I would like to know your opinion on this:
for the simplicity.. consider that you get yourself a progressive system (betting on 18 numbers with 10 steps-marti) and test it against 9704 spins...
The tests showed:
At which step of the 10 steps-marti a HIT occured?
Step # Hits
------------------------
+1 | 4893
+2 | 2386
+3 | 1206
+4 | 601
+5 | 307
+6 | 154
+7 | 80
+8 | 43
+9 | 20
+10 | 4
>11 | 1
Last line of above table shows that the 10 steps progression failed only one time in 9704 spins.
Would you consider such a system a winner or loser?
Thx
I would appreciate hearing your opinion on this
As you can see the skew has happened only in the 10th and 11th step. Before that it is as per expectations. Considering this am likely to lean towards to say that this is likely to to go as per expectation and not going to be different from betting random 18 numbers. Another set will produce different results and you will not see consistency in your results.
Data Plot
Let's consider that every game consists of 10 rounds, we would have 970 games.
Out of 970 games we won 969 and we lost only one game.
Datafit
The Hit-rate at the first step is interesting...can be exploited as it looks promising
Ok- i believe +9000 spins are too much, nobody can play continuously all these spins.
I have taken a more realistic sample (500 spins):
Step # Hits
------------------------
+1 | 233
+2 | 129
+3 | 64
+4 | 36
+5 | 18
+6 | 7
+7 | 4
+8 | 0
+9 | 0
+10 | 0
>11 | 0
I'm confused by your data..
If step 1 hit 4893 times, isn't that 4893 spins accounted for?
If step 2 hit 2386 times, isn't that 4772 spins accounted for?
So together steps 1&2 have accounted for 9665 spins, and the whole test was only conducted over 9704 spins?
Where and how does the rest of the data fit in to the spin count?
Would you consider such a system a winner or loser?
Hey RB the fact that it went past the 10th leg of the progression
should worry you. It could wipe out 90% of your progress.
Quote from: Taotie on Feb 22, 09:28 PM 2018
I'm confused by your data..
If step 1 hit 4893 times, isn't that 4893 spins accounted for?
If step 2 hit 2386 times, isn't that 4772 spins accounted for?
So together steps 1&2 have accounted for 9665 spins, and the whole test was only conducted over 9704 spins?
Where and how does the rest of the data fit in to the spin count?
Yup, you are right in ur consideration however there is a difference between step and spin...
To make it simple, you would play 9000 spins out of 18000 as a sort of trigger play...cheers
Quote from: Proofreaders2000 on Feb 23, 02:10 AM 2018
Would you consider such a system a winner or loser?
Hey RB the fact that it went past the 10th leg of the progression
should worry you. It could wipe out 90% of your progress.
Well it's complicated !!!
Reason is that those spins are sparsed over a few days, I believe this system (in background) can overcome this game if tested against a consistent set of spins produced by only one dealer..
It's quite simple, there is a relation between last number and next number, the relation is cause&effect.
I hope you understand what I meant
Cheers
Quote from: Roulettebeater on Feb 23, 03:04 AM 2018I hope you understand what I meant
Crystal clear. No fire, no smoke. Or is it the other way round.
Quote from: Roulettebeater on Feb 23, 03:04 AM 2018the relation is cause&effect.
I hope you understand what I meant
For better understanding: Do you need a factor 2/5 ?
Quote from: Herby on Feb 23, 05:28 AM 2018
For better understanding: Do you need a factor 2/5 ?
It's not the first time you come up with this 2/5 factor... Go on and tell me what is this 2/5 factor !?
Thx
Back to topic ...
Many of you wondering how does this system work, what is the base idea behind it ? ...
Ok let's take it one by one ...
First of all, none of us would debate on the fact that casino loves randomness, the more random their tables produce, the happier are they !!
Here is the bulletproof, we will revert the random to beat the house... let's take the speed of spin as an example, the house loves alternating spin ball's speed, we will just revert the speed and we should be almost right there..
I am looking forward to an extended discussion on this topic
Cheers
Hi Roulettebeater,
I answered your question, my internet connection broke down :sad2:, the answer is lost, but maybe has to do with:
Now I see you want to revert the speed of the ball : here you mean physically ?
in the thread for genius you want to revert a pattern of 18 numbers, can you give an example for better understanding ?
Hey
I don't want to reveal the full secret but I will give a clue, how rare do you see a live table where ball's speed is constant ?
That will never happen ! Right ?
Ok, lets try to recap, the casino will do any thing to keep the speed varying.. we will exploit this event and beat them back
Got it ?
for the calculation of the velocity, energie of a rolling sphere
you need:
moment of inertia of a rolling sphere: 2/5 m r^2
here is this factor 2/5
Yup but i have an easier way, I am not measuring the speed real time, last two numbers are enough to detect speed.
The theory says: next speed is gonna be different than last speed
To be continued ....
Quote from: Roulettebeater on Feb 23, 07:16 AM 2018
Yup but i have an easier way, I am not measuring the speed real time, last two numbers are enough to detect speed.
The theory says: next speed is gonna be different than last speed
Of course there is limitation and violation, for example lazy dealers will produce sometime consistent sets but that's a small exception and can be worked out
To be continued ....
Quote from: Roulettebeater on Feb 22, 03:06 PM 2018
I would like to know your opinion on this:
for the simplicity.. consider that you get yourself a progressive system (betting on 18 numbers with 10 steps-marti) and test it against 9704 spins...
The tests showed:
At which step of the 10 steps-marti a HIT occured?
Step # Hits
------------------------
+1 | 4893
+2 | 2386
+3 | 1206
+4 | 601
+5 | 307
+6 | 154
+7 | 80
+8 | 43
+9 | 20
+10 | 4
>11 | 1
Last line of above table shows that the 10 steps progression failed only one time in 9704 spins.
Would you consider such a system a winner or loser?
Thx
Don't you see that a progression + unit on loss performs better than martingale?
So on loss + unit
on win reset to base unit
Open your eyes well, guys !!!
Here the calculus :
4893 *(+18) +
2386 *(-18+36) +
1206 *(-18-36+54) +
Etc
Quote from: Roulettebeater on Feb 23, 10:05 AM 2018
Don't you see that a progression + unit on loss performs better than martingale?
So on loss + unit
on win reset to base unit
Open your eyes well, guys !!!
Here the calculus :
4893 *(+18) +
2386 *(-18+36) +
1206 *(-18-36+54) +
Etc
I can see, I can see finally thanks a lot.
Hahah
I don't know exactly what is the minimal hit ratio on 18 numbers in order to be able to win with this stakeing system (up one unit on loss and reset on win)
Unlucky7black
bring some progression experts here and let them have a look at this wonder :)
Thx
Quote from: Roulettebeater on Feb 23, 06:51 AM 2018
Hey
I don't want to reveal the full secret but I will give a clue, how rare do you see a live table where ball's speed is constant ?
That will never happen ! Right ?
Ok, lets try to recap, the casino will do any thing to keep the speed varying.. we will exploit this event and beat them back
Got it ?
RB, for the last time, if you have no intention to share stuff it's ok, no problem.
BUT STFU about these things else you are guilty of baiting again !!! :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:
Dear Cht
Did you bother yourself looking at the staking method I proposed and it's efficiency ?
What do you think ? It's fire, isn't it ?
Not playable in b&m casino. :)
Quote from: cht on Feb 23, 12:05 PM 2018
Not playable in b&m casino. :)
I can turn it playable at b&m casino, all what you have to do is bet the 18 numbers given by the system and follow the progression + 1 unit on loss, reset on win ...
Can you continue the calculus as written below and write down the final result ?
I am driving right now and I can't do !
4893 *(+18) +
2386 *(-18+36) +
1206 *(-18-36+54) +
Etc
Quote from: Tinsoldiers on Feb 22, 04:09 PM 2018
As you can see the skew has happened only in the 10th and 11th step. Before that it is as per expectations. Considering this am likely to lean towards to say that this is likely to to go as per expectation and not going to be different from betting random 18 numbers. Another set will produce different results and you will not see consistency in your results.
Thx for ur comment... forget skewness, expectation etc, don't bother urself unless you wanna have headache.
take a look at my staking method and don't be hesitated to write ur opinion
Quote from: Roulettebeater on Feb 23, 12:13 PM 2018Can you continue the calculus as written below and write down the final result ?
4893*(+18) +
2386*(-18 + 36) +
1206*(-18 - 36 + 54) +
601*(-18 - 36 - 54 + 72) +
307*(-18 - 36 - 54 - 72 + 90) +
154*(-18 - 36 - 54 - 72 - 90 + 108) +
80*(-18 - 36 - 54 - 72 - 90 - 108 + 126) +
43*(-18 - 36 - 54 - 72 - 90 - 108 - 126 + 144) +
20*(-18 - 36 - 54 - 72 - 90 - 108 - 126 - 144 + 162) +
4*(-18 - 36 - 54 - 72 - 90 - 108 - 126 - 144 - 162 + 180) -
1*(-18 - 36 - 54 - 72 - 90 - 108 - 126 - 144 - 162 - 180)
Sum: +9918
Quote from: Herby on Feb 23, 01:29 PM 2018
4893*(+18) +
2386*(-18 + 36) +
1206*(-18 - 36 + 54) +
601*(-18 - 36 - 54 + 72) +
307*(-18 - 36 - 54 - 72 + 90) +
154*(-18 - 36 - 54 - 72 - 90 + 108) +
80*(-18 - 36 - 54 - 72 - 90 - 108 + 126) +
43*(-18 - 36 - 54 - 72 - 90 - 108 - 126 + 144) +
20*(-18 - 36 - 54 - 72 - 90 - 108 - 126 - 144 + 162) +
4*(-18 - 36 - 54 - 72 - 90 - 108 - 126 - 144 - 162 + 180) -
1*(-18 - 36 - 54 - 72 - 90 - 108 - 126 - 144 - 162 - 180)
Sum: +9918
Perfectus !
It's fire, the aim of this thread was to see if there is a genius here who can get this "on the fly" but there wasn't any!
I have just been lectured on skewness and expectation ... as usual !
Correct me if I am wrong,
Instead of keeping it simple like a Martingale on even chances, and having (18/37) chance of doubling stash, this system uses the fractional aspect of the game on the players' side?
Are there more chances of hitting one of 18 numbers in ten rounds than one of selected EC in ten spins, just because of chaos and randomness?
9704 spins, with a bet on EC, this would give, statistically,
9704x 18/37= 4721 hits on first spin;
9704x (18/37)^2=2296 on second spin;
...
You claim to have 4893 and 2386,...? This is way more, and the amount of rounds is big enough to be relevant, so little place for crazy deviation here.
Again, correct me if I am wrong.
Lemme just gaze at the stars for the night, I'll digest this information...
Checked: a difference of 1.77% on stage 1; 0.92% on stages 2&3, then 0.59% and below for the other ones.
Stage 1 at 4893 is higher than 50%, throwing the house edge away! Close to eclipsing the house edge on latter stages, and above (1/2)^n from stage 5 to 9.
Unless I'm wrong, it's worth the few clicks when online or the token shuffling when in casino!
Quote from: Bigbroben on Feb 23, 09:19 PM 2018
Checked: a difference of 1.77% on stage 1; 0.92% on stages 2&3, then 0.59% and below for the other ones.
Stage 1 at 4893 is higher than 50%, throwing the house edge away! Close to eclipsing the house edge on latter stages, and above (1/2)^n from stage 5 to 9.
Unless I'm wrong, it's worth the few clicks when online or the token shuffling when in casino!
Yup I totally agree, the push is achieved within the first stage, there we have a great hit ratio, after the first stage successively the hit ratio starts to change, this can be due to the fact that these 9k spins are not consistent (they are collected over a few days, that means there is a lot of consistencies gaps).
When I tested, I tested all of them together as I can't do manual tests, I have automated the tests and it was possible only if I test them
All together as one consistent sequence.
So back to the point, applying a classical martingale is not recommended, I tweaked the progression a bit and used the ladder I already described.
I still find it hard to understand how it can e a hit rate higher than 50% with less than 50% of coverage...
Nrs are chosen randomly? Change every spin? DO you choose the last 18 nrs to exploit repeaters?
New exploration with 404 spins, this time they are consistent:
Stage1 > 199
Stage2> 108
Stage3> 53
Stage4> 23
Stage5> 11
Stage6> 4
Stage7> 3
Stage8> 2
Stage9> 1
Stage10> 0
199*(+18)
+108*(-18+36)
+53*(-18-36+54)
+23*(-18-36-54+72)
+11*(-18-36-54-72+90)
+4*(-18-36-54-72-90+108)
+3*(-18-36-54-72-90-108+126)
+2*(-18-36-54-72-90-108-126+144)
+1*(-18-36-54-72-90-108-126-144+162)
Total=1098
Quote from: Bigbroben on Feb 24, 08:11 AM 2018
I still find it hard to understand how it can e a hit rate higher than 50% with less than 50% of coverage...
Nrs are chosen randomly? Change every spin? DO you choose the last 18 nrs to exploit repeaters?
No, No, No
Numbers are not chosen randomly!
I never said that!
If you want to beat this game, you have only one way:
increase the accuracy!
"The Hit-rate of Stage1+Stage2 must be > 1/2 of TotalSpins"
In last exploration above:
199 +108 = 307 >1/2 of 404
OK,
let's say I can't go to casino, check for dealer, study his numbers/trend and bet accordingly.
Live tables online would do it, right? RNG?
Actually, checked real quick, I think you'd be better off stopping progression at stage 3: later you lose money.
Quote from: Bigbroben on Feb 24, 08:38 AM 2018Actually, checked real quick, I think you'd be better off stopping progression at stage 3: later you lose money.
Mate,
Let RNG alone, the highway to hell goes through RNG.
Real tables only, my method will kill the casino!
Because i am beating them exactly in the same point where they are strong at..
I don't agree that i should stop at stage 3...
Stage1+Stage2 will always have a hitrate >50%.
Hi,
if you are using a doubling-up Martingale, sure you could continue. Again, with your 9xxx rounds given earlier,but if only +1u every step, then if stop at:
step 1: 1638u
step 2: 558u
step 3: 87462 u
step 4: 54576 u
step 5: 32832 u
step 6: 24840 u
step 7: 15048 u
step 8: 11898 u
step 9: 11178 u
... probably reaching the 9918u sum at round 11.
P.S.: Sum of the numbers you gave is 9695, not 9704. Hey, doesn't matter, still good.
Limiting the stages to only 3 produced following results:
Stage1> 193
Stage2> 106
Stage3> 53
44 TIMES we have had three consecutive losses ...
So the total is:
189*(+18)
+104*(-18+36)
+52*(-18-36+54)
+44*(-18-36-54)
= 522
Quote from: Roulettebeater on Feb 24, 09:13 AM 2018
Limiting the stages to only 3 produced following results:
Stage1> 193
Stage2> 106
Stage3> 53
44 TIMES we have had three consecutive losses ...
So the total is:
189*(+18)
+104*(-18+36)
+52*(-18-36+54)
+44*(-18-36-54)
= 522
Wasn't it 199, 108, 53?
Quote from: Bigbroben on Feb 24, 09:11 AM 2018
Hi,
if you are using a doubling-up Martingale, sure you could continue. Again, with your 9xxx rounds given earlier,but if only +1u every step, then if stop at:
step 1: 1638u
step 2: 558u
step 3: 87462 u
step 4: 54576 u
step 5: 32832 u
step 6: 24840 u
step 7: 15048 u
step 8: 11898 u
step 9: 11178 u
... probably reaching the 9918u sum at round 11.
P.S.: Sum of the numbers you gave is 9695, not 9704. Hey, doesn't matter, still good.
Mate,
Yup, the outcome is crazy..
I still believe no classical martingale required, the system performs wonderful with +1 Unit up on loss.
If you you have numbers from real table to test you can post here, i will process them and write down the result.
Cheers
Quote from: Bigbroben on Feb 24, 09:19 AM 2018
Wasn't it 199, 108, 53?
yes, a typo error..
still positive and it even went UP :)
Quote from: Roulettebeater on Feb 24, 08:11 AM 2018
New exploration with 404 spins, this time they are consistent:
Stage1 > 199
Stage2> 108
Stage3> 53
Stage4> 23
Stage5> 11
Stage6> 4
Stage7> 3
Stage8> 2
Stage9> 1
Stage10> 0
199*(+18)
+108*(-18+36)
+53*(-18-36+54)
+23*(-18-36-54+72)
+11*(-18-36-54-72+90)
+4*(-18-36-54-72-90+108)
+3*(-18-36-54-72-90-108+126)
+2*(-18-36-54-72-90-108-126+144)
+1*(-18-36-54-72-90-108-126-144+162)
Total=1098
I get to 409 rounds total....
And profit of 3762 u at stage 3...
We must be calculating differently,,,,
Quote from: Bigbroben on Feb 24, 09:25 AM 2018
I get to 409 rounds total....
And profit of 3762 u at stage 3...
We must be calculating differently,,,,
Lol.. i dunno what you mean with the column left in your table?
I calcualte like that:
Max Stages= 3
199 Times a HIT has been achieved in the 1st stage
108 Times a HIT has been achieved in the 2nd stage
53 Times a HIT has been achieved in the 3rd stage
44 Times 3 consecutive MISS showed up
LOL indeed!
Ok:
Stage1: 199 hits. 18u profit. 199*18=3584
Stage2: 108 hits. (-18+36)=18u profit. 108*18=1944
Stage3: 53 hits. (-18-36+54)=0 u profit. 53*0=0
Unhit 409-199-108-53=49. (-18-36-54...
Arrrrrr shit: just found my error.
Damn, OK you winn!!!
Quote from: Bigbroben on Feb 24, 09:50 AM 2018
LOL indeed!
Ok:
Stage1: 199 hits. 18u profit. 199*18=3584
Stage2: 108 hits. (-18+36)=18u profit. 108*18=1944
Stage3: 53 hits. (-18-36+54)=0 u profit. 53*0=0
Unhit 409-199-108-53=49. (-18-36-54...
Arrrrrr shit: just found my error.
Damn, OK you winn!!!
Fire, it's a fire...and
(link:://:.pichost.org/images/2018/02/24/temp_794349.png) (link:://:.pichost.org/image/GAZML)
O0
Quote from: Roulettebeater on Feb 24, 08:27 AM 2018
"The Hit-rate of Stage1+Stage2 must be > 1/2 of TotalSpins"
In last exploration above:
199 +108 = 307 >1/2 of 404
Shouldn't it be above 3/4? Spin 1 above 1/2 and/or 1+2 above 3/4?
Simple maths:
18 profit on spins 1 and 2.
54 loss (3*18)on all others.
So hits at spins 1&2 with their 2*18 must cover the 3*18 or the rest.
So, (1+1)xn% must be greater than 3xn%
60%x(1+1) = 40%x3
Should have 60% hit rate on first spins to break even. Am I correct?
No I am not. It really is 75%.
Take a look below - here is a test of 398 spins, first column is round's ID
19012 HIT +18
19013 HIT +18
19014 HIT +18
19015 MISS -18
19016 HIT +36
19017 MISS -18
19018 HIT +36
19019 HIT +18
19020 MISS -18
19021 MISS -36
19022 HIT +54
19023 MISS -18
19024 HIT +36
19025 HIT +18
19026 HIT +18
19027 HIT +18
19028 MISS -18
19029 HIT +36
19030 MISS -18
19031 MISS -36
19032 MISS -54
19033 MISS -18
19034 HIT +36
19035 MISS -18
19036 MISS -36
19037 HIT +54
19038 MISS -18
19039 HIT +36
19040 MISS -18
19041 MISS -36
19042 HIT +54
19043 MISS -18
19044 MISS -36
19045 HIT +54
19046 HIT +18
19047 MISS -18
19048 MISS -36
19049 MISS -54
19050 MISS -18
19051 HIT +36
19052 HIT +18
19053 HIT +18
19054 HIT +18
19055 HIT +18
19056 HIT +18
19057 MISS -18
19058 HIT +36
19059 MISS -18
19060 HIT +36
19061 MISS -18
19062 MISS -36
19063 HIT +54
19064 MISS -18
19065 HIT +36
19066 HIT +18
19067 HIT +18
19068 HIT +18
19069 MISS -18
19070 MISS -36
19071 MISS -54
19072 MISS -18
19073 MISS -36
19074 MISS -54
19075 MISS -18
19076 MISS -36
19077 HIT +54
19078 HIT +18
19079 MISS -18
19080 HIT +36
19081 HIT +18
19082 MISS -18
19083 MISS -36
19084 MISS -54
19085 MISS -18
19086 MISS -36
19087 MISS -54
19088 MISS -18
19089 HIT +36
19090 MISS -18
19091 MISS -36
19092 MISS -54
19093 HIT +18
19094 HIT +18
19095 HIT +18
19096 MISS -18
19097 HIT +36
19098 HIT +18
19099 HIT +18
19100 MISS -18
19101 MISS -36
19102 HIT +54
19103 MISS -18
19104 MISS -36
19105 HIT +54
19106 HIT +18
19107 MISS -18
19108 MISS -36
19109 HIT +54
19110 MISS -18
19111 MISS -36
19112 HIT +54
19113 MISS -18
19114 HIT +36
19115 MISS -18
19116 HIT +36
19117 MISS -18
19118 MISS -36
19119 MISS -54
19120 HIT +18
19121 HIT +18
19122 MISS -18
19123 MISS -36
19124 HIT +54
19125 HIT +18
19126 MISS -18
19127 HIT +36
19128 MISS -18
19129 HIT +36
19130 HIT +18
19131 MISS -18
19132 HIT +36
19133 MISS -18
19134 MISS -36
19135 MISS -54
19136 HIT +18
19137 HIT +18
19138 HIT +18
19139 MISS -18
19140 HIT +36
19141 HIT +18
19142 HIT +18
19143 MISS -18
19144 HIT +36
19145 MISS -18
19146 MISS -36
19147 HIT +54
19148 MISS -18
19149 HIT +36
19150 MISS -18
19151 MISS -36
19152 MISS -54
19153 MISS -18
19154 HIT +36
19155 MISS -18
19156 MISS -36
19157 HIT +54
19158 MISS -18
19159 MISS -36
19160 MISS +54
19161 MISS -18
19162 MISS -36
19163 MISS -54
19164 HIT +18
19165 MISS -18
19166 HIT +36
19167 MISS -18
19168 HIT +36
19169 MISS -18
19170 MISS -36
19171 HIT +54
19172 MISS -18
19173 MISS -36
19174 MISS -54
19175 HIT +18
19176 MISS -18
19177 MISS -36
19178 HIT +54
19179 MISS -18
19180 HIT +36
19181 MISS -18
19182 MISS -36
19183 MISS -54
19184 HIT +18
19185 MISS -18
19186 MISS -36
19187 MISS -54
19188 HIT +18
19189 HIT +18
19190 MISS -18
19191 HIT +36
19192 HIT +18
19193 MISS -18
19194 HIT +36
19195 HIT +18
19196 HIT +18
19197 HIT +18
19198 HIT +18
19199 MISS -18
19200 HIT +36
19201 MISS -18
19202 HIT +36
19203 MISS -18
19204 MISS -36
19205 HIT +54
19206 HIT +18
19207 MISS -18
19208 MISS -36
19209 HIT +54
19210 MISS -18
19211 MISS -36
19212 MISS -54
19213 MISS -18
19214 HIT +36
19215 HIT +18
19216 HIT +18
19217 HIT +18
19218 HIT +18
19219 MISS -18
19220 HIT +36
19221 MISS -18
19222 HIT +36
19223 MISS -18
19224 HIT +36
19225 MISS -18
19226 MISS -36
19227 HIT +54
19228 MISS -18
19229 HIT +36
19230 HIT +18
19231 MISS -18
19232 MISS -36
19233 HIT +54
19234 HIT +18
19235 MISS -18
19236 HIT +36
19237 HIT +18
19238 HIT +18
19239 HIT +18
19240 MISS -18
19241 MISS -36
19242 HIT +54
19243 MISS -18
19244 HIT +36
19245 MISS -18
19246 HIT +36
19247 HIT +18
19248 HIT +18
19249 MISS -18
19250 MISS -36
19251 MISS -54
19252 HIT +18
19253 HIT +18
19254 MISS -18
19255 HIT +36
19256 HIT +18
19257 HIT +18
19258 HIT +18
19259 HIT +18
19260 HIT +18
19261 MISS -18
19262 HIT +36
19263 HIT +18
19264 MISS -18
19265 HIT +36
19266 HIT +18
19267 MISS -18
19268 HIT +36
19269 MISS -18
19270 MISS -36
19271 MISS -54
19272 HIT +18
19273 HIT +18
19274 MISS -18
19275 MISS -36
19276 HIT +54
19277 MISS -18
19278 HIT +36
19279 HIT +18
19280 MISS -18
19281 MISS -36
19282 HIT +54
19283 HIT +18
19284 HIT +18
19285 MISS -18
19286 HIT +36
19287 MISS -18
19288 HIT +36
19289 MISS -18
19290 HIT +36
19291 MISS -18
19292 MISS -36
19293 HIT +54
19294 HIT +18
19295 HIT +18
19296 MISS -18
19297 MISS -36
19298 HIT +54
19299 MISS -18
19300 HIT +36
19301 MISS -18
19302 MISS -36
19303 MISS -54
19304 MISS -18
19305 HIT +36
19306 HIT +18
19307 MISS -18
19308 HIT +36
19309 MISS -18
19310 MISS -36
19311 HIT +54
19312 MISS -18
19313 MISS -36
19314 MISS -54
19315 HIT +18
19316 HIT +18
19317 HIT +18
19318 MISS -18
19319 MISS -36
19320 HIT +54
19321 HIT +18
19322 MISS -18
19323 MISS -36
19324 MISS -54
19325 MISS -18
19326 HIT +36
19327 MISS -18
19328 MISS -36
19329 HIT +54
19330 MISS -18
19331 HIT +36
19332 HIT +18
19333 HIT +18
19334 HIT +18
19335 MISS -18
19336 MISS -36
19337 MISS -54
19338 MISS -18
19339 HIT +36
19340 HIT +18
19341 MISS -18
19342 HIT +36
19343 HIT +18
19344 HIT +18
19345 MISS -18
19346 HIT +36
19347 MISS -18
19348 HIT +36
19349 MISS -18
19350 HIT +36
19351 MISS -18
19352 HIT +36
19353 MISS -18
19354 MISS -36
19355 HIT +54
19356 HIT +18
19357 MISS -18
19358 MISS -36
19359 MISS -54
19360 HIT +18
19361 HIT +18
19362 HIT +18
19363 HIT +18
19364 MISS -18
19365 MISS -36
19366 HIT +54
19367 HIT +18
19368 HIT +18
19369 HIT +18
19370 MISS -18
19371 HIT +36
19372 MISS -18
19373 MISS -36
19374 MISS -54
19375 MISS -18
19376 MISS -36
19377 HIT +54
19378 HIT +18
19379 HIT +18
19380 HIT +18
19381 MISS -18
19382 MISS -36
19383 MISS -54
19384 HIT +18
19385 HIT +18
19386 HIT +18
19387 MISS -18
19388 HIT +36
19389 MISS -18
19390 MISS -36
19391 MISS -54
19392 HIT +18
19393 MISS -18
19394 HIT +36
19395 MISS -18
19396 HIT +36
19397 MISS -18
19398 MISS -36
19399 HIT +54
19400 HIT +18
19401 HIT +18
19402 MISS -18
19403 HIT +36
19404 HIT +18
19405 HIT +18
19406 MISS -18
19407 MISS -36
19408 HIT +54
19409 MISS -18
Total= 198
I tried something:
took two 5000 random spins. Checked if the number out was a repeater of a number within the last 18 spins (not the last 18 nrs). Out of 5000 spins, less than 2000 times was it a repeater. Actually, 1967 in one run, 1938 in the other one.
That is, 3000+ times was it NOT a repeater.
There must be a way to exploit this.
Quote from: Bigbroben on Feb 24, 10:07 PM 2018
I tried something:
took two 5000 random spins. Checked if the number out was a repeater of a number within the last 18 spins (not the last 18 nrs). Out of 5000 spins, less than 2000 times was it a repeater. Actually, 1967 in one run, 1938 in the other one.
That is, 3000+ times was it NOT a repeater.
There must be a way to exploit this.
Check my lasted thread; HOUNTING REPEATERS! :smile: