@ turbo

[Anastasius]

Ben thanku..! I'm a simpleton with maths are u able to convert 20 in a row into fraction from decimal like 1/10000 or whatever plz? I true need the answer...

[The General]

There is No need to know the difference. The only thing i need to know and that i'm sure of is that everytime we play at the same Table and everytime 37 spins go by Without a repeat you pay me 10 Bucks. And everytime 37 numbers fall within 37 spins i give you you're 10K in a Black suitcase  i know Who is gonna laugh at the End of the night, Sorry but it won't be you Steve. And i Have earned myself again 100 Bucks and i can take my wife out for dinner, AGAIN, every night of the week 

Yet for some reason you can't beat the MPR game on this site.   

[jekhb76]

Yet for some reason you can't beat the MPR game on this site.   

That's not what i'm talking about.
You all just don't understand how random works.
If all members on this forum would play 10 sessions of 37 spins a day, and everytime when there is at least 1 repeat in those 37 spin sessions they pay me â,¬10,00! I wanna check my bankacount by the end of the week, won't you? Now where is my ferrari 

[Steve]

Jek how could you still not get it? You cannot build working systems from rare events. The odds of the next spin, for every spin, still haven't changed.

Again go win your millions. Prove me wrong.

[jekhb76]

Jek how could you still not get it? You cannot build working systems from rare events. The odds of the next spin, for every spin, still haven't changed.

Again go win your millions. Prove me wrong.

And yet, you pay me everyday 100 Bucks. A year Long. I saw a very Nice Black bmw station at the dealer today 

[Steve]

I'm not the Casino my deluded friend.

[Bigbroben]

Ben thanku..! I'm a simpleton with maths are u able to convert 20 in a row into fraction from decimal like 1/10000 or whatever plz? I true need the answer...

Here,
once in 597 will there be 20 different nrs in row.

[jekhb76]

I'm not the Casino my deluded friend.

[The General]

That's not what i'm talking about.
You all just don't understand how random works.
If all members on this forum would play 10 sessions of 37 spins a day, and everytime when there is at least 1 repeat in those 37 spin sessions they pay me â,¬10,00! I wanna check my bankacount by the end of the week, won't you? Now where is my ferrari 

Jekhb76,

You can't win even if there's 36, 35,34,33,32,30,29 unique numbers in 37 spins either!  LOL. 

Why do you suppose it is that YOU can't beat the MPR game? 

[nottophammer]

You can't win even if there's 36, 35,34,33,32,30,29 unique numbers in 37 spins either!  LOL.

[nottophammer]

General i can win wih 15 uniques in spins 11-40 

[nottophammer]

Ain't got all night, so just got these from the highly recommended R.org, 14 non-hit in spins 11-40, See you tomorrow

[The General]

Ain't got all night, so just got these from the highly recommended R.org, 14 non-hit in spins 11-40, See you tomorrow

Notto,

Why do you suppose it is that you can't beat the MPR game over a statistically relevant number of spins? 

[Ricky]

Hi Steve,
thanks for your update. I think we have some common ground we can discuss further. I don't think we will actually agree on everything but that's what this forum is about right. We should be able to discuss our ideas and have differing opinions about what we think works and doesn't. Roulette is not an exact science. We all agree the Casino's will win in the end but I do admit they do take Advantage Players with sophisticated computers or who discover wheel biases with distaste and a real threat to their business model.

Let me respond to your points.

Yes its simple. Its exactly like saying 35 is a smaller number than 37. It's not my opinion. It's fact.

Assuming European Roulette, I understand that 35 is smaller than 37. I know we have 37 numbers but if our number hits we only get paid 35 to 1 not 37 to 1. So statistically we have 1/37 chance of choosing the right number. So in the 'long term' statistics we will get it wrong 36 times out of 37 spins therefore I will loose to the house edge in the long term by 2.7% (5.4% for American Wheel) of our wager.
Where  the contention is with this fact is that taken as a long term statistic it does not represent a typical "Short Term"  session when it comes to following a system. Call it 'Hit and and Run' or realistic gambling time frames or whatever you want. Some people are going to win, some will lose more than the house edge. So I won't continue arguing this fact and dismiss all systems because of this. We can't get around the House Edge without removing the Zero or increasing the accuracy of prediction.

Now, to quote Turbo's view, the house edge can be viewed as a collective of bets from multiple players. If you take his example it does make sense. From the Casino point of view they see the collective sum of all player bets. They will take the losses from one player's bet selection to pay the winners at a smaller rate 35:1 and in the long term expect to make 2.5% of all bets. That's statistical fact as you mention. But if you have a method that enables you to avoid betting on the "losing" numbers and choosing the "winning" numbers more often then you avoid losing to the house edge.

In your method using a computer you can see that because you know that most of the time you are going to be choosing the winning numbers and will avoid the losing numbers so you can see that you will not be exposed to the house edge. This is the Advantage you claim and why the casinos fear you. You now have a Players Edge.

Turbo is claiming that if you look at the past events and, for what ever reason, certain numbers tend to get hit more often than others, why would you choose the numbers that are "currently" losing. If you had that "time machine" and were able to see which numbers were going to come out more often, you would agree that to get an advantage and avoid losing to the house edge you would choose those winning numbers and not  bet on those losing numbers. Well rightly or wrongly this is what Turbo is saying when he follows Repeaters. To put it in your words, he is seeing the effect and reacting to it by betting on what the effect is showing. Right or wrong if it is working in the  short term to follow the "trend" then it has to be better than guessing the next number. Its not going to work all the time because the "effect" may not continue in the future. That I grant you. But it only has to work most of the time to have an advantage. You could call it taking an "educated" guess. You may say "guessing" is not having an advantage it is gambling. And that I will agree with you. But if it guides the gambler to make the right gamble more often than the wrong one then it will reward him/her. That's gambling. It does not mean you don't give it a  go because you could lose. You may as well not gamble but invest your money.

Im not saying computers is the only way. There are other ways. It just isnt repeaters. I've explained why, given examples, proof etc

I won't attempt to persuade you on "Repeaters" being a way to get an advantage but I think there is merit in the approach. Its not the HG for the reasons you mention but it can be a successful approach in the short term with set limits in place including stop losses and profit targets.

Nooo. They are completely different. Repeaters uses previous spins to try to predict winning numbers. Computers use the actual variables that determine the winning number. A proper method should be cause and effect, not effect and effect.

I can't dispute your point. But what I am pointing out is repeaters are using the "effect" information to determine a bet selection. The "effect" is that certain numbers or sectors of the wheel will not get hit in the short term because of the "cause". Yes using the "Cause" as your method to determine bet selection is always going to be superior to using the "effect" I totally agree and that's why Casinos try to stamp out players using this method of bet selection. But using the "effect" information is going to be superior in most cases than walking up to the table and splashing chips around hoping you have more chips on the winning numbers than on the losing numbers. Or putting your life savings on "red" and hoping that at that very next spin black or zero does not  show.

What repeaters attempts to do is predict winning numbers using irrelevant variables.

For the reasons I mentioned above I would not call the concept using irrelevent variables. If the "effect" is caused by some relevent variable like ball spin or wheel rotation or dealer bias then the "effect" of this cause - the winning numbers are not irrelevent variables. They are a variable used as inputs to the Repeater method. They may not be what you would be called relevent like the ball speed or physical properties of the wheel but they are inputs into a method that is likely to be better than "guessing".

In terms of your description of Repeater trying to "predict" the winning numbers I will grant you that I would describe the repeaters method as more one that tries to take an "educated" guess more than a prediction. Because you are right in saying that you can't "predict" the future result with a high degree of accuracy just on the fact of the past results alone. I would classify the Repeaters method more as a follow the trend method just like following streak of reds or blacks. Take advantage of the trend while it lasts. "The trend is your friend" is another way of putting it. But if it works then I am not complaining.

Repeaters is not a valid variable except in cases like wheel bias. Although repeaters is only very loosely associated with bias, because a biased wheel has numbers that are more likely to repeat than other numbers.

Yes but this has nothing to do with repeaters. Repeating distance between one number and the next yes, but not repeating numbers.

Now we are getting somewhere. Firstly I view the value of Repeaters method for the reason you have described due to a wheel bias or more likely a dealer bias. But I think this is where members were looking for your insights. You gave me a light bulb moment when I read this. I have actually been thinking about this myself. When I see there the dealer launches the ball and where it lands I often think how many rotations does the ball typically make with this dealer? And how fast is the wheel rotating in the opposite direction? Can I predict on the next spin based on this information where the ball is likely to land? So I think we have a basis for a method that we can work on. And I am thinking this is what you use computers for to accurately measure these variables to calculate the sector where the ball will land.

So I am very interested  to learn how you start to use this information if you only had the last numbers as inputs and you assume the dealer will launch the ball roughly at the location of the last number hit. Although I have seen dealers not follow this "rule". I  am not sure if this is actually a "rule" written into the game. Do you take averages of distance for x spins and how many spins would you use? Do you treat clockwise and anticlockwise as different figures and then only use the information for every second spin to predict the result?

No, I don't agree. You can have won just as quickly with common variance. Sometimes you win with random bets, sometimes you lose. Mostly you lose, which is because of the house edge.

Ok I will concede this point without actually testing it. So what I will do each time I visit the BM casino is I will test this and report the results. You would agree that if I win more than I lose then there has to be some merit to the idea. But if I lose more than I win I will concede my win was due to common variance.  Given I am a very unlucky gambler left to my own devices I think any system that allows me to control my bets and avoid chasing loses is a good thing and better than playing the pokies.

Turbo says it will only work if the spins are random, which is a boneheaded statement. He is saying he gets better than random accuracy when its only random.

Here I will have to disagree with Turbo if that's his claim. I see Repeats as a result of the physical properties of the wheel not of the effects of "Random". Random is Random. You cannot argue that it favours repeats. That is ridiculous.

Look forward to some constructive discussion where we can develop ideas to improve systems that do not involve computers. As you stated there are other ways that do not involve computers. Can the Repeat of distance between numbers be one we can use as a basis for a system?

Cheers,
Ricky

[Steve]

Rick, firstly thankyou for attempting to have a structured discussion.

Roulette is not an exact science.

It is, but the game is dynamic with ever-changing variables, and degrees of error.

Where  the contention is with this fact is that taken as a long term statistic it does not represent a typical "Short Term"

It does, but simply there is variance.

to quote Turbo's view, the house edge can be viewed as a collective of bets from multiple players

Not exactly. Each bet has its own odds and payout. It is more accurate to say the casino is more assured to profit because there are so many bets made, from multiple players combined. So even if one player wins, lots of players lose.

Right or wrong if it is working in the  short term to follow the "trend" then it has to be better than guessing the next number

But it doesnt work in the short or long term any better than random bet selection. Its not an opinion. Its fact anyone can test and verify.

If you're talking short term only, then test lots of short term sessions. The combined result is a loss. Its like the player who plays 1 spin a day and thinks that gives him the best chance of winning. What happens when 100 players all use the same approach? Do they all have a better chance, or are they all deluded?

but I think there is merit in the approach. Its not the HG for the reasons you mention but it can be a successful approach in the short term with set limits in place including stop losses and profit targets.

It has no merit because the odds/accuracy are still 1 in 37, so it's literally as good as random bet selection. That's the whole point.

But using the "effect" information is going to be superior in most cases than walking up to the table and splashing chips around hoping you have more chips on the winning numbers than on the losing numbers

As above, its no different. Proper tests clearly show this.

Take advantage of the trend while it lasts. "The trend is your friend" is another way of putting it

Its not a "trend". It's just a collection of random numbers, and you think it looks like a trend.

When I see there the dealer launches the ball and where it lands I often think how many rotations does the ball typically make with this dealer? And how fast is the wheel rotating in the opposite direction? Can I predict on the next spin based on this information where the ball is likely to land? So I think we have a basis for a method that we can work on.

Yes now we're getting somewhere. We're looking at relevant variables (the cause). If you want to use a repeaters system, check for distance in pockets from one winning number to the next. It's a step forward, towards dealer signature. But checking for repeating distances is a clumsy way of doing it. I said earlier if I was going to try and win on MPR, dealer signature would be my approach. But its a bit more complicated than just looking at repeating distances.

And I am thinking this is what you use computers for to accurately measure these variables to calculate the sector where the ball will land.

No the computers measure the ball and rotor speed after the spin starts. Dealer signature is approximating distances before ball release.

Although I have seen dealers not follow this "rule".

You don't need 100% accuracy. You only need slight accuracy. The house edge is only small.

Do you take averages of distance for x spins and how many spins would you use? Do you treat clockwise and anticlockwise as different figures and then only use the information for every second spin to predict the result?

That's part of it. You can use this for free:
link:://roulettephysics.com/jaa/index.php/jump

It charts the distance between pockets with data in this format:

0,12
13,8
4,13
18,12
0,21
21,33
2,18
0,5
12,16
30,18
1,26
25,10
1,35

This gives this:

Here I will have to disagree with Turbo if that's his claim. I see Repeats as a result of the physical properties of the wheel not of the effects of "Random". Random is Random. You cannot argue that it favours repeats. That is ridiculous.

He has made many other "boneheaded" claims, that are plain wrong, clumsy and contradictory. That's what the experienced players are on about. There are so many holes in his story, and the less-experienced and naive members waste their time chasing shadows, without understanding any of it.

Every now and then a new self-professed guru comes along, and sheep follow blindly. It degrades the forum, kills productivity, and costs people money - all for the kicks of a sociopath.

you are on the right path with dealer signature. The things to keep in mind are:

* The wheel is circular. Peaks in charts overlap even with different variables.

* If you dont carefully monitor the variables, you can go from hitting the right sector to completely avoiding it. This means you go from a positive edge, to a negative edge that's worse than random accuracy. The end result is no edge at all, or even worse win rate than random bet selection.

Dealer signature is not as simplistic as it sounds, if you are to get and maintain an edge. But again you are on the right path.