1. Have a gambling question?

    Post it here and our gambling experts will answer it!
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Welcome to the #1 Gambling Community with the best minds across the entire gambling spectrum. REGISTER NOW!
  3. Join our $5,000 Cash Giveaway!

    Win Cash by Posting and Inviting New Members!

Roulette Why Progressions Don't Work

Discussion in 'Roulette Forum' started by Michaela, Dec 19, 2016.

  1. Michaela

    Michaela Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Likes:
    21
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    Great article by imspirit. It refers to Baccarat but the same argument applies to any NE game.

    https://imspirit.wordpress.com/2012...or-negative-expectancy-games-in-the-long-run/

    Please read and digest this before embarking on quest for the ultimate progression, and don't listen to the self-styled "GURUS" on this forum who would have you believe otherwise. Ask for just the merest shred of evidence that any of their claims are true and they'll attack you; call you "closed-minded", or tell you that no one would be silly enough to reveal a system which would take down the casinos (LOL).

    Which, of course, isn't any evidence at all. It's simply irrelevant. Such people are not trying to help you. They're seeking to bolster their own doubts by gathering a following of fellow believers. And that's all you have : belief. Systems and progressions are like religions; except that unlike religions it can really be proved that they don't work.
     
  2. mr j

    mr j Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2015
    Likes:
    159
    Occupation:
    self employed
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WIS
    @Turbo >> This type of BS is what I have been saying for months. If you had not posted your thoughts/ideas, these goofy threads/user names would not exist. Dont get me wrong, I FOR ONE AM ALWAYS INTERESTED in your ideas and usually understand it all without further assistance. Let them win because its all in the definitions.

    Meaning, they actually lose (and I dont mean roulette per say). Thats what keeps me going and laughing my sick fuckin ass off.

    *KNOWING* they have nothing is a damn hoot. Dont believe me? Just glance over at RF/BS/VLS...its all you'll need.

    Works great for me.

    Ken
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2016
  3. Michaela

    Michaela Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Likes:
    21
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    Ken, come back when you have an argument. Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.
     
  4. mr j

    mr j Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2015
    Likes:
    159
    Occupation:
    self employed
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WIS
  5. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    323
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    No one has been attacked by me in any of my posts... closed minded ? Perhaps. That's not a insult, just a observation. The group of people who think this is a 1 spin game (where each spin is independent from the last, thus it's only 1 spin that matters) are closed minded for not thinking outside of that single spin box they are trapped in. That's no attack though.
    Any yes - it would be downright "stupid" in the greatest definition of the word to post something where anyone who wanted to could walk into a casino and win. I'm sorry if that's what you require as proof because you can't think on your own. The game "could" be changed in order to defeat why this works, and I'm not going to allow that to happen....especially if the payoff to me would be "you" specifically...understanding what I'm talking about. I'm not stupid and neither are you.
     
  6. gizmotron2

    gizmotron2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Likes:
    84
    Location:
    Northern California
    I just bagged a narcissist at BS. Many here hate him as a poster under a different name. He likes Trump.
     
    Bombus likes this.
  7. Bombus

    Bombus Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2016
    Likes:
    64
    Location:
    amongst flowers
    I can give you any progression, and it won't work infallibly. The same goes for bet selections. What's required is a perfect match between the two.

    Even then the possibility of failure is very real. There needs to be more to it in order to compensate when a failure does present.

    BTW Ken, actually you are very rude to people and quite often too.
     
  8. Bombus

    Bombus Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2016
    Likes:
    64
    Location:
    amongst flowers
    He's a piece of work that narcissist, right down to the mail order bride half his age.
     
  9. Michaela

    Michaela Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Likes:
    21
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    It's not just that the next spin is independent from the last. What's true is that the next Y spins are independent of the last X, where X and Y can be any number of spins. This follows from the fact that the next (single) spin is independent of the last (single) spin. It's basic logic. If each single spin is independent of the last single spin (which you admit), then how can a series of future spins be anything other than also independent of any number of past spins? You're arguing that somehow the whole is greater than the sum of parts. The "logic" here is similar to something else which system players argue - that the "long run" doesn't apply to them because they only play in the "short run". They don't seem to grasp than a series of short runs adds up to the long run.
     
  10. gizmotron2

    gizmotron2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Likes:
    84
    Location:
    Northern California
    Here's the deal with foreseeable expectations. If you wait until you get a first repeater in spins, and you begin at that point to place bets, then there is an average expectation of the number of spins it took to get to that first repeater in your doubles list. Lets say that that number averages out to be about 8 to 10 spins into a starting point. Now of those numbers that have repeated, you add them to your list of numbers that have repeated and bet on each one until you get that third repeat, a winner. There is an average number for that too. It spans between 1 and 24. So what's needed is a logarithmic, constantly increasing in size, set of repeaters to bet on until you get a third repeat in one of them with properly incremented steps of a negative progression. What is needed is for big wins to take place at or around the average point where wins take place at about 12 spins into the betting cycle. So there are fewer wins in the first few bets, 1 to 5, and there are fewer wins at the late end of the cycle, 20 to 24. I've written a program that analyzes this. I've yet to find that perfect balance of expectations vs risk that produces a consistent winner. I don't see how a three or four step progression can work for TG. It could be something very simple as averaging out winners to losers. I'm just skeptical. All that is needed is a 24 step progression with new numbers being added to the selection list at least 18 out of the 24 spins. The list starts with 1 number selected to bet on and increases from there until a win.
     
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2016
  11. Michaela

    Michaela Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Likes:
    21
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    Gizmo,

    What's the point of waiting? The expectation will be the same whether you wait or not.
     
  12. gizmotron2

    gizmotron2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Likes:
    84
    Location:
    Northern California
    Moron,

    The point of waiting is to see the current occurring, law of third, numbers. It's not my idea, it's Genius' idea. I know it doesn't work, unless someone can come up with a 24 stepped progression for ever increasing numbers bet on for those spins.
     
  13. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    323
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    24 steps ???????? Wow - way too long of a progression there to accomplish anything.
     
  14. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    323
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    It's absolutely NOT the same.
     
  15. gizmotron2

    gizmotron2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Likes:
    84
    Location:
    Northern California
    I have not tried flat betting each cycle with 5, 25, 125. I didn't bother because I was starting over after each cycle, and found that it is possible to lose three in a row with those three steps for all numbers bet on in three cycles of 38.. Somebody suggested to me to use the new repeats discovered in the first cycle to populate the selections for the next cycle. That way I would be closer to including the hottest numbers instead of missing the qualifiers that already did good. I just have not worked out a plan for that but it does seem like a good idea.

    I was just checking to see if I could force a winner in the first cycle and for every cycle.
     
  16. Michaela

    Michaela Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Likes:
    21
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    Can you give me a concrete example? Just one will do. This conversation is going to get boring if you just keep repeating "find out for yourself because it would be silly to give away the holy grail" whenever I ask for a counter-example.

    I can prove that the expectation of any sequence changes not one iota whatever sequence was prior to it. Not by using math but by empirical data. However, if I offer some examples which prove my point you'll just tell me it was the wrong example to use. All it take is ONE counter-example to prove that all the experts and mathematicians are wrong and you are right.
     
  17. JMWT

    JMWT Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2015
    Likes:
    22
    Good luck with that one

    Is that Gauntlet getting heavy yet?
     
  18. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Well-Known Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    323
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    I don't keep repeating that - what I keep repeating is that you can't think past the next spin (or present spin) and you can't think about the cycle/sequence as a whole instead (it's two different things).
    If I asked you to predict the timing of the next completely random "blip" from the Geiger counter in the video I posted a link to - You would correctly say that it can't be done. No one would argue.
    If I then asked you to predict the outcome that appears in the "hundreds" column - you would EASILY be able to predict the outcome, and even if you were wrong with a guess, you would be confident in using a progression because you would win on the next try.
    Stop thinking about the single unpredictable spin - that's what I keep saying over and over and you're not listening.

    Start at 21:00 - then you won't have to waste your time watching it all from the beginning. Laughs. And I won't keep going in circles saying the same thing anymore.

     
  19. Michaela

    Michaela Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Likes:
    21
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    I'm sure I've seen that vid before. I think Reyth on roulette30 forum posted it. Anyway, it's a common mistake to attempt to apply the law of large numbers to gambling. I've seen regression to the mean touted on several forums as the key to casino's coffers, and have tried to explain why it isn't. Didn't have much success though. :(

    https://www.ifa.com/articles/gambler_fallacy_misuse_large_numbers/
     
  20. Michaela

    Michaela Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Likes:
    21
    Location:
    3rd Rock from the Sun
    Hi Mike. Same shit, different forum eh? :D

    This place reminds me of the old GG. Turbo, Ken, ND, little or no moderation. Makes me feel quite nostalgic.
     
    mr j, TurboGenius and JMWT like this.

Share This Page