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 You can't beat the math, or can you?

Discussion in 'Roulette Forum' started by gizmotron2, Sep 12, 2016.

  1. gizmotron2

    gizmotron2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Likes:
    65
    Location:
    Sacramento
    You can't beat the math, so don't try to beat the math by using the math. There is no variable change in the game of Roulette. But conditional probability, a form of statistics, says that there are times that conventional probability does not run parallel with conditional probability at the same time. If you use "Coincidental Change" to process an accepted form of conditional probability, then you have a value that can be discernible as a kind of situational awareness, much the same as the advantage in a game that does have a variable change like 21. The implication is that there must be a situational math based on the coincidences found in randomness.

    Does that make this argument a chicken or the egg paradox? That remains to be seen until someone proves it, one way or the other.
     
  2. gizmotron2

    gizmotron2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Likes:
    65
    Location:
    Sacramento
    Variable Change:

     
  3. RS

    RS Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2016
    Likes:
    7
    Location:
    USA
    Can you explain what you're talking about -- ie: How it can be applied to roulette (to gain an advantage)? Or at least an example?
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2016
  4. gizmotron2

    gizmotron2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Likes:
    65
    Location:
    Sacramento
    I've explained it at the betselection dot cc forum. It's there with all the skeptics responding to each idea presented by me. That can make it difficult to understand. I responded back so there is a lot of clutter to read through to get it all. Even here it is trashed by the typical hate mob. In terms of it fitting a mathematical review. It has yet to be explained by the two factions of probability study, the Frequentists and the Bayesian inference side. It's a kind of absolutism versus decision theory.

    "Frequentist probability or frequentism is a standard interpretation of probability; it defines an event's probability as the limit of its relative frequency in a large number of trials."

    "Bayes' theorem (alternatively Bayes' law or Bayes' rule) describes the probability of an event, based on conditions that might be related to the event."

    These two camps of probability theory have been arguing for more than 100 years with no settlement in sight.
     
  5. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Active Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    163
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    "You can't beat the math, or can you ?"

    Yes you can.

    And the well known "Monty Hall" problem does not apply to roulette as roulette is random
    and the MH problem is not. You simply change your odds of winning by "switching" your choice
    on what seems to be a 50/50 chance - but it's not 50/50 at all.
    But anyway - the two don't compare - it's apples and oranges.
     
  6. gizmotron2

    gizmotron2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Likes:
    65
    Location:
    Sacramento
    This is where we agree, as I stated in the paragraph at the beginning: "There is no variable change in the game of Roulette. But conditional probability, a form of statistics, says that there are times that conventional probability does not run parallel with conditional probability at the same time."

    I then went on to describe this in a later post: "These two camps of probability theory have been arguing for more than 100 years with no settlement in sight."

    It was never an apples and oranges consideration to begin with. It was a postulation that "Change" is not exclusively owned as "variable change" only.

    I gave a great example of variable change so that others could see that it is an accepted form of statistics. Anyone that knows how to use it in the game of 21 knows that it is real. Many here do not accept the notion of another kind of advantage based on conditional probability. I wanted to point out that we are never going to settle an argument that has been going on for more than 100 years. That makes this apples to apples in my opinion. What say you to that?
     
  7. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Active Member Web of Trust

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    88
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    Conditional probability in roulette? It's a foolish idea, since each spin of the wheel is an independent trial. All that matters is the probability of the very next spin. Believing that conditional probability can be used in roulette (gambler's fallacy) is a classic newbie mistake. (Don't feel bad, many new players make this classic mistake, especially when changing from a game like blackjack.)

    Before you waste more time chasing such a fallacy, I highly recommend that you read on some of the basics involving the game at the wizardofodds.com
    It will make your new foray into roulette more enjoyable once you can grasp some of the basic math/probability involved.

    Best of luck.

    -Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2016
  8. TurboGenius

    TurboGenius Active Member Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2015
    Likes:
    163
    Occupation:
    Self proclaimed Theoretical Philosopher
    Location:
    Near Atlantic City New Jersey
    Did you happen to catch the video from the 60's I posted in the other thread ?
    You can skip ahead to 20:40 and watch from there.
    You can see clearly how a completely random group of events becomes incredibly predictable
    (as you chart the "hundredths column" and even beyond - it's completely predictable even though the initial data being collected is random).
    The same can be done with roulette numbers. Isn't that lovely. ;)
     
  9. gizmotron2

    gizmotron2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Likes:
    65
    Location:
    Sacramento
    You can't get any more condescending than that. Sophistry is not a tangible argument. At best you come from the frequentism side, absolutism. I can marginalize your argument too. Don't be so foolish. You couldn't possibly know what to do with the same dozen sleeping for 30 spins in a row because you won't be looking for it in the first place. Funny you.
     
  10. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Active Member Web of Trust

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    88
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    Gizmo,

    21 aka blackjack is not a game of independent trials. The cards dealt effect future hands. However, roulette is a game of independent trials. Previous spins have no effect on future spins. This is easily proven.

    1. The number of pockets remains the same from one spin to the next.
    2. The dealer does not block a number from hitting once it has hit.
    3. Therefore the odds do not change from one spin to the next.

    Now if you disagree, then perhaps you can explain what the physical force is that's magically reaching from the past and into the future to change the outcomes?

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2016
  11. gizmotron2

    gizmotron2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Likes:
    65
    Location:
    Sacramento
    What's up Doc? From the first paragraph: "There is no variable change in the game of Roulette."

    What about context with regard to knowing what has been pointed out? Are you a retard? Because the context now suggests that you need to be accommodated for your obvious limitations. If not, please don't bother dragging us through that nothing else can exist crap because of the very tired and lame independent spins argument. You must be a retard. What is it anyway, room temperature IQ, lead in the paint of your crib, or perhaps high function autism? I get it. You've been to the mountain top and the guy said "past spins can't predict future events." Like duh! You must have climbed the wrong mountain. That other Zen Master said "past spins can't prevent a trend from becoming recognizable."

    I get it. You play a doctor on TV.
     
  12. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Active Member Web of Trust

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    88
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    Gizmo,

    Sorry, but until you get a little experience under your belt, you're simply not going to comprehend much of what I'm telling you. I suppose I could break it all down for you by using smaller words, shorter phrases... so that you can comprehend what it is that I'm teaching you. However, I'm just not that patient. Is there perhaps and adult in your house that can explain it to you instead?
     
  13. gizmotron2

    gizmotron2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Likes:
    65
    Location:
    Sacramento
    Well I didn't want to tell anyone that it was that stick up your ass. It makes you look like a big sucker. Do you know what a straw man argument is? Look it up retard. You want to have a prediction of the future argument because you are too afraid to talk about coincidental distribution that has no cause. You think that spins can't be seen as a sequence of spins. Even if you were tortured to death you could not see that. That makes you an absolutist , a retarded convenience monger at best. You won't connect mathematical sequences of independent events unless you want to sight the long term odds. I see that you hinge your absolutism on the single spin. Are you still listening idiot? In hundreds of sequences of spins I have seen many times that a characteristic known as an identifiable trend has a tendency to continue even if after jumping to other similar groupings on the table layout, for example sections to columns. This continuation of independent spins has no physical force causing it. Perhaps you should consult the Keepers Of Odd Knowledge Society, KOOKS, for your straw man arguments. Come on ass hole, man up. Deal with the fact that a coincidence can exist without it being predictable or being caused by any external force.
     
  14. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Active Member Web of Trust

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    88
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    [​IMG]

    Giz,

    Each spin is independent. On the very next spin...you have no way of knowing whether or not a trend will end or continue. You're trapped in a fools folly. You should go back to your little blog on that other forum where the mods will readily delete the facts, logic, and common sense so that you can perpetrate your scam along side the other fruitcakes like XXVV.
     
  15. gizmotron2

    gizmotron2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Likes:
    65
    Location:
    Sacramento
    I just wanted to prepare you. I'm fixing a meal for you. You will have to eat it too. I'm developing an Ai sim that is proof of concept evidence. This is the last thing your type can handle.

    It works on the truth of your own words: "On the very next spin...you have no way of knowing whether or not a trend will end or continue."

    Funny how I figured that out decades ago. It's true and it will always be true. I figured out that if I wanted to beat Roulette I would have to come up with a way that is not dependent on "knowing whether or not a trend will end or continue." So I did. And I'm going to shove that down your throat by Christmas or sooner. I can make available this sim that can't be hacked because I have an encryption key that is around a quarter of a million bit. Not some lame SSL 128 bit garbage that keeps you safe either. I can yank that key after a week of tasting enjoyment. You are an idiot compared to me.
     
  16. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Active Member Web of Trust

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    88
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    Giz,

    Cool, I have new funny quotes to post on myrulet below:

    1. "I'm developing an Ai sim that is proof of concept evidence."
    2. "I can make available this sim that can't be hacked because I have an encryption key that is around a quarter of a million bit."
    3. "I can yank that key after a week of tasting enjoyment."

    Unfortunately AI isn't going to work any better than a magic unicorn will at predicting trends in random numbers.
    [​IMG]



    Attempting to predict random is an oxymoron.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2016
  17. jbs

    jbs Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Likes:
    11
    These system scammers, whether it's roulette, baccarat, video poker, etc., are nothing but kooks.
     
  18. gizmotron2

    gizmotron2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Likes:
    65
    Location:
    Sacramento
    You really are a dimwit. You can't see someone right in front of you telling you that 'prediction' is your fallacy not mine. I won't try to fix your brain damage anymore. Nobody ever claimed that an absolutist was a realist. So, in your protected world, you can only see prediction as anything that I can possibly be thinking? That's called projection, turd. It usually indicates a recognized personality disorder. No matter what, you refuse to hear me. Dumbshit personality disorder. I predict that you will eat shit. LOL ! I have mathematical proof of it. By refusing to see past your diapers full of shit, you see YourWorld from sheep-dip Arkansas
     
  19. Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone

    Dr. Sir Anyone Anyone Active Member Web of Trust

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Likes:
    88
    Occupation:
    Shoe Cobbler
    Location:
    Merica
    Ok, then prove it. Post it here and now.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2016
  20. gizmotron2

    gizmotron2 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2016
    Likes:
    65
    Location:
    Sacramento
    I'm not selling the proof. I'm telling you that it will be in your face for free. I'm scamming you the other way. I'm sticking the proof in your puss. I'm going to watch you blow up. And it's free too. That's the very best scam of all, the truth that is actually the truth.
     

Share This Page