It was very interesting to read. Please share your opinions
i dun get how he gets the clockwise positions.
Quote from: weddings on Nov 11, 12:10 AM 2011
i dun get how he gets the clockwise positions.
I spent an hour and still can't get it
There are no numbers in the grid table, do U have them?
And who is the author? U should say who's writing this is attributed to.
I have seen this long time ago. Numbers are "invisible" in the table. Spell tip how to reveal them:
Change the color of numbers in the table in black color, and they will show yourself to you.
Then all will have sense. Very good idea for further developing.
Regards
Drazen
I think I grasp the concept. It appears to have some good stuff here. But this is not easy to track... Even harder to test for a good ammount of spins...
Quote from: Chrisbis on Nov 11, 02:20 AM 2011
There are no numbers in the grid table, do You have them?
And who is the author? U should say who's writing this is attributed to.
Chrisbis, I downloaded it as is from turbogenius.webs.com. No further instructions were given
I read this topic and I would like to give my point of view.
Turbo is a person that I like.He is trying to beat the wheel with maths and reasons.I have read all his published systems.
I went in his site and I did not find this "download". So slatan can you show me where you found it? thanks.
My point of view about this idea of Turbogenius:
Combining 2 or 3 or more things it is a nice thing to do. But with the way that he describes it is not a valid combination.
The numbers that did not appear in the last 37 spins ,have nothing to do with the distance of pockets between 2 numbers in the CW or ACW direction.
He says that if the number 5(for example) has not hit in the last 37 spins , but the CW distance of 5 pockets has happened in the last 37 spins , then we must not bet the number 5 !
WHY? what has to do the number 5 with the CW distance of 5 pockets between 2 spins. NOTHING.
So his combination with the way that is doing it , it is not correct.It is not a combination.
Although his way of calculation is mistaken he gave me a nice and new way way to look at roulette.
But I do not know if we can find a correct way to combine 2-3 events.
One idea is to play the numbers that did not hit in the last 37 spins and in the same time play all the distances of the CW or ACW direction that did not hit in the last 37 spins. But this will require to start playing with 24(or something) numbers.
ps. He also made an other silly mistake.
He did not had to count the CW AND the ACW.
Because if for example the CW is 10(pockets distance) then the ACW will ALWAYS be 27. So it is pointless.
I was really expecting something more clever from Turbo. I think he is starting losing his minds.
Even if he made some mistakes, and we would need him to explain why he connects the number 5 and the 5th location on the wheel to know we're right in assuming he made a mistake, this is still a valuable presentation for purposes of stimulating ideas, if nothing else.
Nate
why dont u just check kimo li instead
I like the idea of combining number sets.
I think that Turbo made mistake too.
I see combination like this. Lets take 37 spins and CW movements. You get cold numbers (around 12) and around 12 "COLD" movements. But you combine not the cold numbers and distances from the pockets but cold numbers and numbers you get from the last spun number calculating distances on the wheel.
After next spin you have recombine because you get new last spun number and "COLD" CW movements will produce different numbers for combination.
I understand that it is impossible to track by hand but with tracker could be nice system.
regards
DL
Well i am not the expert - but once among other times i send Laurance one email about similiar topic.
It would be the holy grail if you could capture the postive fluctation if there is no true bias.
They start to apper and vanish like any other selection and there is no positive expectation.
I apolieges being negative.
Quotewhy don't u just check kimo li instead
Roulette only appears to be a game of mathematical perfection, only if you think in linear terms. However, if you think in cyclical terms, and open your mind to someone who has lost their mind, you might learn something.
Imagine these 36 numbers were in a circle. Now count the spaces between the numbers as it relates in a circle of continuous spaces based on 6 number increments.
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
One space relationship: 12, 23, 34, 45, 56, 61, 12, 23, etc.
Two space: 13, 24, 35, 46, 51, 62, 13, 24 etc.
Three space: 14, 25, 36, 41, 52, 63, 14, 25 etc.
Four space: 15, 26, 31, 42, 53, 64, 15, 26, etc.
Five space: 16, 21, 32, 43, 54, 65, 16, 21, etc.
Six space: 11, 22, 33, 44, 55, 66
Now try it ACW:
One space relationship: 16, 65, 54, 43, 32, 21, 16 etc.
Two space: etc. 15, 64, 53, 42, 31, 15 etc.
Three space: 14, 63, 52, 41, 36, 25, 14, etc
Four space: 13, 62, 51, 46, 35, 24, 13, etc.
Five space: 12, 61, 56, 45, 34, 23, 12, etc.
Six space: 11, 22, 33, 44, 55, 66
The spaces between numbers in a cyclical table base have different meanings from a traditional numerical point of view. For example, space 53 CW has a four space difference, while 53 ACW has a two space difference.
And yes, you can track this “stuffâ€.
Welcome to the Global Star System.
Kimo Li
I also said that this "wheel combination concept" of Turbo is a very nice idea that can be the "trigger" for new systems.
I think that we need an excel tracker that can help us in this concept.
What we need is to have an excel tracker that we will be inserting 2 roulette numbers and it will be calculating the distance between those numbers.
We do not need to have both calculations of CW and ACW direction. Because as I posted above if the CW is X then the ACW will always be Y. We just need the one direction.
I have a nice idea on this concept and I please an excel programmer to make this excel tracker.
Thank you very much.
Pocket distances ( European R. W.)
Uups, Kattila was faster while I was doing my sheet. I post it anyhow, cause I also did it for the American Wheel.
The difference between my sheet and the one of Kattila: if 2 numbers lie directly beside each other (pe 15 and 19), my sheet will tell you CW 1, against what Kattilas sheet tells you CW 0.
Also note: on the sheet for the American wheel, you have to enter number 38 instead of 00!
Maybe its helpful for you.
Quote from: slatan on Nov 10, 11:52 PM 2011
It was very interesting to read. Please share your opinions
I knew what you were talking about when someone said the numbers were missing before I even downloaded it. I studied this months ago and built a tracker in XL. The numbers need setting to a colour, but if I remember rightly, one of the numbers is wrong, and throws you. Typo.
Basically, what the author theorises is this:
In 37 spins, numbers will double and treble, on average, 24 times, ala Law of the Third
He then says that you don't have to run 37, but can run 2 x 18, so one being the normal way, as you see them, and another way being sectors anticlockwise. Then you can do even more runs using different positions.
so 9 numbers from 9 different ways gives you 37 numbers which follow the law of the third perfectly.
Basically I can spin 9 times and have a full complement of 37 numbers
It doesn't work LoL. Nice try though because its thinking outside the box.
(later) sorry, when I said it doesnt work, the numbers from 9 runs follow the law of the third.
The trouble with LOTT is that you have absolutly no way of knowing what that 24 will look like. It will be 24 on average, but its shape is as random as the game itsself
If you bet on all 1 hits hoping they double, it gets too big. If you bet on all doubles hoping they treble, its easier on the BR, but there nothing to say you wont end up with a load of doubles that never trebled
Thank you kattila and MadMax.
The correct way is with MadMax sheet. The zero position must be when the number will make a repeat.
Yes turnerfeck the way of combining the things with Turbos idea is wrong.But its a nice thought for other systems to be made.
Of course if the 1 event has -2.7 then combining an other event that has also -2.7 it leads to no advantage.(we will always have -2.7) Because no matter how many times we will add 0 to 0 , we will always have 0.
But we can give it a try.
Quote from: Master_of_pockets on Nov 21, 04:03 PM 2011
Thank you kattila and MadMax.
The correct way is with MadMax sheet. The zero position must be when the number will make a repeat.
Yes turnerfeck the way of combining the things with Turbos idea is wrong.But its a nice thought for other systems to be made.
Of course if the 1 event has -2.7 then combining an other event that has also -2.7 it leads to no advantage.(we will always have -2.7) Because no matter how many times we will add 0 to 0 , we will always have 0.
But we can give it a try.
Do you know something?, you are absolutly correct. This idea didnt work really but it inspired me to think about other ideas, one of which I play currently, which I wont bore you with.
Is it because you don t want to bore me , or is it because its a secret? :)
Quote from: Master_of_pockets on Nov 22, 08:06 AM 2011
Is it because you don't want to bore me , or is it because its a secret? :)
Sorry, no, I meant I didnt want to hijack this post with another system.
I am writing it up as we speak and will post seperate. I want to test it further before anouncing that I have cracked the roulette code LOL
If you will post it , we can help you with the testing.
Quote from: Master_of_pockets on Nov 23, 06:06 AM 2011
If you will post it , we can help you with the testing.
I will, just about 70% typed up.
Dont get too excited, its just a repeat number law of the third system. Its just the progression that came to me that ironed out some of the misgivings with the way I used to play. 100% success this week on William Hill live Roulette (2 live dealer tables) Also, some nice actuals have come out of my testing. My £40 BR now sits at £130 for 30 mins play in total.
Give me a day or 2 to complete.
Hi Slatan,
A little late, but anyhow: always beware of people who claim hat they can help you and than end up with pages and pages of examples of their system: if a system exists, it can be explained without examples, simple as that; if a system exists you can even calculate the win probability etc, unless of course people claim that the state of mind is important, but then you do not have a falsifyable system anymore, but a belief, which is always true from the point of view of the believer)
Concerning the law of the third: this is just the consequence of what is called the "birthday paradox" how many people in a room do you need for the probability to be at least 50% that 2 of them have thde same birthday?
This is common math and it can not be used to predict numbers... (Although it is not said that you cannot use it in another way - only I do not know of such a way)
grts reddwarf
May I welcome Kimo Li to the forum............
Great to have another Legendary player amongst us...............
Hope we may hear from you more often Kimo Li
Quote from: slatan on Nov 10, 11:52 PM 2011
It was very interesting to read. Please share your opinions
In fact ROULETTE is the exact opposite. Thats the train too many have yet to board.