@ turbo

[jekhb76]

Regarding 37 back to basics, its the same nonsense. It doesnt work because your odds are still 1 in 37. Any number is not more likely to repeat anytime soon, or at all, than any other number.

You can do your tests with 300 or so spins, but I've done mine over probably billions. I've just let software run for days testing this kind of stuff. And all I found is what every other professional or statistician says. The repeater concept is as old as gambling itself. I did that kind of testing a very long time ago.

You can either do proper testing and stop wasting time, or go around in circles for a few more years before you finally get it.

Can anyone show me any proof that a repeater is more likely to spin again anytime soon? No.

But there's still this talk about 24 numbers on average in a 37 spin cycle. That's all just basic probability. You are still stuck at 1 in 37. Repeaters changes nothing. Its the same as random betting.

I waste a lot of time explaining it, and still it isnt understood. So just tell me what you need on MPR to show everyone, and stick to one account.

If you Have wasted so much Time in explaining, why don't you Just stop explaining and Let us be 
The 37 Back to basics is one of the best threads here on the forum in a very long time. Even you might learn 1 or 2 things from it, if you Just stop explaining why things won't work. Maybe explain things that actualy do work. Nothing personal, but you are Keep repeating yourself over and over again.

[6th-sense]

Regarding 37 back to basics, its the same nonsense. It doesnt work because your odds are still 1 in 37. Any number is not more likely to repeat anytime soon, or at all, than any other number.

You can do your tests with 300 or so spins, but I've done mine over probably billions. I've just let software run for days testing this kind of stuff. And all I found is what every other professional or statistician says. The repeater concept is as old as gambling itself. I did that kind of testing a very long time ago.

You can either do proper testing and stop wasting time, or go around in circles for a few more years before you finally get it.

Can anyone show me any proof that a repeater is more likely to spin again anytime soon? No.

But there's still this talk about 24 numbers on average in a 37 spin cycle. That's all just basic probability. You are still stuck at 1 in 37. Repeaters changes nothing. Its the same as random betting.

I waste a lot of time explaining it, and still it isnt understood. So just tell me what you need on MPR to show everyone, and stick to one account.

What actually doesn’t work ? Not giving any system? Or so you mean the balance doesn’t work?
Please enlighten me what doesn’t
Work 

[6th-sense]

Just re read ..Repeats?  I’m on about balancing...hits 1in 37 odds is like you say so undeniably balance happens...there’s never been a tracker like ayks posted before with the spin count on it and coloured sections for each cycle..
Very handy tool even for you
One example I gave is you will never see a gap of 12 unhit numbers in a row...an example in the extreme is one dozen sleeping this long.or sleeping in this tracker .never in my own personal playing have I seen this...
Or am I wrong? But on the other side of the coin if it happened the other two dozens would not have very large  unhit numbers between them becouse the average is 24 out ..37 out and 1 dozen sleeping? Is this wrong too?
Statistics Steve don’t lie
When this 37 back to basics has been looked at then I’ll go into 74 back to basics to show you what usually happens too then we can disagree some more 😃

[Roulettebeater]

Just re read ..Repeats?  I’m on about balancing...hits 1in 37 odds is like you say so undeniably balance happens...there’s never been a tracker like ayks posted before with the spin count on it and coloured sections for each cycle..
Very handy tool even for you
One example I gave is you will never see a gap of 12 unhit numbers in a row...an example in the extreme is one dozen sleeping this long.or sleeping in this tracker .never in my own personal playing have I seen this...
Or am I wrong? But on the other side of the coin if it happened the other two dozens would not have very large  unhit numbers between them becouse the average is 24 out ..37 out and 1 dozen sleeping? Is this wrong too?
Statistics Steve don’t lie
When this 37 back to basics has been looked at then I’ll go into 74 back to basics to show you what usually happens too then we can disagree some more 😃

No!

I saw a dozen sleeping for 18 spins !
And i think it can be up to 22 !

[6th-sense]

No!

I saw a dozen sleeping for 18 spins !
And i think it can be up to 22 !

Re read what I posted I think eddy was 29 on Rng

[6th-sense]

No!

I saw a dozen sleeping for 18 spins !
And i think it can be up to 22 !

My apologies I re read myself lol I meant you will not see a dozen sleeping for 37 spins or a linear gap that long either

[jekhb76]

Re read what I posted I think eddy was 29 on Rng

Yep, you're Right.
The longest sleeping dozen i ever saw was:
29 spins on RNG.
24 spins in a BM casino Live Play.

[ZERO]

This is from Turbo`s site:

"This page is to document some extremes that have been noted during a recent runoff of 1 million spins (rng)."

Location...Longest no show...Most repeated

Straight Up.......466..........4
Splits................249..........6
Streets..............160..........7
Corners............136..........7               
Line..................89............9           
Dozen...............35...........13
Column.............38...........12
Even Money......24...........19

link:s://web.archive.org/web/20120809083321/link:://:.freewebs.com:80/turbogenius/whatsthelongest.htm

[jekhb76]

after 10 spins 28 non hits left.
11-20 5 non hits hit - 23 left
21-40 10 non hits hit - 13 left
41-60 4 non hits hit - 9 left
61-80 2 non hits hit - 7 left
81-100 2 non hits hit - 5 left
101-120 1 non hit his - 4 left
121-140 1 non hit hits - 3 left
141-160 0 non hits hit - 3 left
161-180 2 non hits hit - 1 left
181-188 1 non hit hit - 0 left

[Ricky]

Can anyone show me any proof that a repeater is more likely to spin again anytime soon?

Hi Steve,
Here's Proof tracking Repeaters over 37 spins 'Can' give an advantage. Last night I spent 6 hours until 2:30aM at the casino struggling to make a couple hundred bucks on my quest for financial freedom. Ended up breaking even at the Baccarat tables and was all done for the night.

Decided to track some roulette spins using the ayk tracker. Very useful tool to have at the casino. After 37 spins shown in the screenshot attached I decided to bet all the 2+ repeaters. Only got to put 7 of them on before 30 second 'no more bets'. So out of 37 numbers to choose from on the very next spin I had to find the winning number. So why not bet all the repeaters. After all they came out more often. Ignore the non hits they likely won't come out any time soon. You won't agree I know because all numbers have same chance right? Well coincidence or not I chose 12, 32, 19, 4, 21, 17, 34 [8,23] because they came out recently more often than the others. Did not have time to put on the last two so I started praying they would not get hit. Well as you can see on the 38th spin after I started tracking, one of the repeats repeats again. 21. Yeah 1 spin I choose the winning number from 37 possible numbers. Lucky choice or not I will take this win any day because I have absolutely no luck choosing the correct number, color, high/low, even/odd if I had to guess it myself. If you want to clean up on Roulette just ask me what to choose and then do the opposite. You will make a killing. I have no luck picking the winning side.

So, advantage or not I'll take this win anytime. So up $50 at 2:20am I went home a winner thanks to a strategy of only choosing repeats and ignoring the other numbers. I know its fallacy but better than luck as I have none if left to my own devices.


Cheers,
Ricky

[Steve]

That's not proof. So you had a win. $50. Keep using it and see.

[Steve]

I know its fallacy but better than luck

Most people here dont actually know what they're saying. You basically said "I know its random and luck, but it's better than my luck". I not criticizing you. Many members dont want to listen or even try to understand what more experienced players say. It's not my money.

[Ricky]

That's not proof. So you had a win. $50. Keep using it and see.

I knew you'd disagree. But its $50 in my pocket I didn't have. That's all that matters at the end of the day. Not complaining

[Steve]

If you Have wasted so much Time in explaining, why don't you Just stop explaining and Let us be

Jek I dont care if you want to lose your own money. I'm concerned about the ignorant newbie that believes the nonsense some members spread, then they lose money.

if you Just stop explaining why things won't work. Maybe explain things that actualy do work

I've been doing exactly that. Problem is people arent getting the very simple explanations.

Nothing personal, but you are Keep repeating yourself over and over again.

Yeah thats because people arent getting it.

I try saying it many different ways, even giving software and exact testing procedures, with results in their face, but I assume people either lack the intelligence, or are too lazy to actually do proper testing. I think its a combination of both.

What actually doesn’t work ? Not giving any system? Or so you mean the balance doesn’t work?
Please enlighten me what doesn’t

Start with :.roulettephysics.com/roulette-strategy/

Even if I went into precise detail about a specific method or approach, and why it wont work, it is not understood. I'm typing clear english though. A mathematician would understand. Anyone with sound logic and basic understanding would. Even a high school student. But on forums, it seems the logic and understanding is just gone. Again its not my money. I have tried to explain but I'm not the only one.

One example I gave is you will never see a gap of 12 unhit numbers in a row...an example in the extreme is one dozen sleeping this long.or sleeping in this tracker .never in my own personal playing have I seen this...
Or am I wrong? But on the other side of the coin if it happened the other two dozens would not have very large  unhit numbers between them becouse the average is 24 out ..37 out and 1 dozen sleeping? Is this wrong too?
Statistics Steve don’t lie

Right, statistics dont lie. The problem is you arent understanding them.

Try using your "never-fail" repeaters theory to change the odds. You are stuck at 1 in 37, and stuck with payouts 35-1. Your bet selection is exactly the same as random. You changed nothing.

I do not agree with Steve because he talks about odds of 1:37

Then you'd better check your math.

which has nothing to do with the outputs of the numbers, the probability is one thing, the numbers output patterns is something else.

The odds how often you will win on average. Right, its not exactly the exact output of numbers. So let's try beating roulette by using a method that has no real correlation to the variables that determine winning numbers. Sounds stupid, right? That's what repeaters tries to do.

WHY would a number repeat? If there are completely random and unpredictable game outcomes, it's random.

R A N D O M.

That means 1 in 37 accuracy.

the probability is one thing, the numbers output patterns is something else.

Then practice what you preach and start looking at the variables that cause outcomes, not the outcomes that cause outcomes.

[Steve]

I knew you'd disagree. But its $50 in my pocket I didn't have. That's all that matters at the end of the day. Not complaining

Yeah I agree its a profit. I dont agree it is proof like you said. Why would I? They're very different things.