel's
    "fitness" instead of saying the wheel is producing random results or not - same thing, change
    the wording and try to look right ?
    I need coffee, then I can read whatever other nonsense you posted as you run in circles.
     
    TwoUp likes this.
  7. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,484
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    Random doesn't have limits - but we can test a wheel and know if it's random outcomes or not.
    Run in circle.
    Anything can happen with random, even 1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1 but then it fails the *cough* "fitness" test
    and isn't considered random.
    Run in circle.
    This could be an incredibly long post but I'll just stop.
     
    TwoUp likes this.

  8. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,484
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    Second good laugh of the day at your expense Saint..
    Always ready to try to insult someone for any reason and then walking out looking
    like the fool you pretend not to be. Classic.

    I bet you do the same with maths - pointing out where everyone is wrong, meanwhile it's you who
    doesn't have a clue what you are talking about.
     
    TwoUp likes this.
  9. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    119
    Location:
    England
    Turbo, I'm surprised you don't know about Caleb's nearly 200 page book "How To Visually Detect Bias Roulette Wheels"? You won't find it on Amazon or anywhere else, but it was floating around some years ago and I'm sure there are members (other than me) who have a copy. Dr Sir is correct, finding bias solely by recording spins isn't efficient and there are far better ways to do it, plus you will likely find certain kinds of bias which you wouldn't see if you were only tracking and analysing.
     
    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone likes this.
  10. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    119
    Location:
    England
    This is an example of the double standards I was talking about:

    Then TwoUp in his post above says :

    But notice he didn't query LF's statement, in fact he liked the post! And LF hasn't challenged TwoUp either. Doesn't matter though, does it? any enemy of the mathboyz is a friend of theirs, lol.

    But maybe they meant that having equally likely outcomes isn't the ONLY criterion for being random. It's certainly true that in order to be random, outcomes must be equally likely, but it's not enough. What else is needed? (I know the answer, but I'd like to see some replies).
     
    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone likes this.
  11. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,484
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    I have a copy, he was nice enough to send it to me a long long time ago. It was very informative.
    I also know that collecting spins from a suspected bias wheel is a very important part of the process
    or else you won't know where to exploit the bias. I can spot one visually, but without the data it is
    useless.
    Like a mechanic who can fix any car needs to actually diagnose the problem before they can fix it.
    Sure the problem might be obvious - but you won't know what to fix without ALL of the data.
    The same goes for bias wheels, I'm sure you know this. If you don't think he's asked people to record
    spins to supply him with info then you don't know how "the game" works when it comes to his art.
    When he says he doesn't need a ton of recorded spins - he's lying. The more spins the better......
     
  12. TwoUp

    TwoUp Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2020
    Likes:
    122
    Location:
    Australia
    But notice how you cut off the rest of the explanation where I explain variance and probability distributions.

    Very disengenuous MJ. You guys are corrupt to the core.
     
  13. TwoUp

    TwoUp Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2020
    Likes:
    122
    Location:
    Australia
    Yeah you are MJ.
     
  14. Ka2

    Ka2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2019
    Likes:
    106
    Location:
    Netherlands
    To bad everyone is living all over the world. We could go to a bar have a beer or 2 and finish this discussion once and for all. Lol
     
    Median Joe and gizmotron like this.

  15. gizmotron

    gizmotron Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2015
    Likes:
    2,220
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    The West Coast of USA, RV'ing
    That would end up being consumption bias.
     
    Ka2 likes this.
  16. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    1,484
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    lol
    That would be an interesting group of people for sure.
    Although it wouldn't settle anything, I bet we'd all end up getting along.
    Regardless of anyone's views or opinions - we're all here for the same reason, even the ones
    who say they aren't here for that lol.
     
    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone and Ka2 like this.
  17. TwoUp

    TwoUp Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2020
    Likes:
    122
    Location:
    Australia
    A beer would be good, but I wouldn't want to ruin a good beer talking numbers.
     
  18. Benas

    Benas Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2018
    Likes:
    84
    Occupation:
    Looking for peoples who play better...
    Location:
    Ania
    Turbo , what you write here is information about wheel , not about sequence ! Sequence cant be random or not random - it is such as it is .
    But wheel can generate outcomes which are more or less efected by something , say bias or some other damage or conditions and by this reason outcomes are not absolutely random .
    Simpliest example - some numbers will appear say more intensive than others...
    Turbo, if you will move in such direction - you fast will start wonder with right or left hand he place bets. It is absolutely not important who track , before game , or in some other time track, or not track at all...that are game nuances. Are some peoples, who can say weight from eye, but other need scales...
     
    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone likes this.
  19. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    119
    Location:
    England
    You could be right, and it's been a long time since I read the book, but I thought collecting a small sample of spins is necessary only to confirm the bias identified visually. He's been doing it a long time so perhaps with experience you know "more or less" which sectors or numbers will be affected by certain types of bias, but someone with less experience will need to collect more spins. Anyway, I'm sure he'll turn up later and comment, lol.
     
  20. Median Joe

    Median Joe Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2020
    Likes:
    119
    Location:
    England
    lol, cut off? It's not as though your statement wasn't a complete sentence. Obviously you and LF were talking about averages; variance is a given because nobody expects to see every number in 37 spins. You don't need to know anything about probability to know that.

    And this isn't correct:

    But the Binomial doesn't tell you that all numbers are equally likely. That would be the discrete uniform distribution, which is only equivalent to to the Binomial when there are two outcomes and p = 0.5.
     
    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone likes this.

Share This Page