#1 Roulette Forum & Message Board | www.RouletteForum.cc

So whats a hot number to you?

32 this is spin 1 is it a hot number?
10 does this become hot number as well?
31
0
19
30
16
9
31 This has repeated so i presume this must be a hot number.
23

If we are to bet for repeats, hot number/s
Do we bet from spin 1
or wait till a repeat like the above #31

Which way is the right way? bet from spin 1 or wait for a repeat. Surely this needs to be set in stone so that one and all are on the same page, then we can move forward with devising away to catch this/these hot numbers.

If you was to be betting from spin 1, here you'd be break even.


link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=14735.30  Dec 16, 07:16 PM 2014

(link:://:.pichost.org/images/2017/11/14/temp_485837.png) (link:://:.pichost.org/image/j3of)

are #'s 32 to 9 hot or #31

lets assume a hot number is a repeat like #31 so no money spent no money lost.

(link:://:.pichost.org/images/2017/11/14/temp_952487.png) (link:://:.pichost.org/image/jR61)

countback is showing add 15 to the 9 from spins 1-10

How could 15 non-hit come over 30 spins 11-40, 5,5,5 or the usual 7,5,3?  well its 5,+0
But lets look at hot #'s
If set in stone a hot # needs to be a repeat so 31 is hot and we would be betting it, as we see spin 11 becomes hot, then spins  13,14 become hot and a win on spin 17.
Now do we drop all apart from #16 a real hottie?

Over to you members

No such thing.
Same for cold numbers.
Same for sectors.
Same for repeats.
Same for ...(insert your own here)

These things exist only in the minds of people
who don't understand random numbers.

Quote from: nottophammer on Nov 14, 03:47 AM 2017So whats a hot number to you?

32 this is spin 1 is it a hot number?
10 does this become hot number as well?
31
0
19

There is only one logical explanation for what a "hot" numbers is.
It's not even up for debate so I'm not sure why there is any debate at all.
Any number that appears above it's expected rate of appearance is a hot number.

In your example -
32 - so now think on this. 32's chances of appearing are 1 in 37 spins yet it appeared
1 in 1 spin. I'd say that's logically a hot number. It has 37 chances to appear once and it only took 1 spin for it to appear, therefore it's hot.
From there on - if people can understand this, the road gets a little easier.
To continue on - if we get to spin #37 and 32 still has only shown once - it's clearly showing "at expected" and not hot. If we roll ahead to spin 74 and it's still shown just once - it's cold. You have to know the odds of any bet appearing and how it's actually appearing to know what number or location is hot, average or cold. It's not complicated.

What good is a hot number if it doesn't tell you which numbers are more likely to spin anytime soon?

No change in odds. No change in payouts. No change at all. All thats left is progression or money management, and that's nothing but different size bets on different spins.

Guys, please don't deny the fact, that there are hot numbers that show up randomly, these hot numbers came up due to the consistency of ball'spin from one particular dealer, and yes that does happen frequently.

You get hot numbers with rng, real wheels or whatever. You can't use hot numbers without looking at cause and effect, unless there is bias.

Well, rng is another world, I don't like to dive into it!

Quote from: Steve on Nov 16, 05:21 AM 2017
You get hot numbers with rng, real wheels or whatever. You can't use hot numbers without looking at cause and effect, unless there is bias.

I agree, things don't magically happen always. Once you know the bias you know where the hotties are going to hit. No comments about rng though.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 16, 03:43 AM 2017What good is a hot number if it doesn't tell you which numbers are more likely to spin anytime soon?
No change in odds. No change in payouts. No change at all.

This isn't accurate - the problem is that explaining how and why you're wrong would mean disclosing why it works. So here we are lol.
I've already shown how (my way) works using repeats - I've explained it in various places in posts as well but I'm not about to piece it together in one post like this even though it's killing me to point out what you're missing.
You should rethink things perhaps if you're looking for the answer - When you see that the math changes it all becomes clear. Or you can stick to your guns that it's impossible to use repeaters to "Always" win and be done with it I suppose.

Turbo, I'd bet my balls I'm not wrong. Really, I'd lay them on the chopping block and accept painful removal if I was wrong. They often annoy me anyway. Sometimes I accidentally knock them, and well it's inconvenient.

I've tested many billions of true RNG results checking combinations of spin outcomes to check for patterns. Many times I've focused on the significance of "hot numbers". And the result is previous spins have no correlation on future spins when the results are truly random. Random means random. I'm just one of many people who have done similar testing.

All outcomes are cause and effect. Nothing happens without cause. Winning numbers are the effect, not the cause. You cannot use an effect to predict other effects unless there is a common link. With true RNG, there is no reasonable way to model the common link because you don't have enough data. It's like taking a few particles and trying to predict what they will do, based on what other particles a mile away will do.

I do have an open mind. But you have made various contradictions I don't think you're aware of. I seriously looked into what you were saying but I couldn't find anything to substantiate what you've said. One of the primary ways you tried to validate your claims was parxonline but the math of parx is rigged to almost guarantee strong profit.

But anyway you dont want to reveal the "secret", which is fine. We are all allowed secrets. If you have what you claim, then really I hope you kill the casinos. But for my personal validation of your claims, it ends in a kind of stalemate. Not that you owe me or anyone anything, because you dont.

(link:://:.pichost.org/images/2017/11/16/temp_170149.png) (link:://:.pichost.org/image/jkU0)

Turbo
I have a question ,
We know You are using progression, but is the bet selection chosen by You being able to generate an edge,  flat  bet on a wheel with a single zero?
I am very curious ,whether to spent  time to probing variants of hot numbers flat bet or whether it combines with adequate progression  from  start.

What pattern u didnt get? Divide ur billion spin 148 each. Now can you say that any of the 148 doesnt have at least a number running 7-8 times?

Quote from: Steve on Nov 16, 06:53 PM 2017And the result is previous spins have no correlation on future spins when the results are truly random.

This is absolutely correct. Past spins mean nothing - however a group of spins (cycle/session, etc) gives predictable results even though each spin is random and independent. Once you have something predictable you can use that. (coughs.... I'm not going to explain this dammit lol).

Here's a rough example using something everyone knows already - that law of thirds or whatever fancy name it has now (I think everything is packaged in 3 letter catch-phrases now ?).
Spin of cycles of 37 spins over and over and over until your balls hurt.
Tell me how many numbers appear once, twice, three times, not at all - etc.
I don't have to do this, I can tell you it's going to be damn near 24 numbers appearing
and 13 not appearing (on average... and yes it's a little off but I rounded stuff for the sake of the post). You can do this over and over. The total amount of numbers that appear will end up being 24...20...28...20...24...25...25...24...20....19....24 go on until you're tired - you'll end up with an incredible amount of cycles where it's 24.
Now think of the math of the game as it's commonly stated.
Any number has a 1 in 37 chance of appearing during a cycle of spins.
That means that any number on average will show up once per 37 spins.... we can all agree with this right ?
But no.. as you can test and prove to yourself - 24 numbers appear on average every 37 spins, not 37. There never will be 37 possible outcomes... just because there are 37 numbers and 37 spins in a cycle and each spin is independent - there will never be 37 numbers that show once and no repeats.
Now grab the eraser and make it every number has a 1 in 24 chance of appearing ?
You could do this or you could take this info and look into repeaters....
I said it until I'm blue in other posts. A number can't show twice unless it's shown once, it can't show 3 times unless it's shown twice, etc..
And most importantly - you can never lose a single unit on any number that doesn't appear because you never bet on it.

To answer the other questions OZON - work on it flat betting. The progression isn't one to pull out of drawdown - I'd call it a positive progression instead. Any progression just magnifies the results of whatever you're doing (Steve will agree I'm sure as well). If you're doing something wrong and using a progression you'll lose worse and worse.. if you're doing something that works - you'll win more and more (but the nay-sayers have to be open to accepting that there are things that do work - to them any progression just makes you lose more and faster). I've done my best to modify how I play down to a flat bet but I'd prefer to use a progression to win more faster instead of playing longer with smaller unit size.

Best explanation!!! ✊️ :thumbsup:

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 16, 09:36 PM 2017
This is absolutely correct. Past spins mean nothing - however a group of spins (cycle/session, etc) gives predictable results even though each spin is random and independent. Once you have something predictable you can use that. (coughs.... I'm not going to explain this dammit lol).

Here's a rough example using something everyone knows already - that law of thirds or whatever fancy name it has now (I think everything is packaged in 3 letter catch-phrases now ?).
Spin of cycles of 37 spins over and over and over until your balls hurt.
Tell me how many numbers appear once, twice, three times, not at all - etc.
I don't have to do this, I can tell you it's going to be damn near 24 numbers appearing
and 13 not appearing (on average... and yes it's a little off but I rounded stuff for the sake of the post). You can do this over and over. The total amount of numbers that appear will end up being 24...20...28...20...24...25...25...24...20....19....24 go on until you're tired - you'll end up with an incredible amount of cycles where it's 24.
Now think of the math of the game as it's commonly stated.
Any number has a 1 in 37 chance of appearing during a cycle of spins.
That means that any number on average will show up once per 37 spins.... we can all agree with this right ?
But no.. as you can test and prove to yourself - 24 numbers appear on average every 37 spins, not 37. There never will be 37 possible outcomes... just because there are 37 numbers and 37 spins in a cycle and each spin is independent - there will never be 37 numbers that show once and no repeats.
Now grab the eraser and make it every number has a 1 in 24 chance of appearing ?
You could do this or you could take this info and look into repeaters....
I said it until I'm blue in other posts. A number can't show twice unless it's shown once, it can't show 3 times unless it's shown twice, etc..
And most importantly - you can never lose a single unit on any number that doesn't appear because you never bet on it.

To answer the other questions OZON - work on it flat betting. The progression isn't one to pull out of drawdown - I'd call it a positive progression instead. Any progression just magnifies the results of whatever you're doing (Steve will agree I'm sure as well). If you're doing something wrong and using a progression you'll lose worse and worse.. if you're doing something that works - you'll win more and more (but the nay-sayers have to be open to accepting that there are things that do work - to them any progression just makes you lose more and faster). I've done my best to modify how I play down to a flat bet but I'd prefer to use a progression to win more faster instead of playing longer with smaller unit size.

Now grab the eraser and make it every number[37numbers] has a 1 in 24 chance of appearing

How has the odds changed ? Unless you know which pockets appear or which pockets don't appear.

Same with repeaters. 24 hits has a 1 in 13 chance of appearing again(repeat1).

How has the odds changed ? Unless you know which pockets appear or which pockets don't appear the second time.

Tell us how we know which pockets appear before they do. Everything else is moot.

My answer is BIAS.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 16, 09:36 PM 2017a group of spins (cycle/session, etc) gives predictable results even though each spin is random and independent

You are confusing plain statistics with predictability.

For example, the law of a third. In 37 spins, about a third of numbers will be repeated.

It sounds predictable and usable. The reality is:

* You don't know which numbers will repeat, with better than 1 in 37 accuracy.

* Even if you knew some recent repeaters, you don't know which will repeat again, with better than 1 in 37 accuracy.

You are trying to say one sequence of spins has a different probability of another sequence. Like 33,33,33 is any different to 32,4,15. Anyone who tested enough would know this. You're just talking about plain statistics.

The fallacy is just like saying after 10,000,000 spins, there will be around even reds and blacks. It doesnt help, at all.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 16, 09:36 PM 2017That means that any number on average will show up once per 37 spins.... we can all agree with this right ?

Sure, we agree on that.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 16, 09:36 PM 2017But no.. as you can test and prove to yourself - 24 numbers appear on average every 37 spins, not 37.

You appear to be forgetting that a number can hit perhaps 3 times in 37 spins. Or it can not hit at all for 100 or so spins. The average is still 1 in 37.

Another thing to test is see how often this combination of numbers will spin in trillions and trillions of spins:

0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12, ... etc to 36

Then see how often any other combination of numbers spins. What you'll find is in the long term, it's exactly the same!

The point is the wheel doesn't give a crap about what you think. Patterns in your head, hot numbers and trends, are just in your head.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 16, 09:36 PM 2017there will never be 37 numbers that show once and no repeats.

Completely wrong. If you test my point above you'll see you've made a mistake.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 16, 09:36 PM 2017I said it until I'm blue in other posts. A number can't show twice unless it's shown once, it can't show 3 times unless it's shown twice, etc.. And most importantly - you can never lose a single unit on any number that doesn't appear because you never bet on it.

If you agree the odds of the next number are 1 in 37, then this is true for every spin. You cannot put a chain of 1 in 37's together to change odds. And if you claim you arent changing the odds, then what are you changing? You certainly cant change the payouts.

In roulette the two main parts are odds and payouts. You can only ever change the odds. If you claim to not be changing the odds, but that you have a long term winning system, then you dont understand what you're saying.

This is not about anyone being  a "naysayer". This is plain and simple mathematics and simple logic. If a mathematician saw your claims, they would immediately recognize your mistakes. This is not complicated stuff.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 16, 11:27 PM 2017
In roulette the two main parts are odds and payouts. You can only ever change the odds. If you claim to not be changing the odds, but that you have a long term winning system, then you dont understand what you're saying.

This is not about anyone being  a "naysayer". This is plain and simple mathematics and simple logic. If a mathematician saw your claims, they would immediately recognize your mistakes. This is not complicated stuff.

That's clear contradictory statements. No need a mathematician, just use high school statistics of permutation and combination lessons.

Probably the best way to understand the relationship between odds and payout is a hypothetical roulette game where the payout is changed from 1:35 as now to 1: 37 for the hypothetical game. Now the punter has a clear advantage in this case.

We can't change the payout, so we have to change the odds to gain the advantage. That's logic.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 16, 09:36 PM 2017
.......there will never be 37 numbers that show once and no repeats.

The math answer for never is 37^37 = 1.055513496 x 10^58

Which is no different from any everyday sequence the roulette wheels randomly churn out.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 16, 11:27 PM 2017* You don't know which numbers will repeat, with better than 1 in 37 accuracy.

* Even if you knew some recent repeaters, you don't know which will repeat again, with better than 1 in 37 accuracy.

As I said in another forum (or this one... actually don't remember).
You have to look at potential winning numbers.
When you sit down to play - if I told you "Here is the game - you can only pick 1 number and if you're right you'll win 35:1 and the odds are 1:37" I'd be correct.
We all agree on this but you have to get past this single spin blockage.
Of course - when you sit down - ALL numbers have the potential to be the next spun number. Each has a 1:37 chance of appearing... if you're only plan is to bet 1 number for 1 spin. Once you expand this out it all changes though doesn't it..
If I instead told you to sit down and bet on a number to show twice.... you would logically now ignore the numbers that haven't shown at all - you would instead focus on the numbers that have shown once... after all, you can't get a win on a number showing twice if it hasn't shown at least once already. It's only a potential winning number after it has appeared at least once.
I really don't want to explain it more - it either clicks in someone's head or it doesn't.
You might jump up at 3am some night screaming lol.
And like I said before - It's far from perfect -  of the top 10 repeating numbers that would make profit, I manage to get a couple of them. I don't have to be perfect in order to win every time. If I post the spins and what numbers I played (have already done this before) - according to you it would have to be magic or voodoo or luck ? How did I manage to win and profit on 3 or 4 or 5 of the top 10 repeaters which hit above average and not lose anything on the numbers that never appeared or hit below average ? I certainly didn't cheat. It's easy to say 37:1 odds and 35:1 payout means there's no answer but then you're not thinking.
Also - to debunk (again) that "Parx" is fixed I purposely lost my bankroll. I posted before I did it that I was going to - it should have been impossible according to everyone who thinks the RNG is rigged (which it isn't).
It was covered on the other forum with the typical replies.
When I won $7 million - it was because it was rigged for me to win - when I lost it on purpose to prove them wrong - it was rigged for me to lose. When I won it wasn't "realistic" and then when I lose the bankroll to show it was actual conditions - then it's still not realistic lol. So I gave up and challenged others to do what I did and document it as I did - no one has/can. But why not ? It's so easy to win, it's rigged.... but it's not - and no one can. The daily log in bonus doesn't count towards ranking and simulates a bankroll that you would use to begin with for the day. The only thing that the leader board ranks players on is their profits. But I've said all this before.. and with the lack of anyone else being able to do what I did - I suppose that speaks for itself. (and I know - no one has the time to waste on that rigged game, that's why no one has repeated what I did). sighs.
""but the math of parx is rigged to almost guarantee strong profit.""
Then how on earth did I purposely lose all that bankroll - and why can't anyone else just play whatever method or system they want and do what I did ?
It's actually not rigged, it's just RNG. It's random. Math beats a math game - random has limits. It's going to be on my tombstone someday :)

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 17, 12:22 AM 2017
As I said in another forum (or this one... actually don't remember).
You have to look at potential winning numbers.

It's only a potential winning number after it has appeared at least once.

This simple question requires a direct answer from you, how do you select the numbers that appeared once to bet on ?

Or bet all numbers that appeared once ?

All numbers or selected numbers that appeared ?

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 17, 12:22 AM 2017
We all agree on this but you have to get past this single spin blockage.
Of course - when you sit down - ALL numbers have the potential to be the next spun number. Each has a 1:37 chance of appearing... if you're only plan is to bet 1 number for 1 spin. Once you expand this out it all changes though

it either clicks in someone's head or it doesn't.

Math beats a math game - random has limits. It's going to be on my tombstone someday :)

It's crazy how there's been a few ppl that have shared this but because other ppl can't put it together they say it doesn't work or exist.

Maybe the way your trying to do it is not different enough.  So you keep getting the same results!

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 17, 12:22 AM 2017But I've said all this before.. and with the lack of anyone else being able to do what I did - I suppose that speaks for itself.

[coughs] I think a couple of us came close, though not with the same 7 mill success. ;-)
And for the nay-sayers, Im still playing repeats and doing well.

I've always said and agreed, you have to consider the series of bets as your single bet. Not one single spin.

To strip it right back to basics as an example, pick one number and bet on it for 37 spins. Consider that one bet, not 37 bets. We know 24 numbers (on average) will show. Thats already a better than 60% chance of a hit on that bet and therefore a profit.

Quote from: fossell on Nov 17, 03:36 PM 2017I've always said and agreed, you have to consider the series of bets as your single bet. Not one single spin.

Indeed.
What I meant was people who keep saying it can't be done or that it's fixed at that site (or any site, or live, etc) can't win even with it being fixed as they believe it is.
I think Bago even insisted that the site was fixed just for "ME" specifically to win. Unreal.
I think the two of us should run up the leader board again. I still want to see a first and second place with our names up there :)

Quote from: Steve on Nov 16, 11:27 PM 2017
The point is the wheel doesn't give a crap about what you think. Patterns in your head, hot numbers and trends, are just in your head.

That's the truth

Quote from: cht on Nov 17, 04:32 AM 2017This simple question requires a direct answer from you, how do you select the numbers that appeared once to bet on ?
Or bet all numbers that appeared once ?
All numbers or selected numbers that appeared ?

I don't bet on all numbers that appeared - it wouldn't really be possible unless I was at a terminal or playing online. At a table I can't cover a large amount of numbers so I keep the amount of numbers that I play small. So I miss out on some great wins - yes. I only need one or a few of my played numbers to win above expected, and that always happens.

Quote from: Andre Chass on Nov 17, 05:05 PM 2017That's the truth

So to be clear - there are patterns galore in past spins, yet no one believes that future spins will create a pattern. Makes no logical sense and isn't how random works - but to each their own. I used to believe the sky was blue.. turns out I was wrong.

The only pattern that can be predicted is in which sector of roulette the ball lands the most. You should bet on the wheel, not the table.

Imho

Quote from: Andre Chass on Nov 17, 05:33 PM 2017
The only pattern that can be predicted is in which sector of roulette the ball lands the most. You should bet on the wheel, not the table.

Imho

Def not the only pattern that can be predicted. I wouldn't say I bet on either the wheel or the table. Take them both away. I just use the random string. And it has to be random.

If I have time TG, for Parx, I'll give it another blast. Always good fun for testing. Though I know you'll be a step or three ahead of me all the time damn it! I'll have a go from the reset on Sunday night.

Quote from: Andre Chass on Nov 17, 05:33 PM 2017
The only pattern that can be predicted is in which sector of roulette the ball lands the most. You should bet on the wheel, not the table.

Imho

Everyone's opinion is heard and to be respected.  But if I bet on the table or the wheel or random numbers coming out an rng!  Makes no difference

But your trying to tell someone that has a working method that it wont work.

TG and fossell are both speaking from experience and gave a very good explanation of what they do. 

Instead of trying to figure out why it's different or why it works.  Your trying to give them advice.  That makes no sense!

I'm not attacking you or trying to be arrogant.   I'm trying to give you advice. Maybe you should look into what they are saying.   The key is not to think of 1 spin

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 17, 05:10 PM 2017
I don't bet on all numbers that appeared - it wouldn't really be possible unless I was at a terminal or playing online. At a table I can't cover a large amount of numbers so I keep the amount of numbers that I play small. So I miss out on some great wins - yes. I only need one or a few of my played numbers to win above expected, and that always happens.

Thanks for the answer. It's an important one to establish your betselection model to understand where you're coming from.

Quote from: Andre Chass on Nov 17, 05:33 PM 2017
The only pattern that can be predicted is in which sector of roulette the ball lands the most. You should bet on the wheel, not the table.

Imho

I do not agree that sector prediction using VB or rc is the only way to win at roulette.

There are systems play that can win. But they are not the run of the mill systems posted here. I have not seen anyone posted it on forums and I don't expect it either although I have posted the gist of it here.

Repeaters and parallel streams are the 2 ways I have researched extensively and they can win when played with disciplined rules.

It all comes down to betselection and timing of when to start bet.

For those who claim to not predict which numbers to bet = no betselection and bet from the first spin = no timing, all power to you.  :thumbsup:

By win I look at +100% return on sessions br, how fast the system achieve that target, the drawdown, how large is the drawdown against the total bankroll, ie. how many sessions br is lost. My sessions br is 6% of investment.

A standard investment is 15K played at b&m casino. I do not operate alone, I'm part of a group of regular old-timers having fun and entertainment.

I gave the details so that you understand the perspective where i'm coming from. I like to know your perspective too to better appreciate your posts.

I changed my mind. Repeaters are the key to making miilions at roulette. Lots of people make a fortune with repeaters. Thats exactly why if you play repeaters, the casino will ban you.

Advantage play is a load if crap. Casinos only pretend to be worried about it just to prevent players from focusing on repeaters.

I admit it. I make a fortune playing repeaters and only preached AP to distract people.

All the experts really know repeaters work. We hide the truth. We are all in in it, and the repeaters players are the real experts.

And when anyone discovers the truth and posts it here, i rush to quicky cover it up because im desperate for sales. I cant eat without them. I have no integrity or honesty. I'm so motivated by money id lie my ass off if it meant a few extra bucks.

I'm curious.. How many repeaters players actually make millions? Come on, don't be shy.

I know you're out there. I'm so sick of hiding the truth. I'm sure turbo is one of them. He really showed us in parx, which is so not mathematically rigged. Of course he had to lose the lot intentionally, because you know that's just what people do right?

I need you millionaires to come forward so i can prove to everyone I'm not going to ban you anymore.

I also lied about the odds for single numbers. It's actually 1 in 24, not 1 in 37.

But you can still win without changing the odds. Because even if it's 1 in 37 for a single spin, over time it becomes 1 in 24. Just like 0+0=0, but 0+0+0+0+0=25

I'm sorry for lying. But it feels good to finally tell the truth.

That's childish.
I'll just back out of the thread, I've said what I came to say.

 :xd:

Cool it guys. No one has full monopoly of info especially when we deal with random. We know some, some other people know some and you can be assured there're ways out there you've not thought about yet, take it the right way it's an intellectual challenge. There're ore than 1 way to skin the cat definitely. But not those silly claims from noobs going on about supposed non-random game and so on, put them on ignore. Casino games is random there's no changing that, get real. If you insist on believing otherwise bet the farm.  :thumbsup:

Sarcasm is not childish. Im making a point.  I mean you must have made a fortune, if what you say is true.... unless you prefer spending days winning monopoly money without understanding the math behind the wins... And unless you prefer a few small wins instead of millions. Or maybe you already don't need to work for money anymore. Maybe you have a job because so easily beating even rng is simple for you. Right?

All those pros that ever explained the basic math of the real world.... you know they are all actually lying, just like me. They are selling something. There's no other explanation.

Ps i do get the concept of beyond 1 spin. What you are not understanding is that principle is well tested too.

No group of spins make another group more likely. One of the most tested principles is the most obvious...... hot numbers.

Pps, i rely on my own testing, not someone's words alone. Anyone can use the free software i published, or at any similar software to see for themselves. I have a version that looks for every possible combination or set principle.

I have said many times there are many ways its possible to beat roulette. Not just technology i use or sell. My interest in truth is much, much stronger than interest in profit.

I would love for someone to find something better. I would sincerely give them ample publicity if they wanted, not censor it as some stupid claims. When have i ever censored??

Anyone paying attention knows i encourage people to explore NEW ways to beat roulette... not the same old bullshit.

I don't give a crap if people don't like the idea of my methods. If they find something better im offering $100,000 for it. Proving i have the funds is laughable and easily done to anyone serious.

I don't stifle innovation even if it were better than the 150% edge of a computer. I would welcome it.  again when have i ever censored a method?

Quote from: Steve on Nov 18, 12:07 AM 2017
I have said many times there are many ways its possible to beat roulette. Not just technology i use or sell. My interest in truth is much, much stronger than interest in profit.

Steve, I'm curious!

You say there are many ways to beat roulette other than through software, VB, computers or bias. What are these ways?

Quote from: Steve on Nov 17, 11:35 PM 2017
Anyone can use the free software i published, or at any similar software to see for themselves. I have a version that looks for every possible combination or set principle.

You say you don't believe in statistics, that past spins do not affect future spins and that bets are independent of each other.
But you contradict yourself  saying that you use a software that looks for every possible combination.
Could you explain me?

Thanks in advance!

Andre,

"Past spins dont affect future spins" is a mathematical or better say a probability assumption and not a statistical assumption.

i hope you understand what i mean

Quote from: Roulettebeater on Nov 18, 09:11 AM 2017
Andre,

"Past spins dont affect future spins" is a mathematical or better say a probability assumption and not a statistical assumption.

i hope you understand what i mean

Yes I know, but you mixed what I said. I said:1- he doesn't believe in statistics. 2- he doesn't believe that past spins affected future spins. 3- bets are independente of each other.

Quote from: Andre Chass on Nov 18, 09:25 AM 2017
Yes I know, but you mixed what I said. I said:1- he doesn't believe in statistics. 2- he doesn't believe that past spins affected future spins. 3- bets are independente of each other.

i dont think steve doesn't believe in statistics.

Quote from: Andre Chass on Nov 18, 08:47 AM 2017
Steve, I'm curious!

You say there are many ways to beat roulette other than through software, VB, computers or bias. What are these ways?

See the "Outside the box" area. Coming up with new ideas is why i added that area. The sticky thread  has  approaches i suggest investigating, which habe nothing to do with traditional AP. Im sure there are more others can think of which aren't the same nonsense repackaged.

Quote from: Andre Chass on Nov 18, 08:57 AM 2017
You say you don't believe in statistics, that past spins do not affect future spins and that bets are independent of each other.
But you contradict yourself  saying that you use a software that looks for every possible combination.
Could you explain me?

No i never said i didn't believe in statistics. Statistics is reality but most players don't even understand basics, and use it incorrectly.

The average understanding is actually about junior high school, its that bad. Most players won't even do basic proper testing.

I have software that looks for anomalies in data. It does a lot of different things. In the case of hot numbers, they have no bearing on future spins unless there is physical bias. That includes individual spins or groups of spins.

Turbo i explained the parx math in detail. Caleb even reposted it. I guess you don't understand it. Anyone could have achieved the same results as you with random bets. As per the math, it just takes playing the optimimum amount of spins with progression.

If you play too little you won't rank well. Play too much and you'll lose your bankroll. Play just right and you'll have virtually guaranteed profits.

Again i already explained the math.  its not a matter of opinion. Real casinos don't pay huge fake cash prizes which can then be used to win more fake cash prizes and rank high. Dont tell me winnings aren't included in stats. You didn't win $7m from $1000. You won $7m by increasing bet size after huge fake cash prizes. Getting the first fake cash prize is easily achieved.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 19, 12:55 AM 2017Turbo i explained the parx math in detail. Caleb even reposted it. I guess you don't understand it. Anyone could have achieved the same results as you with random bets. As per the math, it just takes playing the optimimum amount of spins with progression.

If you play too little you won't rank well. Play too much and you'll lose your bankroll. Play just right and you'll have virtually guaranteed profits.

Again i already explained the math.  its not a matter of opinion. Real casinos don't pay huge fake cash prizes which can then be used to win more fake cash prizes and rank high. Dont tell me winnings aren't included in stats. You didn't win $7m from $1000. You won $7m by increasing bet size after huge fake cash prizes. Getting the first fake cash prize is easily achieved.

This is all nonsense you know. But nothing is going to change your mind.
I played my system yesterday for 300 spins at Parx and manually put all spins into RX at the same time - then used the RNG in RX for 300 spins and then grabbed 300 spins from Random.org. Guess what - exact same results from all 3. RX gives analysis in great detail and not once was there some issue with any of those 3 being "rigged".
I played a $10.00 min table with $100.00 max bet there (insane limits, but I can work with it).
Currently for the week in 6th with 109k profit (just profit - none of that includes whatever they gave me for logging in daily - which represents a bankroll you would bring to the casino). So 6th for me - no other roulette players in the top 10. The next roulette player is in 12th place and 17th place. Odd though Steve since everyone wins.
Or will you use Bago's thoughts that it's rigged "just for me" and no one else ?
You can say all day that's it rigged, or that everyone wins - it's not the case. I've recorded the spins and put them in RX - no problems with the spins and it's been proven to be nothing more than random. If they gave me a million bonus credits - I'd still be in 6th place.
No, I couldn't make HUGE bets and shoot up the leader board as you said - there are table limits, in this case 10-100 per number.
And not a single nay-sayer has the time to go there and easily rank in first ? Nope.
Then you'd see that it's realistic and not rigged - you might have to accept that what you believe isn't correct.
"You didn't win $7m from $1000" - correct. I started with $3000 and won $7m over MONTHS of work.
I can do it again because I have changed the math of the game into my favor and there is no way logically for me to lose with my system. I did this for MONTHS - I posted results - not a "lucky streak". I got to first and stayed at the top each week, which was hard work - even though that means nothing to you.
I suppose it is what it is.
If you want to debunk the math of the RNG on the site - feel free. Record the spins as I have from the start and plug them into your software. (I know, you don't have time. about 10 minutes really to auto spin and plug then it). You'll have to accept though that it's not rigged. Surely someone who agrees with you can shoot right up to first and stay there for 3 months ? It's easy !  lol.
Remember though - whatever "bonus" awards you get don't count for the leader board, only profits (which is why there are no other roulette players in sight of me there).
If they give me 2k for logging in - vs - me bringing 2k to the casino to use as a bankroll.. there's no difference. Hell, I even posted a detailed chart of my "bankroll" vs "profits" which clearly showed that no bonus points were relevant to my ranking.
Nothing will matter though - you refuse to believe that there are ways to win.
There's nothing I can do about that.
I can't make you see something that is there if you refuse to accept that you see it.

Here's some stats.

Spins 0-200 are from RX (RNG)
Spins 201-400 are from Random.org (RNG)
Spins 401-end are from Parx (RNG)

Please note average layouts bet (every spin played and easy bets to place) and net% profit. Yes, I shaded some info because you shouldn't need that info really. The progression can't go out of control because it's actually impossible for that to happen.
I reworked the aggressive progression due to Parx and the 10-100 limits.
But regardless, it still works and can't fail according to the math.
It doesn't take 20 sets of 200,000 spins to test something when the math has changed. (because "not enough spins" comment is coming)
Unless your statistics take into account the math being in the player's favor - you're results could never possibly be the same.
10 hours of play - $10.00 minimum bet on any location = $8,610.00
Anyone with the big balls who would use 100's would mean $86,100.00
But it's all rigged. Who would work a 10 hour day for 86K anyway. Who would play online on a "toy wheel" for "fake" money and make 7 million over 3 months of play.
It's all rigged.  ???

Nobody cares if you don't explain the process. Btw -2500 drawdown is a huge turn off.  :o

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 19, 07:43 AM 2017This is all nonsense you know. But nothing is going to change your mind.

What would change my mind is tangible information that contradicts what I believe. In other words, show me I'm wrong.

In this case my belief is not from personal opinion. Its from tangible and verifiable information, plus logic.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 19, 07:43 AM 2017then used the RNG in RX for 300 spins and then grabbed 300 spins from Random.org. Guess what - exact same results from all 3

300 spins? It is meaningless. Literally unless you have additional data to back it up, 300 spins is a meaningless test. Even 600 spins. Any random system on RX will profit most of the time over 600 spins.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 19, 07:43 AM 2017Or will you use Bago's thoughts that it's rigged "just for me" and no one else ?

Bago is dumb and says stupid things. I am not saying spins are rigged just for you. Like I said, the math at parx is rigged for everyone so that if you play too little, you wont rank well. If you play too much, you lose your bankroll. If you play a fair bit but not too much, you are virtually guaranteed profit and good rankings. I'll explain the math another way later.

I

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 19, 07:43 AM 2017If you want to debunk the math of the RNG on the site - feel free

The math and the RNG are two different things. I havent been talking about the RNG at all. I'm talking about the math of prizes.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 19, 07:43 AM 2017about 10 minutes really to auto spin and plug then it). You'll have to accept though that it's not rigged

10 minutes is nowhere near enough to determine if the RNG is fair. But again I'm not talking about the RNG.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 19, 07:43 AM 2017Nothing will matter though - you refuse to believe that there are ways to win.

Actually I have a very open mind. If you've seen people say I don't believe in anything except AP, it is an egg-headed comment I wont go into again.

For me to believe something, there needs to be substantiating data and logic. In your case, the glaringly obvious points are:

1. The math of parx. It is very different to a real casino. It virtually guarantees profit.

2. Contradictions in what you say, indicate you dont understand what you're saying

3. The principles of repeaters and hot numbers is tested to exhaustion. I've tested it myself too. And besides bias, there is no single spin or group of spins that make future spins more likely.

But let's ignore points 2 and 3 and assume you found a new way to beat roulette that has been missed by tonnes of experts. This leaves point 3.

Here's an example of what happens if you play the "right" amount of spins on Parx:

Step 1: You use a typical progression system and have moderate luck, to get one of the minor cash prizes. Now you have a boosted account balance and can afford to bet even higher than other players.

Step 2: Your larger bets mean bigger wins. Sure you might lose too, but you are still on even playing field with other players..... except you have a larger bankroll, and bonus cash. This means when other players go bust, you have funds to prolong progressions and win more.

Step 3: You have an unfair advantage over other players. After all, you've been given extra cash to play. So you are much more likely to beat other players, rank higher, and win even more bonus cash payments.

You then keep repeating steps 2 and 3.

But if you play too much, then you lose your bonus cash amounts PLUS more.

Keep in mind this mathematical situation is what I'm looking at. I'm not looking at the Parx RNG. I'm not unwilling to change my mind. I have simply formed my opinion on the obvious way a player can be virtually guaranteed to profit.

Imagine if someone told you 1+1=5, and they said "no really it's 5. You just have a vested interest in it being 2". The person might really believes it is 5, but you understand why it's not. But their misunderstanding doesn't change reality.

With all things considered, I think you believe your method works. But on the other hand, why have you not made millions from it?

PS, random does NOT have limits. Saying random has limits is a terrible misunderstanding of statistics. It's literally like saying "numbers have limits".

Putting it into context of unique numbers, it is more probable that of 37 spins, some numbers will repeat. That's basic statistics. If you check the probability of each spin and compare it to numbers already spun, then you get the same thing that gives the law of a third. It is not a principle that can be used to change odds for the next single spin, or groups of spins. It no different to saying after 1000 spins, if there are mostly reds, bet on black because eventually there will be around an even amount.

Also you cant change the odds of a group of spins and not change the odds of a single spin. It's just mathematically impossible. It really like saying 0+0=0 but 0+0+0+0=2

It's not just you. Many people make the same backwards claims.

A few replies - then I'll leave the thread alone, it's not mine anyway. I feel like I hijacked it.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 19, 06:20 PM 2017300 spins? It is meaningless. Literally unless you have additional data to back it up, 300 spins is a meaningless test. Even 600 spins. Any random system on RX will profit most of the time over 600 spins.

This is all dependent on the method being used. It takes a very small sample of spin to show that the math is in the player's favor and very few spins. Actually, depending on how the method is - it could take a few hundred spins or thousands of spins to reach every possible situation the player would face. I don't have this problem, I am guaranteed to win according to the rules of math. So 300 spins or 30,000 spins will produce the same results. You saw that my average amount of layouts bet was around 2 locations. Pretty impressive I'd say.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 19, 06:20 PM 20171. The math of parx. It is very different to a real casino. It virtually guarantees profit.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 19, 06:20 PM 2017Imagine if someone told you 1+1=5, and they said "no really it's 5. You just have a vested interest in it being 2". The person might really believes it is 5, but you understand why it's not. But their misunderstanding doesn't change reality.

Well, there's things we learn every day. There's ways to do things and look at things that haven't been done yet. There's no "end of the book" when it comes to what we know. It might seem like every approach has been tried, tested and failed - but that's not the case.
Did you know that if you take the sum of all natural numbers to infinite -
1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12 etc to infinite = -1/12
link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=w-I6XTVZXww
Sounds stupid, sounds insane, doesn't make sense - and guess what - that's correct.
Roulette has these too. But if you can't think past 1:37 odds and 35:1 payout then you can never understand how I've done what I've done.

As far as using it to be a "millionaire". I'm not sure what that means. I started this when I was incredibly young and haven't stopped. My goal was/is never to beat the game to be "rich". It was to beat the game fair and square, which I've done.
Would I use it to make easy money - sure, and I do. But it would be against everything I believe in and worked for to make shit-loads of money.
Making millions wouldn't matter either though, admit it at least. You would say I had a lucky streak and that as my bankroll grew I had a greater advantage over other players ? What does that mean ? It's US against the casino. It's the player against the math. There's no competition in the real world against anyone else. At the site I just like to point to my ranking because since so many nay-sayers say it's easy and anyone can do it, there's STILL no other roulette players in the top 10. There aren't many in the top 100 actually.
It kinds of shoots the "anyone can do it" and "it's fixed" all to hell just looking at the rankings. That's all, thanks for reading and the debate. It's my hope that the readers continue on exploring the math of the game and aren't ready to throw in the towel when those "who should know" tell them constantly that it's impossible.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 19, 07:30 PM 2017Would I use it to make easy money - sure, and I do. But it would be against everything I believe in and worked for to make shit-loads of money.

I don't buy that. I think if you could make $7m with roulette so easily, you would be doing it instead of wasting weeks with fake money play.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 19, 07:30 PM 20171+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12 etc to infinite = -1/12

Looks like theoretical mathematics that has no relation to reality. Its like 1/0 = infinity.
Infinity is undefined.  It is a concept, not a value.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 19, 07:30 PM 2017It's my hope that the readers continue on exploring the math of the game and aren't ready to throw in the towel when those "who should know" tell them constantly that it's impossible.

Again i'm all for people trying new things. But I have seen nothing at all to indicate what you have is anything new.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 19, 07:30 PM 2017At the site I just like to point to my ranking because since so many nay-sayers say it's easy and anyone can do it, there's STILL no other roulette players in the top 10. There aren't many in the top 100 actually. It kinds of shoots the "anyone can do it" and "it's fixed" all to hell just looking at the rankings.

1. Dont you think validation of your claims is best done on a platform that doesn't guarantee huge winnings?

2. Actually Fossell got pretty close to you and very quickly. Anyone can do the same with random bets, progression, and playing the "right" amount of time (as explained in earlier posts).

It would make little difference which games was used. It's all probability vs payout, plus the massive competition bonuses. It doesnt matter which game its done with.

Anyway through all the fog, one thing is still clear. The parx results are not at all proof of anything. The winnings you achieved are LIKELY for anyone who played the right amount of time. So why on Earth would you use parx as validation if you are mathematically assured of a huge profit even with random bets?

just a bit of fun betting numbers with best STD...

Quote from: Steve on Nov 19, 08:34 PM 2017The parx results are not at all proof of anything. The winnings you achieved are LIKELY for anyone who played the right amount of time. So why on Earth would you use parx as validation if you are mathematically assured of a huge profit even with random bets?

That's why I also used RX spins, Random.org spins along with Parx online - and my live play results. But under all the various circumstances - the results are the same. So there's that.
I don't use Parx for validation - but people can clearly see my rank and perhaps "listen" a little more to what I'm saying, think a little more about the possibility that this game can be beaten - that the big bad scary house edge is actually a small problem to deal with.. and then go from there. Or they can choose to listen to "It's all rigged and impossible, the payout doesn't equal the odds of winning - you can't win at this game".
That's their choice, people will do what they want.

@Steve;
1.) Why are you so much against Turbo's Parx test??   Come on mate, you can try too and then we Will see is you can be same successful as Turbo was!

2.) Can you mathematicaly prove to world, that you can beat roulette with VB (roulette computer)? 


@Turbo;
It is very unfair to say that spins from Parx, RX and RNG give exactly same results!!  What if you showed ONLY the best (or let average 200 spins results)?   BUT I am sure that can be also catastrophical 200 spins where you have no chance to win. (I today sent you 180 "hard" spins. Can you win on them too??)

Hi Maestro
I used to  using the RX in your way.
Always bet 3 numbers at the top of the rankings with the highest STD.
I've noticed that almost always at some point we are profit, but we never know how big and when exactly.
I played a flat bet, sometimes I had a pretty big drowdawn befor plus.
  And here my question is what are the best options to use this bet selection.
If we know that at some point we should be positive.
But it is safer to stop sessions on any plus or set a fixed target profit?
And what about stoploss, do you use it?

QuoteHi Maestro
I used to  using the RX in your way....

ozon i do not use that kind of play was just a go for fun to see how it goes..

Quote from: jefra on Nov 22, 09:15 AM 20171.) Why are you so much against Turbo's Parx test??   Come on mate, you can try too and then we Will see is you can be same successful as Turbo was!

Because the Parx math is nothing like real casino math. Parx guarantees an ever-increasing bankroll.
Is this is what real casinos are like?

I could spend days and days on parx like turbo, but why? To prove a point with fake money? Already i explained the math. I dont have the time to mess around with play money to prove something that is already known.

Quote from: jefra on Nov 22, 09:15 AM 2017Can you mathematicaly prove to world, that you can beat roulette with VB (roulette computer)? 

No doubt. Unquestionably and easily, I do it very often.

The thing to understand about statistics is it is never, never 100% certainty. Like with a biased wheel... you could find a wheel where zero wins significantly more than other numbers. Does this guarantee there is a bias on zero? No.

So what you can do is check even more spins. And if you still see zero wins more than other numbers. Does it guarantee there is a bias? NO.

All getting "more data" does is increase the probability that there's genuine bias.

Now take bias one step further, and observe spins very closely. You might notice that when the ball hits the pockets, there's a high pitched "ping" sound. But when the ball hits the zero pocket, there's a bit of a pop or thud sound. If you notice this a few times, it may indicate the green plastic in the pocket is bubbling up. This absorbs more of the impact of the ball, so the ball bounces less. And if the ball bounces less, then zero will become bias.

My point? Well in this case, we would have both:

1. Statistical data, and enough of it to be relevant (but not 100% proof of bias), AND
2. Observation of the CAUSE of a bias.

Put those together, and you still dont have 100% certainty. But you damn well have a very, very high degree of certainty.

NEVER will you have 100% certainty with any investment. There is always risk. Do you need 100% certainty? No.

Are you 100% certain you arent in a dream, right now? How can you be 100% certain?

ALL INVESTMENTS ARE CALCULATED RISK. It's the same in roulette or any advantage play situation.

So where am I going with this?

Firstly, advantage play is not just bare statistics with nothing else. I've explained one case with bias analysis. With roulette computers, the analysis is even more blatant because you can get predictions based on where the ball will first hit the rotor. What are the chances of hitting the right number within 5 pockets, about 80% of the time over 60 spins? Again it's never 100% proof, but add in things like hearing the beep when the ball is predicted to fall. There is a lot of additional information - additional to plain statistics - to back up assessment of accuracy.

Now with testing a typical roulette system, all you have is PROFIT AND LOSS. There is no signficant backup data. So all you can do is test and test and test. And the more you test, the more assured you are your system works or fails. 1000 spins is not enough. 10,000 is getting more realistic, but still its no guarantee the system actually works. Ive seen systems even profit after 10,000 spins, then tank shortly after. I've even seen systems get lucky over 100,000 spins only to eventually tank.

And finally with turbo's system, I've already explained why his approach wont work. And as usually I get the typical eggheaded comments like I must be totally against it because i'm selling something. Actually the truth is simpler. And I already explained it. I explained the math of Parex, and why anyone could be practically guaranteed an ever-increasing bankroll.

Quote from: jefra on Nov 22, 09:15 AM 2017(I today sent you 180 "hard" spins. Can you win on them too??)

That's nowhere near enough spins to tell you anything useful. Everyone needs to understand short term tests are useless without backup information.

On the note of system testing, almost everyone tests the whole system in something like an online casino, with tests done spin by spin by spin.

The problems with that are:

1. You could waste a day testing, or even weeks, and still it will NOT tell you if your system works (or is luck)

2. You are taking a big risk with your bankroll

So a simpler way is just test the working principle of your system that is supposed to change the odds.

For example, maybe your system tracks RBRBRB then you bet R. Ok so then you should use RX or other automated software to check millions of spins for the sequence RBRBRB R

Then if the odds are better than random, you might have something. Do the testing in a click of a button, instead of wasting weeks of your life, and money.

And if anyone needs convincing about how shorm team tests are meaningless, just run a random RX system for 500 spins a few times.

Sometimes you profit, sometimes you lose.
... but most of the time, you lose.

Take it one step further. Say you won almost every time. So then test the system a few times, over perhaps 1,000 spins this time. You may find sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. But with more spins (1000 per test), you might find you end up losing more times than you did with 500 spin tests. It's a sign your system doesn't work.

For people that says I just dont like systems because i sell computers, how about this.... Test properly, then see if the system actually works, or I'm just full of shit.

Or should I lie and tell fairytales about what does and doesn't actually work, just so I look neutral?

I dont have loyalty to one method of beating roulette over another. It's not loyalty anyway. I just have an aversion to bullshit. And I believe in proper testing and logic.

Steve;

You almost all said very well, except one thing disturb me. You said that a system player must test a system through thousands and thousands (if not million) of spins. WHY? Even 500 spins is too much, because mostly players play 100-200 spins in one piece in casinos.

You said very good that you use signals from RC which warn you if all match to saved timings or something changed. These signals mostly come on end of spin, after you already made a wager, but after all, these signals still give you enough informations "in a long run". You can have exactly same ball speed 5th ball rev till end but a final distance still can variate for +70 pockets. BUT this is still OK because as you said you count on 50, 60 or 80% certainty that a ball will stop in your betting area.

They say that the best indicator for a working system is "if longer you play- more you win". YES, this is true BUT VB player CAN stop playing and move to other table or return next time if something changed, BUT system player MUST continue to play, no matter if he noticed changes and started to lossing. We have two different criterions, and this is not fair.

OK, maybe we both think too much on systems based on outside bets and table bets, and here I 100% agree with you. But with above I more thought on Turbo, Mr.J and maybe some other individuals ;-) because their play does not differ so much from VB players. A system or RC are only PART of winning way, other part is knowledge, personal experiences,... which differ from player to player.

End of the end, Steve, we both know that testing is one, but playing in live can be total different  ;)  for most players.


Turbo is one unique guy and I like him very much, because he is one of very few an honest, fair and trustworth people in gambing community. Maybe he has only two little mistakes, one is that he can be stuborn sometimes, but other mistake seem for me as huge, because he is enormous ignorant of email replies, and this very much disturb me  :(

When i see the design of his system i feel amazed. From percentage of unit laying  on mat for every bet to per spin earning . If no cheating in roulette he ll be winner for sure.

Steve, I'm not sure that you're argument or justification about Parx holds up or makes sense. I'll explain - you can either understand what I'm saying or not.

Take your local casino.
Player 1 goes in with $300.00 for a bankroll and plays a $5.00 minimum table.
Let's assume he wins some, loses some - leaves 5 hours later broke. Fair enough.
Player 2 goes in with $30,000.00 bankroll and plays the same table.
He wins some, loses some - leaves 5 hours later down $300.00 and takes his
remaining $29,700.00 home with him for the next trip.

Now If I'm reading what you say right - player 2 has a huge advantage over player 1 because he has a much larger bankroll and can "play longer". That doesn't change the math considering they are using the same table with the same limits.
Parx calculates the leaderboard based on profits, not based on bankroll (as it should be). So player 1 who might start with $300 and walk away with $2,000 will have $1,700 in profit - of course he can now use the $2,000 to continue playing and maybe rank higher next week (this is what I did there). Eventually he would get to #1 - this has nothing to do with whatever bonus points/credits they give that player.
Granted player 2 can play "longer" thanks to having a bigger bankroll - but it won't matter because with the same table limits - they will both end broke eventually according to the nay-sayers. There's no advantage in being player 2 other than he can play longer before going broke.
I'm pretty sure you think that they will both lose everything anyway - it's just how long it takes being based on their bankroll ?
Even if a player had a unlimited bankroll - they wouldn't be able to place on the leader board unless they could make more in profits than anyone else.
The more they play - the larger they bet - the faster they'll lose (according to you).
(and since anti system people believe there's no way to beat the math - everyone, regardless of what they have for a bankroll will lose).
Aside from buying in there to get credits (I've never done) - it's a equal playing field on that site. You get a log-in bonus once per day (ranges from almost nothing to 3k per day after a month). We also got 50k today for it being Thanksgiving (very generous I'd say).
So everyone is on the same equal playing field - and regardless of their bankroll everyone is doomed to lose (correct ?).
While I'm using my method/system/ whatever you want to call it - and rank constantly high on the board - no credit given for me lol. I understand that I suppose. It would mean having to say that something works.
Player 1 above left broke, Player 2 left with $29,700 but it doesn't matter - they both lost $300.00 - they haven't changed the math of the game regardless of their bankroll. If you can't win then having a bigger bankroll won't matter a bit, you just won't lose it all as fast as the player with a small bankroll.
So saying the math is rigged because everyone has equal starting playing amounts - they are ranked based on profits only (not bankroll) makes no sense. It's absolutely fair. No player is given more bonus credits than anyone else.
I charted (they don't do this at the site) my bankroll vs my total profits - you can clearly see that aside from the initial bankroll I started with - any bonus credits I got played no part whatsoever in my profit balance.
And I liked the "I don't have time" comment - I said that would be coming.
I probably have less "free time" than anyone on the forums (trust me). But 10-15 minutes per day is enough with the turbo-spin option to do what I need to do to keep myself in the top 10.
I agree with you fully that no one can win without changing the math of the game - the thing is - it can be changed. I gave one quick example in another post.
You can tell me that a number has a 1:37 chance of appearing, but we can test and know that 24 numbers appear in 37 spins on average. This already throws a wrench in the works for the "math" people.

As for needing to test 200 million spins ? Nonsense. It's math.
If I gave you a set of dice and a method you could easily calculate how many throws it would take to see every possible outcome. The same goes for a specific method with roulette. If I give you the specifics, you would see that it can be proven as true or false just by using math, you wouldn't need 200 or 500 million spins. There is only a few possible outcomes that can happen (wink). 300 spins is more than enough.

I think I 'get it' what tg is talking about. His play logic is quite simple to test.....

funny how can go flat in plus for over 6000 spins and goes feck... :xd: :xd:

Quote from: jefra on Nov 23, 03:58 AM 2017You almost all said very well, except one thing disturb me. You said that a system player must test a system through thousands and thousands (if not million) of spins. WHY? Even 500 spins is too much, because mostly players play 100-200 spins in one piece in casinos.

500 spins is nowhere near too much. You not wanting to play that many spins doesnt change reality. No casino or statistician would consider 500 spins statistically relevant. Again if you need proof, test a random system for 500 spins. Keep doing a 500 spins test and you see sometimes you've won, sometimes you've lost. Are the winning sessions proof the system works?

500 spins not being enough is not a matter of opinion. Simply do enough testing for yourself and see.

Quote from: jefra on Nov 23, 03:58 AM 2017YES, this is true BUT VB player CAN stop playing and move to other table or return next time if something changed, BUT system player MUST continue to play, no matter if he noticed changes and started to lossing. We have two different criterions, and this is not fair.

The wheel doesnt care what you think is fair.

Quote from: jefra on Nov 23, 03:58 AM 2017But with above I more thought on Turbo, Mr.J and maybe some other individuals ;-) because their play does not differ so much from VB players.

They have nothing like VB approaches.

And really I have nothing against Turbo. But either he is wrong and doesn't know it, or is misleading people with some degree of awareness. I think it's more a case of him not understanding his mistake, but perhaps both. For example, he still doesnt appear to understand the parx math, or his numerous contradictions. And I find it difficult to believe that by now, he would have either made a fortune, or have realized his approach doesnt work.

Bet hot or bet random!

In the end of the day the results are similar. The difference is that you keep a little more in the game...

Turbo, i'm not wrong about the math. Anyone who gets bankroll bonuses has a big advantage over players that don't get bonuses. There are multiple ways a player with more money has an advantage over other players.

Even if two players made the same size bets, the player with more money is more likely to rank higher. Consider the below chart. The red line is where one player (with less bankroll) goes bust. The other player keeps playing and wins back some losses, and ranks higher.

(link:://:.pichost.org/images/2017/11/23/temp_785922.png) (link:://:.pichost.org/image/cZSD)

There's an easy way to settle this. Just test properly in conditions where you don't receive massive cash bonuses.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 23, 09:28 AM 2017And I liked the "I don't have time" comment - I said that would be coming.

Really, it's not an excuse. I just don't have the time to waste on play money to prove a point that is self-evident if you understand the math.

Remember Fossell had some time, and he ranked high too.

And last time I looked, people playing SLOT MACHINES were ranking higher than you. Does it mean they all have the holy grail of slot machines, or there's another reason for them winning millions and ranking high?

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 23, 09:28 AM 2017As for needing to test 200 million spins ? Nonsense. It's math.

It's math? Testing 200 million spins is nonsense? You dont know you're saying the math is irrelevant and more thorough testing is not as conclusive.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 23, 09:28 AM 2017I probably have less "free time" than anyone on the forums (trust me).

Anyone who has spare time to play for pretend money has spare time.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 23, 09:28 AM 2017You can tell me that a number has a 1:37 chance of appearing, but we can test and know that 24 numbers appear in 37 spins on average. This already throws a wrench in the works for the "math" people.

Its not throwing a wrench anywhere. You are just not understanding it. We also know from a coin toss, each side will increasingly flip a more equal amount. It is impossible to use this to change the odds.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 23, 09:28 AM 2017If I gave you a set of dice and a method you could easily calculate how many throws it would take to see every possible outcome.

Every possible outcome? Actually 200 million would be hugely inadequate for that.

We are really going in circles. We can just leave it at some of the players at Parx have the slot machine holy grail. And you have the roulette holy grail. You are all winning millions in play money, but too busy to make real money. And you deliberately lost all the parx money, because.

Hundreds of millions in winnings on slot machines. Just like real casinos:

(link:://:.pichost.org/images/2017/11/23/temp_887481.png) (link:://:.pichost.org/image/ckul)

Steve,

In all seriousness, what is your endgame?   

Quote from: Moxy on Nov 23, 11:02 PM 2017
Steve,

In all seriousness, what is your endgame?

How far are we looking ahead? And endgame with what exactly?

Assuming you're just asking why I'm bothering with this stuff. I'm trying to help people.

Should I see obvious and harmful mistakes and say nothing? Most of the time I say nothing anyway because I don't have time and it would just annoy most people anyway.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 23, 11:18 PM 2017
How far are we looking ahead? And endgame with what exactly?

Assuming you're just asking why I'm bothering with this stuff. I'm trying to help people.

Should I see obvious and harmful mistakes and say nothing? Most of the time I say nothing anyway because I don't have time and it would just annoy most people anyway.

Of course, by helping them you help your endgame.   Not sure how these folks aren't aware of that by now.   

Don't play silly, we're well aware of, at least I am, what your thoughts are about the future the gaming landscape and your computers.

• Repeaters are the key to win.
• The past spins influence the future spins.
• Hot numbers mean they are more likely to spin again soon.
• You can change the math of the game with hot numbers.
• It's pointless to test lots of spins because you'll never play lots of spins.
• Every expert in the field of gaming is wrong. They have ulterior motives, like me.
• Statisticians are wrong. They have ulterior motives, like me.
• I'm all against these facts, because it's a conspiracy to sell roulette computers.
• The Parx players make hundreds of millions in fake money, playing slots. They are too busy to play for real.
• Turbo has the holy grail. He proved it with fun money. But he isn't really interested in making millions in real money.

If you believe all that. Then frankly, you're an idiot.

It is a knee-jerk reaction and narrow-sighted to assume that I have a hidden agenda. You dont know me Moxy. I'm as direct and straight-shooting as they get. Despite the trash you might think you know about me, I'm as honest as people get.

My motivation for explaining everything is exactly as I stated. It has nothing to do with sales of anything. I have many different products and businesses in many different industries. I'm in a comfortable position.

Most people might be, but I'm not motivated by money. That's one of the blinders for people to understand my simple motives.  I care far more about honesty and integrity. And when someone calls me a liar, well that's sand in my crotch.

You are free to believe your bulletpoint fairytales.

Don't forget this one.  :thumbsup:

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 21, 09:04 AM 2015
I've been doing this now for over 3 decades

Quote from: Steve on Nov 24, 12:03 AM 2017

• Repeaters are the key to win.
• The past spins influence the future spins.
• Hot numbers mean they are more likely to spin again soon.
• You can change the math of the game with hot numbers.
• It's pointless to test lots of spins because you'll never play lots of spins.
• Every expert in the field of gaming is wrong. They have ulterior motives, like me.
• Statisticians are wrong. They have ulterior motives, like me.
• I'm all against these facts, because it's a conspiracy to sell roulette computers.
• The Parx players make hundreds of millions in fake money, playing slots. They are too busy to play for real.
• Turbo has the holy grail. He proved it with fun money. But he isn't really interested in making millions in real money.

If you believe all that. Then frankly, you're an idiot.

It is a knee-jerk reaction and narrow-sighted to assume that I have a hidden agenda. You dont know me Moxy. I'm as direct and straight-shooting as they get. Despite the trash you might think you know about me, I'm as honest as people get.

My motivation for explaining everything is exactly as I stated. It has nothing to do with sales of anything. I have many different products and businesses in many different industries. I'm in a comfortable position.

Most people might be, but I'm not motivated by money. That's one of the blinders for people to understand my simple motives.  I care far more about honesty and integrity. And when someone calls me a liar, well that's sand in my crotch.

You are free to believe your bulletpoint fairytales.

You obviously got me pegged wrong.  I'm well aware of their fallacies.  You're waiting for someone to magically come up with something so you can take it off their hands for relatively and insultingly cheap, maybe even for free.

You're post about being uncertain i.e. concerned about the casino landscape and your continued efficacy of your computer says otherwise about "not being about the money".  It could be favorable for a long time or shut down with a drop of a hat is the gist of what you were implying.  You are not trying to sell your computer so much as you are trying to find the hg via these members on here is the point.

Not sure if you are yanking my chain.  We've had this conversation before in some form or another. 

Why did I add the "outside the box" area?

Why did I suggest "less-explored" and potential valid ways that have nothing to do with AP?

Is it a coincidence that what I say coincides with what every other reputable gaming expert says? (We're in on it together?)

It is an unfortunate fact that most people on gambling forums have very poor knowledge. The level of ignorance is so high that gaming experts literally laugh at members, and joke about it. You can read some of their comments on insider-forums, although they aren't usually public. Casino's profit and thrive from the ignorance of players. Casino owners love seeing people chase hot numbers, cold numbers, repeaters blah blah.

Any legitimate professional takes basic knowledge for granted. It's not questioned. It is just known, because of understanding of the real world. System players tend to be like lost sheep baaing and bumping into each other, accusing the big bad APs from ruining their party.

But you know I was one of them too. All APs were at one stage, until we woke up and wondering what the fuck we were thinking.

Quote from: Moxy on Nov 24, 12:18 AM 2017You obviously got me pegged wrong.  I'm well aware of their fallacies. 

You accused me of pushing an agenda (manipulating) for self-serving purposes. That's as good as calling me a liar.

Quote from: Moxy on Nov 24, 12:18 AM 2017I'm well aware of their fallacies. 

Then i suppose I should shut up and not share experience, in case people think I have an agenda.

Quote from: Moxy on Nov 24, 12:18 AM 2017You're waiting for someone to magically come up with something so you can take it off their hands for relatively and insultingly cheap.

$100,000 is cheap for the HG. But you know, I'm not forcing any HG owner to sell it to me, am I?

You know i already have my methods to beat roulette, which I'm pretty happy with. I don't NEED anything else. I also don't NEED additional income. So if nobody accepts my offer, whoopie.

Quote from: Moxy on Nov 24, 12:18 AM 2017You're post about being uncertain i.e. concerned about the casino landscape and your continued efficacy of your computer says otherwise about "not being about the money".  It could be favorable for a long time or shut down with a drop of a hat is the gist of what you were implying.

Sure it could. I've said it before. It's possible the casinos collectively make changes of some kind that make computers obsolete. It's possible, but unlikely. Virtually nothing has changed in the past 15 years. The latest change casinos made are RRS which randomizes rotor speed after bets close. And ultimately it about halves a computer's edge. From perhaps 80% to 40%, which isnt really a problem.

I have put a lot of time, money and effort into developing my methods and technology. But one day i'll be dead. Nothing lasts forever. I'm getting older, and give a shit less and less. Plus I'm already comfortable with my financial situation. Even if everything related to roulette AP went to shit, woopie. It wouldnt realistically happen, but let's say it did. If I really wanted to remain in the gaming industry, I'd complete development of my technology to see through cards, and focus on blackjack. I have already done everything I wanted to do in roulette and gaming in general. Now as I'm getting older I'm more focused on other things. Roulette to me is more an intellectual thing. It is not my first choice to make money. I would discuss my other companies but then the usual dickheads would post blatant lies about them.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 24, 12:19 AM 2017
Why did I add the "outside the box" area?

Why did I suggest "less-explored" and potential valid ways that have nothing to do with AP?

Is it a coincidence that what I say coincides with what every other reputable gaming expert says? (We're in on it together?)

It is an unfortunate fact that most people on gambling forums have very poor knowledge. The level of ignorance is so high that gaming experts literally laugh at members, and joke about it. You can read some of their comments on insider-forums, although they aren't usually public. Casino's profit and thrive from the ignorance of players. Casino owners love seeing people chase hot numbers, cold numbers, repeaters blah blah.

Any legitimate professional takes basic knowledge for granted. It's not questioned. It is just known, because of understanding of the real world. System players tend to be like lost sheep baaing and bumping into each other, accusing the big bad APs from ruining their party.

But you know I was one of them too. All APs were at one stage, until we woke up and wondering what the f*** we were thinking.

Outside the box is a genius ploy.  Because it takes it from the conformity and restriction of math to the unexplored which gives it at least a better shot at a hg.   As I reiterate your endgame, you would eventually want to take it off their hands either for free or relatively cheap i.e. 100k.  Free, preferably. 

To answer you last post, well then take your offer off the table, go off into the sunset then.  Quit fishing for something you haven't bothered to explore then, you dubiously opportunistic, old fogie.  You said you are old so....

And if I had the HG, I would create software for other players to access it remotely - in a way that would greatly reduce the chances of it being reverse engineered. But it would still allow me securely profit from it for at least some time. That's what I've done with my roulette system, and hybrid computer.

And when I was done with it, I would release it to people who would be responsible. For example, people who would at least help others too as I do with my foundation and humanitarian projects. Giving it to everyone for free is recipe for disaster. It would mean people who didn't earn or deserve it will benefit, and spoil it for people who did deserve it.

I guess you are just cheapskate old fogie spending, maybe wasting, a lot of your time on here rather than more important things as you stated.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 24, 12:39 AM 2017
And if I had the HG, I would create software for other players to access it remotely - in a way that would greatly reduce the chances of it being reverse engineered. But it would still allow me securely profit from it for at least some time. That's what I've done with my roulette system, and hybrid computer.

And when I was done with it, I would release it to people who would be responsible. For example, people who would at least help others too as I do with my foundation and humanitarian projects. Giving it to everyone for free is recipe for disaster. It would mean people who didn't earn or deserve it will benefit, and spoil it for people who did deserve it.

That's exactly my point.  You don't want sell or people to reverse engineer your hg; you still want control over it and distribution.  Yet you are fishing for the hg with your insultingly cheap offer or even for free preferably and yet the contradiction flies over your head again.  Having your cake and eating it too.

Don't you see it?

Quote from: Moxy on Nov 24, 12:33 AM 2017Outside the box is a genius ploy

Quoteploy
plÉ"ɪ/Submit
noun
a cunning plan or action designed to turn a situation to one's own advantage.
"the president has dismissed the referendum as a ploy to buy time"
an activity done for amusement.
"the eternal cross-stitch I was set to do before I could indulge my own ploys"

Wow are you really that cynical? You know, there really are people with good intentions around - who even if they were in a bad position, would still prefer to be honest and disadvantaged, than dishonest for personal gain. I sincerely pitty anyone with such a negative view. It's like a dark cloud above them. Or maybe you just dont know me at all.

Quote from: Moxy on Nov 24, 12:33 AM 2017Because it takes it from the conformity and restriction of math to the unexplored which gives it at least a better shot at a hg

No the math never changes. It's always there. Changing the odds is not specifically changing the math. It's more like understanding cause and effect.

Quote from: Moxy on Nov 24, 12:33 AM 2017As I reiterate your endgame, you would eventually want to take it off their hands either for free or relatively cheap i.e. 100k.  Free, preferably. 

Actually I would credit them with the discovery. But would I use it myself? Yes. But if they somehow accidentally disclosed it to me, then I would look for a way to compensate them. Others may not, but I appreciate value, honesty and integrity.

Quote from: Moxy on Nov 24, 12:33 AM 2017To answer you last post, well then take your offer off the table, go off into the sunset then.  Quit fishing for something you haven't bothered to explore then, you dubiously opportunistic, old fogie.  You said you are old so....

My offer? You make it sound like it is some Earth-shattering part of my life. No, it's just an offer.

And I have explored it. For around 10-15 years. But I eventually concluded I was wasting my time because there were ALREADY viable methods to beat roulette.

Quote from: Moxy on Nov 24, 12:33 AM 2017you dubiously opportunistic, old fogie

Um not that old. I mean "older" as in wiser. I'm 41. I'm not a 25 year-old dickhead anymore.

Quote from: Moxy on Nov 24, 12:47 AM 2017You don't want sell or people to reverse engineer your hg; you still want control over it and distribution.  Yet you are fishing for the hg with your insultingly cheap offer or even for free preferably and yet the contradiction flies over your head again.  Having your cake and eating it too. Don't you see it?

I explained why I wouldn't just release it to every undeserving nitwit. If everyone had it, which includes the casinos, then it would be useless.  Read back what I said I'd do. Anyway now you are just speaking shit.

Unbeknownst to yourself, you are a sly, opportunistic capitalist above all.  You wouldn't sell your blueprint of your hypothetical hg for anything.  It's priceless. 

Only the poor schmucks on here somewhat desperate enough for your offer or just validation would share their hg here for pennies on teh dollar which is what you hope for essentially.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 24, 12:57 AM 2017
I explained why I wouldn't just release it to every undeserving nitwit. If everyone had it, which includes the casinos, then it would be useless.  Read back what I said I'd do. Anyway now you are just speaking shit.

Well, no kidding, Sherlock.  I've been pining for people on here to keep their stuff close to the vest and not let you part their valuable input from them for everyone else, especially you, to see.

This is your desperation grab at a hg even if it means more eyes of the members of this board can see it along as well.

You are a farty pants

I can get a 30-150% edge on modern wheels. We can beat almost every wheel. I can watch my teams win via live video stream, while I'm home in my pijamas. There's more. I don't mean to brag but you're saying stupid things.

And you think I'm desperate for the hg?

Ps, i dont really wear pjs. I practically live in shorts without even tshirt.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 24, 01:41 AM 2017
I can get a 30-150% edge on modern wheels. We can beat almost every wheel. I can watch my teams win via live video stream, while I'm home in my pijamas. There's more. I don't mean to brag but you're saying stupid things.

And you think I'm desperate for the hg?

Ps, i dont really wear pjs. I practically live in shorts without even tshirt.

I'm sure that's the edge.  Way off from what you stated on the AP forum site which I won't divulge.  Anyways, I am happy for you.  I am a capitalist as well.  What separates us is that I am not dubious.  Fair market value is what I strive for.  I would never try to hustle other people of their ingenuity.   

I would love to share my input with a very rich person someday that respects fair market value.  But I'll be fine as well, regardless.   In time.

Check my public computer demo. 120% edge. The one where idiots say i must have used paid actors to act amazed.

Highest I've gotten is astound 200% but that's rare. Mostly we get around 40%.

Moxy, before you have a go at me, make sure you know what youre talking about.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 24, 02:13 AM 2017
Check my public computer demo. 120% edge. The one where idiots say i must have used paid actors to act amazed.

Highest I've gotten is astound 200% but that's rare. Mostly we get around 40%.

Moxy, before you have a go at me, make sure you know what your talking about.

How about an aggregate, lifetime edge.  I assume 40% is that edge?

Well if you factor in progression, the realized edge is probably more than double. Could be like 300% but when we see the edge is strong and clear, we don't bother calculating it.

Take the public demo for example. What's 93% win rate with 15 numbers while using the martingale? High. But there's not much point to progression because you win almost every spin.

Can we cover 15 numbers. Sure with proper team.  It isn't needed.  Usually 3 or so numbers is fine.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 24, 02:28 AM 2017
Well if you factor in progression, the realized edge is probably more than double. Could be like 300% but when we see the edge is strong and clear, we don't bother calculating it.

Take the public demo for example. What's 93% win rate with 15 numbers while using the martingale? High. But there's not much point to progression because you win almost every spin.

Can we cover 15 numbers. Sure with proper team.  It isn't needed.  Usually 3 or so numbers is fine.

I was simplifying it to flat inside bets across the board per spin.  The same way I gauge my edge regardless if it's inside or outside.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 23, 08:00 PM 2017Hundreds of millions in winnings on slot machines. Just like real casinos:

Did you see my post at GF ?
The minimum on those slots are 1k per pull.
On a $1 slot in the casino someone wins 10k you wouldn't blink over it.
On a $1,000.00 min slot someone wins $10,000,000 - you're pointing to it as a sign it's all wrong. It's the same math you know. Just saying.
Each slot will also show you the win/lose rate average - it's the exact same as a slot machine in the casino... but you're not thinking about this because the min wager on any pull is astronomical on the site. The math is the same, sorry.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 23, 07:44 PM 2017And you deliberately lost all the parx money, because.

because I was told over and over that it was all fixed for me to win.
I made a thread about it before I did it. I lost it on purpose to show that even with the massive bankroll that I had - it didn't mean I would keep winning (your theory).
The only reason I was ranking high and winning was because of how I was playing - not because it was "rigged" for me to win - but anyway, that's not proof enough for some people.
Besides - building it back up like I did the first time (again, to make a point). 6th place last week, in the top 10 this week with 3 days to go. 340k bankroll. Means nothing I know - everyone can do it.
And what's with someone ranking higher because they can play longer with a bigger bankroll ? Isn't that reality ?
Player 1 goes into the casino with 200 and player 2 with 2,000 of course player 2 can play longer if they play equal table limits (like the site).
And everyone gets the same log in bonus... everyone gets the same opportunity to win the leaderboard weekly challenges. It's fair across the board for everyone and yes - people have different bankrolls despite this.
Some people don't know how to win, while others do.
Giving someone 7 million won't make them rank in first - and if they don't know how to win, they'll just lose it all (as I proved)

Quote from: Steve on Nov 24, 12:03 AM 2017Turbo has the holy grail. He proved it with fun money. But he isn't really interested in making millions in real money.
===
Most people might be, but I'm not motivated by money. That's one of the blinders for people to understand my simple motives.

================================

I lost track if I'm a idiot or not. Money isn't my motivation and you say it's not yours.
We're both idiots. lol

Turbo, let's simplify this.

You claim to be able to win around $7 MILLION for a small amount of work with your hg system. You proved it with parx with play money.

So why havent you done it with real money?

Ok so money isn't your motivtion. Am i to assume its then intellectual pursuit?

Im not motivated by money, as much as others are. But I'm not an idiot. If i could still make $7 MILLION effortlessly, even with RNG, I would do it.

So ultimately you haven't made $7m with real money... because you dont want to? Am I correct? Please give details.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 24, 06:30 AM 2017Turbo, let's simplify this.
You claim to be able to win around $7 MILLION for a small amount of work with your hg system. You proved it with parx with play money.
So why havent you done it with real money?

I'm not sure that's a simple question or a simple answer.
I've always been motivated to beat this game - to make random predictable.
To use the math I'm given by the game and use it to win.
It never was about winning money. You say you're the same - so this we have in common.
I'm not motivated to win tons of money - I "DO" though much prefer being in the casino playing over a "game" online or RX, of course.
I do go, I do win. People who know me and have gone with me will vouch for me that I've never lost money in a casino. But that's proof of nothing (really, it isn't).
When I get older (older now....sighs..) I intend to play daily since I'm literally surrounded by casinos. But even then it won't be to win shitloads of money, it will be for the satisfaction that I've beaten the game.
Online with "turbo" mode on - and 3 months.. I made 7 million.
In a real casino it would take much longer - but still could be done.
2-3k per visit would be fine, changing casinos daily and staying under the radar to some extent - it would still be work (in my book). I know AP players want to go in and hit hard and walk out with a suitcase filled with money (not literally) but that's not me.
In reality I would be doing it for entertainment - that wouldn't count as "proof" in anyone's book either.. there would be just as many reasons put out on the forums, trust me lol
"Didn't play enough spins", "got lucky", "lied" - you name it, it would never end.
My account at Golden Nugget online is still sitting there (about the only legal online I can play in NJ that has live dealer/wheel).
Between there and AC, PA I could spread my play around enough to make a nice amount over time - travel as well...but like I said above, it's not my goal in life to make a fortune doing this. When I have actual free time (what age does that happen ????) of course I'll spend more time in the casino winning.
I go once or twice every two months now - that could change later.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 24, 06:56 AM 2017
I'm not sure that's a simple question or a simple answer.
I've always been motivated to beat this game - to make random predictable.
To use the math I'm given by the game and use it to win.
It never was about winning money. You say you're the same - so this we have in common.
I'm not motivated to win tons of money - I "DO" though much prefer being in the casino playing over a "game" online or RX, of course.
I do go, I do win. People who know me and have gone with me will vouch for me that I've never lost money in a casino. But that's proof of nothing (really, it isn't).
When I get older (older now....sighs..) I intend to play daily since I'm literally surrounded by casinos. But even then it won't be to win shitloads of money, it will be for the satisfaction that I've beaten the game.
Online with "turbo" mode on - and 3 months.. I made 7 million.
In a real casino it would take much longer - but still could be done.
2-3k per visit would be fine, changing casinos daily and staying under the radar to some extent - it would still be work (in my book). I know AP players want to go in and hit hard and walk out with a suitcase filled with money (not literally) but that's not me.
In reality I would be doing it for entertainment - that wouldn't count as "proof" in anyone's book either.. there would be just as many reasons put out on the forums, trust me lol
"Didn't play enough spins", "got lucky", "lied" - you name it, it would never end.
My account at Golden Nugget online is still sitting there (about the only legal online I can play in NJ that has live dealer/wheel).
Between there and AC, PA I could spread my play around enough to make a nice amount over time - travel as well...but like I said above, it's not my goal in life to make a fortune doing this. When I have actual free time (what age does that happen ????) of course I'll spend more time in the casino winning.
I go once or twice every two months now - that could change later.

Hey turbo

So far I don't know your play method, you write huge text, teaching us all principles and whatever...

Roulette profi players don't neither  like to write nor read big essays, maybe I'm wrong here, anyway plz go ahead and tell us about your play method

Quote from: Roulettebeater on Nov 24, 07:02 AM 2017Roulette profi players don't neither  like to write nor read big essays

Eh. I like to explain things fully. If I don't then someone takes something I didn't say and makes it seem as if I did. Then again I never shut up when I should. lol
As far as the method, it's been explained.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 24, 08:05 AM 2017
Eh. I like to explain things fully. If I don't then someone takes something I didn't say and makes it seem as if I did. Then again I never shut up when I should. lol
As far as the method, it's been explained.

Not exactly. You have given clues but not details. That's often how it is with these "holy grails". You get clues but then you'll have to figure it out yourself. Most of us don't do that.

Quote from: boyd30 on Nov 24, 09:27 AM 2017You get clues but then you'll have to figure it out yourself. Most of us don't do that.

Don't do what ? Figure things out for themselves ?
I've posted more than enough details on how it's done - why it works.
Anyone interested enough will do the work. Anyone else won't.
It's not my job to convince anyone that I'm right - but on the same note I surely don't want people to "give up" trying because a few say it's impossible.
It's not impossible and I've proven that.
I've posted almost every detail - read the forums, read my posts.
I'm not going to spell it out in detail, at some point it will come to that though I'm sure - but it won't be my doing.

Steve's curiosity only piques when you openly share your findings.   But if you place a deservedly, legit value on it, he doesn't care one bit.  Strange.  Or is it?

It would definitely pique my curiosity if they put a price tag that warrants its existence.  But not him.  Free correlates to more authenticity, I guess.   Funny how that works.

What does that say about his "intellectual pursuit" when free input inversely correlates to more authenticity of the typical system in the works whilst something that is aiming for a serious investor is inherently a potential sham and pretty much ignored.

Methinks, it's something else.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 24, 09:44 AM 2017
I've posted almost every detail - read the forums, read my posts.

I'm not going to spell it out in detail, at some point it will come to that though I'm sure - but it won't be my doing.

He meant the details are scattered and not going to explain it step by step.

Ok turbo so you would rather win millions in play money instead of real money. Because its just an intellectual thing for you.

I'll clarify: for me, it started because i wanted to profit. I achieved that and more. But i have other businesses that make money too. Overall if i had to choose, id prefer my other businesses to roulette. Mostly its because i don't need to train people.

Anyway lets focus.. you've given ample information to detail your system. The problem is you make incorrect statements. You contradict yourself. You don't appear to understand your mistakes.

Here's the most important one..

You talk of repeaters starting with a number hitting once, then twice... so let's look at that.

When a number hits once, twice, three times etc in any amount of spins, that and other numbers are not more or less likely to spin anytime soon. It's not my opinion. I've tested beyond thoroughly as have others. So the core of your system is based on fallacy.

Just look at one number that is "hot". You are saying that number is now more likely to remain hot.

You've said it all before. Your approach is quite clear, and its incorrect. But you say to think in terms of more spins. But what i said applies to single or groups of spins.

How big are your groups? Well probably 100 spins maximum because you win in real casinos, right?

Saying to consider more spins doesn't change anything. The truth applies to both short and long term.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 24, 04:09 PM 2017When a number hits once, twice, three times etc in any amount of spins, that and other numbers are not more or less likely to spin anytime soon. It's not my opinion. I've tested beyond thoroughly as have others. So the core of your system is based on fallacy.

You probably don't even have to test that, do you ?
Numbers will repeat. Fact
A number can't repeat unless it's shown once. Obvious fact
A number can't show twice unless it's shown once. Ditto
A number can't show three times unless it's shown two times. More Ditto
You aren't trying to magically pick a 1:37 bet anymore - like I said above,
more like 1:24 or even better...yes the payout stays 35:1. How nice.
Positive progression to maximize benefit of having the math in your favor - Common sense.
You can't lose a single unit on a number that never appears because you'd
never be betting on it. Obvious,
If any of these comments don't make sense or defy belief - I guess I can post it again.
If you can accept these as facts that they are - you can actually turn the math of the game into your favor.
Does it win every time you try ? No. Is it better than sliced bread ? Probably.
Does it win every "session" if you consider a session as I do - Yep

Solution -

+455 <-----------------------------------------------> -79

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 24, 06:22 PM 2017You probably don't even have to test that, do you ?

Actually as I said, I've tested it thoroughly. As have mathematicians, statisticians and other gaming experts.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 24, 06:22 PM 2017A number can't repeat unless it's shown once. Obvious fact

A useless fact as saying one number needs to win.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 24, 06:22 PM 2017A number can't show twice unless it's shown once. Ditto
A number can't show three times unless it's shown two times. More Ditto

Yes but you cant know which will repeat, with better than 1 in 37 accuracy. Some will stay hot, some go cold. In reality, hot and cold is in your head.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 24, 06:22 PM 2017You aren't trying to magically pick a 1:37 bet anymore - like I said above, more like 1:24 or even better...yes the payout stays 35:1. How nice.

You are talking about the law of a third. Again, you still don't know WHICH numbers will hit with better than 1 in 37. There is no 1 in 24. It's in your head. It's like saying red won once, so we have 1 color to choose from. Your 1 in 24 nonsense is not changing anything.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 24, 06:22 PM 2017You can't lose a single unit on a number that never appears because you'd never be betting on it. Obvious,

So if the winning number is not one you're betting on, you lose nothing?

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 24, 06:22 PM 2017If any of these comments don't make sense or defy belief - I guess I can post it again.

They make sense (In other words, I understand you). But the problem is you're incorrect.

It shouldn't be hard to understand.

You can't "trap" numbers and bet on them. Each "hot number" will appear just as often as any "hot number" or "cold number" (easily proven with proper testing).

Let's try and simplify this further.....

If what you're saying is true, then:

1. After a number hits once, it has a higher chance of hitting again soon
2. After a number hits twice, it has a higher chance of hitting again soon
3. After a number hits three times, it has a higher chance of hitting again soon

And NONE of that is true. If you think otherwise, we can easily do some proper testing and publish results here.

You also say nonsense like "random has limits". Actually no, it has no limits. Each spin is a new possibility, with 1 in 37 chance.

And you say nonsense like 37 unique numbers will never spin in 37 spins. But actually if you checked enough spins, you'd find it happens exactly as often as ANY OTHER COMBINATION OF NUMBERS.

None of this is my opinion. It's just what the extensive testing shows. If you were testing properly too, it's what you would also find.

You say a lot that just isn't true. And you tout Parx as a valid test, without even understanding the math.

I'm sorry Turbo but I cant find a single valid point you have.

*sighs.

I'll keep testing then until I see a number at +20 standard deviation since random has no limits. Oh wait, that will never happen in a trillion spins, or 20 trillion if that's not enough. I "have" charted this - random stays completely contained as it will.
Now is it predictable ? Yes. Is it possible to predict at a higher win rate then the payout ? Yes, keep reading my post above I suppose. There's nothing else I can say.
Random doesn't mean "anything can happen". Random means that anything contained within the possibility of what can happen - can happen.
If there's 20 spins where #10 shows each time - you can't say "well, that's normal - it's random". That would mean it's NOT random. That's why spins and wheels are tested to check for random results.
They wouldn't look at a bias defective wheel and say "Well, that's just random"
I suppose it's pointless. We can agree to disagree or disagree to agree.
And the main problem is - if you agree that at some point there will be a repeat, you already agree with me - you just don't know it yet because you're not looking in the right place. As long as there are repeats, I can't lose. In my book that makes it case-closed.

U cant lose on number that didnt show up but u can also lose a lot on number that show once even twice even thrice even more. The 24 number things actually is not useful in field. Ye it appears 24 number. Do i bet all. No . Then whats the point. More real field action needed rather than logic.

Quote from: nottophammer on Nov 14, 03:47 AM 2017So whats a hot number to you?

32 this is spin 1 is it a hot number?
10 does this become hot number as well?
31
0
19
30
16
9
31 This has repeated so i presume this must be a hot number.
23

In closing - and sorry for derailing the thread -
Notto -
32 spun first in your example.
32 had a 1 in 37 chance of appearing and showed 1 in 1 spins. It's "hot".
1:37 chance of appearing and results were 1:1
Now if we get to spin #37 and it still appeared only once, it's showing "at expected" and not "hot" nor "cold".
I hope that helps. - that's my answer to your question

QuoteAnd you say nonsense like 37 unique numbers will never spin in 37 spins. But actually if you checked enough spins, you'd find it happens exactly as often as ANY OTHER COMBINATION OF NUMBERS.

i would love to see it 37 in 37 spins

Quote from: Madi on Nov 24, 09:32 PM 2017
U cant lose on number that didnt show up but u can also lose a lot on number that show once even twice even thrice even more. The 24 number things actually is not useful in field. Ye it appears 24 number. Do i bet all.No . Then whats the point. More real field action needed rather than logic.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 17, 05:10 PM 2017
I don't bet on all numbers that appeared - it wouldn't really be possible unless I was at a terminal or playing online. At a table I can't cover a large amount of numbers so I keep the amount of numbers that I play small. So I miss out on some great wins - yes. I only need one or a few of my played numbers to win above expected, and that always happens.

His secret sauce is he predicts future hot numbers.  :thumbsup:

Smarties know how not to lose the loss spins.  :xd:

If this is the case  whats point to say 24 number appears . No point. Core thing is not that one. If u bet 8 number u need to win 9 time in 37 spin. If u miss u need to try next cycle with positive progression. What he doesnt say is that about losing. It also loses in individual set of x number of spin. Wins on average and goes up.

Quote from: Madi on Nov 25, 01:53 AM 2017

If u miss u need to try next cycle with positive progression.

If you are losing and you are trying to recoup your loss by increasing your betting amounts for subsequent spins, how is that a positive progression?

It is a negative progression.

If you play 8 number and 1 number win in 37 spin u can put some more on that number only not on all the numbers. Thats how its positive

Turbo:

A coin has two sides. The chance of 2 unique sides in 2 tosses is 1 in 2x2=4 (per specific side)

The chance of 2 x heads is also 2x2. The chance of 2 tails is 1 in also 2x2.

A die has 6 sides. The chance of 6 unique sides is 1 in  6x6x6x6x6x6=46,656 (for specific number)
Its the same as any combination of sides.

See the trend?

But according to your logic, it will never happen. Random has limits.

The same applies to roulette wheels.

Again, any combination of results is just as likely. On a die, the combination of 1,5,6,3,2,3 will happen just as often as 1,2,3,4,5,6.

The only difference in roulette there are 37 numbers.

Your claim that random has limits is incredibly backwards. You are misleading people.

Just answer me this. Do you think 37 unique numbers in  roulette will happen less often than any other combination of numbers?

QuoteA coin has two sides.

no this is not truth they are 3 sides.... :twisted: :twisted:

A hot number, it's a number that's impatient

Quote from: Steve on Nov 26, 04:11 AM 2017Just answer me this. Do you think 37 unique numbers in  roulette will happen less often than any other combination of numbers?

No one uses a system like that - who has a brain in their head.
So when you see a #4 followed by a #21 then bet #2 ? 
Of course the spins coming out 1,2,3,4,5 are the same as the spins coming out 21,1,34,21,2
and everyone knows that.
No one is pretending to predict with 100% accuracy what the next spin will be - (well, maybe using a computer - and even then you're going to be wrong a lot) but I can obviously surely do it better than 1:37 and even better than 1:35 that would be needed to overcome the house edge. I explained how to do it too.
Random doesn't have limits ?
Chart the std deviation like I did before - behold !  lol
Wouldn't you know - it stays withing a specific limit and over time even balances out right where it should. Like I said - wheel data is checked for randomness and to detect bias - do they say "OH, that's just random" when the test fails ? Why not ? Does someone in the back of the room jump up and say "those results could have actually happened - it's 1 in a billion chances but it's perfectly normal". ?
So of course random has limits, it performs in such a way that it can be charted and data can be used to check wheels.... but not according to you ?

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 24, 06:22 PM 2017
You probably don't even have to test that, do you ?
Numbers will repeat. Fact
A number can't repeat unless it's shown once. Obvious fact
A number can't show twice unless it's shown once. Ditto
A number can't show three times unless it's shown two times. More Ditto
You aren't trying to magically pick a 1:37 bet anymore - like I said above,
more like 1:24 or even better...yes the payout stays 35:1. How nice.
Positive progression to maximize benefit of having the math in your favor - Common sense.
You can't lose a single unit on a number that never appears because you'd
never be betting on it. Obvious,
If any of these comments don't make sense or defy belief - I guess I can post it again.
If you can accept these as facts that they are - you can actually turn the math of the game into your favor.
Does it win every time you try ? No. Is it better than sliced bread ? Probably.
Does it win every "session" if you consider a session as I do - Yep

So Turbo I would like to ask you when a number first shows how many times would you play that number for it to show a 2nd time ?

Quote from: D1 on Nov 26, 12:29 PM 2017So Turbo I would like to ask you when a number first shows how many times would you play that number for it to show a 2nd time ?

I only play potentially hot bets. - a location showing above expected in the future.
I can't know if a location is going to stay hot, show at average or go cold, etc.. no one can.
I do though know what locations have potential to be hot and which don't.
Anyone can do this using the same math that the nay-sayers use to try to prove that it's impossible.

@Steve - 6th place last week and the highest (by far) roulette player.
today ends the next week's challenge - got to 7th place this week (so far - I might have to stay there as the next highest spot is pretty far ahead of me). the next highest roulette player is in 27th place (at the moment). This is only two weeks - but since the site supposedly favors everyone and is rigged for people to win - why aren't there at least 2-3-4 roulette players in the top 10 ? Is it rigged only for me ? Have a I figured out the secret rigging and using it to my advantage lol. After tonight it resets again for the new week.
Would you put money on me being in the top 10 again next week ?  :)
That would be a good bet to make.

QuoteWould you put money on me being in the top 10 again next week ?

i would but if you fail i will find you and i think i want my money back....i must remember casino movie... :twisted: :twisted:

Quote from: maestro on Nov 26, 01:10 PM 2017i would but if you fail i will find you and i think i want my money back....

lol
Failure is never an option.

Hi Turbogenius,

cycle = 37 spins, you bet from spin no.1 till spin no. 37, is it right please?
it is without some trigger, you start from spin no.1, right?
Do I have to study last one cycle or last two cycles?
How many cycles does have your "session" please?
Location = does it mean sector on wheel or some other group of numbers please?

Thanks in advance
And I do apologize for my english  :D

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 26, 01:04 PM 2017
I only play potentially hot bets. - a location showing above expected in the future.
I can't know if a location is going to stay hot, show at average or go cold, etc.. no one can.
I do though know what locations have potential to be hot and which don't.
Anyone can do this using the same math that the nay-sayers use to try to prove that it's impossible.

When you say locations I take it you are talking about a particular section or sector of the wheel ?
Say a sector containg 5 numbers or something similar ?

I do not know if that changes anything.
I do not even have time to test it.
We start the session so that there we want only a few numbers, waiting for numbers are repeated 3 times and we only play those numbers for 1 unit, if some number falls 4 times bet 2 units only at that number on the remaining still only 1 unit ,if it falls 5 times bet 3 units on that number, the sessions always end at 37 spin.

Quote from: ozon on Nov 26, 03:31 PM 2017
I do not know if that changes anything.
I do not even have time to test it.
We start the session so that there we want only a few numbers, waiting for numbers are repeated 3 times and we only play those numbers for 1 unit, if some number falls 4 times bet 2 units only at that number on the remaining still only 1 unit ,if it falls 5 times bet 3 units on that number, the sessions always end at 37 spin.

That's not flatbet

Quote from: Steve on Nov 26, 04:11 AM 2017

Just answer me this. Do you think 37 unique numbers in  roulette will happen less often than any other combination of numbers?

checkmate!

Quote from: Steve on Nov 26, 04:11 AM 2017
A die has 6 sides. The chance of 6 unique sides is 1 in  6x6x6x6x6x6=46,656 (for specific number)
Its the same as any combination of sides.

I agree totally
Perfect point of view!

One question:

How many million combinations do we have in 37 numbers?

The fact is there's no edge without predicting which sector of the wheel the ball will land.

Hot number=random. Unless math has changed and no one has warned me.   :ooh:

Quote from: Andre Chass on Nov 26, 04:48 PM 2017
The fact is there's no edge without predicting which sector of the wheel the ball will land.

Hot number=random. Unless math has changed and no one has warned me.   :ooh:

:thumbsup:

contact me if you want to master sector play

Quote from: Andre Chass on Nov 26, 04:48 PM 2017Unless math has changed and no one has warned me.

Math was "corrected" and nobody warned you, nor did they have to - you have to learn on your own how it works. It's easier to just deny what's happening.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 26, 05:21 PM 2017
Math was "corrected" and nobody warned you, nor did they have to - you have to learn on your own how it works. It's easier to just deny what's happening.

With all my respect, you're living in a fairy tale world. You have created your own math.
Hot numbers provide an edge just like the Earth is flat.

Turbo, how many times have you said things like "37 numbers in 37 spins will never happen"?

Your claim implies you believe 37 different numbers in 37 spins is different to any other 37 winning numbers (repeaters or not). Now you say it's the same thing. Now that you agree it's the same thing, why are you bothering with hot numbers and repeaters?

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 26, 01:04 PM 2017@Steve - 6th place last week and the highest (by far) roulette player. today ends the next week's challenge - got to 7th place this week (so far - I might have to stay there as the next highest spot is pretty far ahead of me). the next highest roulette player is in 27th place (at the moment). This is only two weeks - but since the site supposedly favors everyone and is rigged for people to win - why aren't there at least 2-3-4 roulette players in the top 10 ? Is it rigged only for me ? Have a I figured out the secret rigging and using it to my advantage lol. After tonight it resets again for the new week. Would you put money on me being in the top 10 again next week ? That would be a good bet to make.

Why are you still trying to use Parx to prove you have the HG? I already explained how it can guarantee enormous long term profit.

QuoteChart the std deviation like I did before - behold !  lol
Wouldn't you know - it stays withing a specific limit and over time even balances out right where it should.

No there is no limit to random. You are just not understanding the data.

There are 37 possibilities for each spin (winning numbers). Each new spin is a new possibility. So for one spin it's 37. For two spins its 37x37. for three spins its 37x37x37 and so on. The TOTALS progress like this:

37
1,369
50,653
1,874,161
69,343,957
2,565,726,409

All the way to 37^37 which probably wouldn't fit on the screen. There are no limits. Simply the more spins you include, the more possible combinations of winning numbers there are.

With standard deviation, you are just looking at the average "average spread" of values. You dont need to be a genius to know if you take 10 spins, the chances are some will be red, some black. But that is useless information.

Using it to predict "hot numbers" is no different to taking 100 spins and betting red if you see 40 reds and 60 blacks, expecting there to be a "balance".

Hey Steve, why do you even care to discuss this? Looks like a college professor arguing with a stubborn first-year high school student...

Dont talk about someone whom u dont know. He is very well known experienced member. There is weight when he is saying something. Infact both are well known experienced.

I respect him but I don't give a crap the way he thinks.

Experienced member? Show me the millions of dollars, the mansion and the Ferrari that were won by betting on hot numbers ..

By the way the casinos avoid hot numbers players... Hahaha
They scare the casinos

Quote from: Steve on Nov 26, 06:03 PM 2017All the way to 37^37 which probably wouldn't fit on the screen.

Sure it will, I've calculated it. And it will never happen, and you know this.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 26, 06:03 PM 2017You dont need to be a genius to know

No. I Don't need to be a genius to know that casinos monitor their wheels - and if "random" isn't happening, they find out why. Bias wheel ? Sometimes - regardless they monitor the spins to track if a wheel is performing properly with it's random results.
There would have to be limits in order for that to make any sense, hence random has limits. Fair enough ? Probably not. So if a wheel has a bias or malfunction - do they just say "Steve says it's possible with random so don't bother, it's just random".
It's all calculated and believe it or not - when "random" doesn't stay within limits, they know there's a problem. But I'm not being honest ?

Quote from: Andre Chass on Nov 26, 06:30 PM 2017Looks like a college professor arguing with a stubborn first-year high school student...
I respect him but I don't give a crap the way he thinks.

And likewise I could care less what your "opinions" are. If you give a crap or not doesn't change a thing, sadly. Your crap giving has no value. (writes that one down for later)

Quote from: Andre Chass on Nov 26, 06:57 PM 2017Experienced member? Show me the millions of dollars, the mansion and the Ferrari that were won by betting on hot numbers ..

Writes that down as well - the proof of a winning roulette system....
A) millions of dollars, B) mansion, C) Ferrari.
Wow, you're gauge of proof is easy to accomplish !
From now on - I'll base my success in life, math and roulette on your proofs.
I could do 2 of them right now, almost the third ! I'm almost there !
You are funny but it's all good - it's entertainment.
Thanks for your (quote) respect (unquote).

Quote from: Andre Chass on Nov 26, 06:57 PM 2017By the way the casinos avoid hot numbers players... Hahaha
They scare the casinos

Bias wheel players take advantage of hot numbers and hot wheel sectors because of the flaw that those AP player's exploit to their benefit, and I'm 100% sure the casinos are aware of them (probably not too scared though). I'm playing hot numbers - as I've said in the past (if you've read my posts). A hot number system player will be playing the same numbers as a bias wheel player - so I'll just assume they would be just as wary of that as well. But not scared. I win a small amount over time. I don't go in for the kill like most AP players tend to like doing. "Milk forever or cheeseburgers once" - I'll take milk forever.

Hey Steve, go ahead with this discussion. Like I said before, I don't know why you still care about these turbo arguments.

I won't be part of this. I'm out!

Go ahead guys!

Hey if Turbo wins.  More power to him.  Don't know why it gets Steve all riled up?  Or is there ulterior motives. :-X

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 26, 07:20 PM 2017Sure it will, I've calculated it. And it will never happen, and you know this.

Here you go again. It will never happen?

Maybe someone said this will never happen:
36,26,0,10,15,13,36,9,5,1,16,32,31,34,23,5,19,15,11,0,0,2,13,6,11,7,0,27,28,0,11,23,6,27,29,17,0

But who would have thought it would actually happen?

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 26, 07:20 PM 2017No. I Don't need to be a genius to know that casinos monitor their wheels - and if "random" isn't happening, they find out why. Bias wheel ? Sometimes - regardless they monitor the spins to track if a wheel is performing properly with it's random results. There would have to be limits in order for that to make any sense, hence random has limits. Fair enough ? Probably not. So if a wheel has a bias or malfunction - do they just say "Steve says it's possible with random so don't bother, it's just random".
It's all calculated and believe it or not - when "random" doesn't stay within limits, they know there's a problem. But I'm not being honest ?

No, bias does NOT have "limits" (besides hitting the same number only, forever and ever). Simply the casino considers specific analysis results to have statistical significance or not

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 26, 07:32 PM 2017Bias wheel players take advantage of hot numbers and hot wheel sectors because of the flaw that those AP player's exploit to their benefit, and I'm 100% sure the casinos are aware of them (probably not too scared though). I'm playing hot numbers - as I've said in the past (if you've read my posts). A hot number system player will be playing the same numbers as a bias wheel player - so I'll just assume they would be just as wary of that as well. But not scared. I win a small amount over time. I don't go in for the kill like most AP players tend to like doing. "Milk forever or cheeseburgers once" - I'll take milk forever.

There's a big difference between "hot numbers" and "bias".

Hot numbers:

* Are short term and almost always insignificant.
* Usually displayed free to players on touch-bet roulette, because it misleads players and profits the casino more.
* Will occur whether or not the wheel has truly random spins.

Biased numbers:

* Are analyzed in the longer term, and the data is much more significant.
* Usually have additional observation to verify bias (such as the sound example I explained earlier)
* Analysis with the above two points make it very unlikely that the anomaly is due to typical variance.
* Casinos would never blatantly reveal useful data to players that would make bias analysis easier.

Anyway we are really going in circles. The reason I'm trying to set the record straight is because things like your Parx results and claims are misleading and harmful to people. Even after the Parx math was explained, you are still using it to back your claims.  It's not like other people don't spread inaccurate information too. But you are one of the more followed members.

Quote from: Moxy on Nov 26, 08:25 PM 2017Don't know why it gets Steve all riled up?  Or is there ulterior motives.

Moxy, you really need to grow up.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 26, 08:39 PM 2017because things like your Parx results and claims are misleading and harmful to people.

Fair enough. Not another word on it from me.

If someone publicly tested a system on a mathematically rigged game, and claimed their system was the HG, generally should the claim be considered credible?

Please dont take it the wrong way. It's really not a personal thing.

Of course not, good Sir.  It's a monetary thing e.g. "get back to me when you really have the hg".

Quote from: Steve on Nov 26, 08:39 PM 2017

Anyway we are really going in circles. The reason I'm trying to set the record straight is because things like your Parx results and claims are misleading and harmful to people. Even after the Parx math was explained, you are still using it to back your claims.  It's not like other people don't spread inaccurate information too. But you are one of the more followed members.

This is the most relevant comment in this discussion. Years of repeated reference to Parx result is motive driven. You can bet this will NEVER stop.

QuoteHey Steve, go ahead with this discussion. Like I said before, I don't know why you still care about these turbo arguments.

I won't be part of this. I'm out!

good one..now go lose some more :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

Quote from: maestro on Nov 26, 09:16 PM 2017

good one..now go lose some more :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

Betting on sectors
Profit 17.800
Loss 2.400

Swallow it!

Quote from: maestro on Nov 26, 09:16 PM 2017

good one..now go lose some more :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

Your signature:
<when you play roulette there will always be a moron tells you that you will lose to the house edge>

You are the one

QuoteBetting on sectors
Profit 17.800
Loss 2.400

so since you have lost you are no longer lucky just whats left is bustard i guess.. :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

A question for more experienced players.
Let's say we will play in a waiting game with hot numbers.
We know that the probability of the 3rd hit in 37 spins  I think is over 98%.
So we are waiting for this 30 spin without 3 rd hit, and play all numbers with 2 hits.
My question is what progressions we will use for this?
Positive or negative?
Do you try to get a negative 1-2-4-8-16 progression, when there is no hit in the last 7 spins, we increase the rate at the next session.
Do you combine something positive progression, say 1-5-25
we raise the rate after hit only when we are not on newest high.

There are many solutions, I am looking for the best, maybe you can advise me something.

I new member.


thx ;)

I will show you a simple way to know if you have better then 50/50 situation - hot or cold

12 numbers that hit within 2 attempts has 50% probability - if you get a higher strikes ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
6 number that hit within 4 attempts has 50% probability - if you get a higher strike ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
4 numbers that hit within 6 attempts has 50% probability - if you get a higher strike ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
3 numbers that hit within 8 attempts has 50% probability - if you get higher strike ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
2 numbers that hit within 12 attempts has 50% probability - if you get higher strike ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
1 number that hit within 25 attempts has 50% probability - if you get higher strike ratio you have hot number and if you get less you have cold number

You can check the math using binomial probability calculation.

CHeers

Quote from: ego on Jan 02, 12:17 PM 2018
I will show you a simple way to know if you have better then 50/50 situation - hot or cold

12 numbers that hit within 2 attempts has 50% probability - if you get a higher strikes ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
6 number that hit within 4 attempts has 50% probability - if you get a higher strike ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
4 numbers that hit within 6 attempts has 50% probability - if you get a higher strike ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
3 numbers that hit within 8 attempts has 50% probability - if you get higher strike ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
2 numbers that hit within 12 attempts has 50% probability - if you get higher strike ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
1 number that hit within 25 attempts has 50% probability - if you get higher strike ratio you have hot number and if you get less you have cold number

You can check the math using binomial probability calculation.

CHeers

Thank you for these stats.

Quote from: ego on Jan 02, 12:17 PM 2018
I will show you a simple way to know if you have better then 50/50 situation - hot or cold

12 numbers that hit within 2 attempts has 50% probability - if you get a higher strikes ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
6 number that hit within 4 attempts has 50% probability - if you get a higher strike ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
4 numbers that hit within 6 attempts has 50% probability - if you get a higher strike ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
3 numbers that hit within 8 attempts has 50% probability - if you get higher strike ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
2 numbers that hit within 12 attempts has 50% probability - if you get higher strike ratio you have hot numbers and if you get less you have cold numbers
1 number that hit within 25 attempts has 50% probability - if you get higher strike ratio you have hot number and if you get less you have cold number

You can check the math using binomial probability calculation.

CHeers

Instead of using binomial probability calculation use this simple arithmetic to determine the 50% mark -

For 24 numbers - 36/24 = 1.5 x 2 / 3 = 1 time in 36 spins

For 18 numbers - 36/18 = 2 x 2/3  = 2 times in 36 spins

For 12 numbers - 36/12 = 3 x 2/3 = 3 times in 36 spins

For 6 numbers - 36/6 = 6 x 2/3 = 4 times in 36 spins

For 4 numbers - 36/4 = 9 x 2/3 = 6 times in 36 spins

For 3 numbers - 36/3 = 12 x 2/3 = 8 times in 36 spins

For 2 numbers -36/2 = 18 x 2/3 = 12 times in 36 spins

For 1 number - 36/1 = 36 x 2/3 = 24 times in 36 spins

Remember this simple arithmetic to know what's the 50% mark without memorising the table of what's what or recall high school probability calculation which most of us have forgotten by now.

You can also change the spin cycle from 36 spins to eg. 24 spins like this -

For 18 numbers = 24/18 = 1.5 x 2/3 = 1 time in 24 spins

For 8 numbers = 24/ 8 = 3 x 2/3 = 2 times in 24 spins

For 6 numbers = 24/6 = 4 x 2/3 = 3 times (approx)

Today I tested the method presented by Denzie and me in the post on the previous page.
Waiting game for 30 spins without 3rd hit.
RNG is getting more and more pissed off.
I lost first session, in the next session hit was at 37 spin, and the next 2 lost sessions.
I know that it is possible  but what the probability is that  happend in first 4 sessions.

on the 37 spins how was law of the third, would you say it was fair to the 24 non-hit or way off, dont Winkel say if LOTT is present then its fair, look at 100 days of Mort avg for 40 spins 15.2 non-hit. Do you know of countback for use over spins 11-40?

si l ont considère le vrai sens des mots 23 ne serait pas un chiffre chaud et 31 ne serait qu'un jumeau ...ce qui offre d autre possibilités pour la roulette 

if we take the true meaning of words and life ... 23 would be the hot figure and 31 a twin! ..what offers other posibilities for roulette .... (desolate translator :) ..)

Quote from: Steve on Nov 17, 09:03 PM 2017
I changed my mind. Repeaters are the key to making miilions at roulette. Lots of people make a fortune with repeaters. Thats exactly why if you play repeaters, the casino will ban you.

Advantage play is a load if crap. Casinos only pretend to be worried about it just to prevent players from focusing on repeaters.

I admit it. I make a fortune playing repeaters and only preached AP to distract people.

All the experts really know repeaters work. We hide the truth. We are all in in it, and the repeaters players are the real experts.

And when anyone discovers the truth and posts it here, i rush to quicky cover it up because im desperate for sales. I cant eat without them. I have no integrity or honesty. I'm so motivated by money id lie my ass off if it meant a few extra bucks.

Lol

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 16, 09:36 PM 2017

To answer the other questions OZON - work on it flat betting. The progression isn't one to pull out of drawdown - I but I'd prefer to use a progression to win more faster instead of playing longer with smaller unit size.

Oh, it works flat betting

Wait, wait... but I have to use progression...

No, no... Aggressive progression...

Ops..  it's better using a super ultra mega aggressive progression

Quote from: Andre Chass on Nov 17, 05:33 PM 2017
The only pattern that can be predicted is in which sector of roulette the ball lands the most. You should bet on the wheel, not the table.

Imho

That's not true.  Given a set of roughly 90-100 spins  there is a pattern of 8 numbers that will hit at least 25 times, where the odds say they should only hit 21 times.  Happens day in, day out, 100 block spins at a time  Doesn't matter if it's RNG, live, airball etc.

Quote from: Steve on Nov 17, 09:10 PM 2017
I'm curious.. How many repeaters players actually make millions? Come on, don't be shy.

I know you're out there. I'm so sick of hiding the truth. I'm sure turbo is one of them. He really showed us in parx, which is so not mathematically rigged. Of course he had to lose the lot intentionally, because you know that's just what people do right?

I need you millionaires to come forward so i can prove to everyone I'm not going to ban you anymore.

I'll be coming after that $100000 challenge soon. Put some shrimp on the Barbee Mate! :)

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 26, 07:32 PM 2017
Bias wheel players take advantage of hot numbers and hot wheel sectors because of the flaw that those AP player's exploit to their benefit, and I'm 100% sure the casinos are aware of them (probably not too scared though). I'm playing hot numbers - as I've said in the past (if you've read my posts). A hot number system player will be playing the same numbers as a bias wheel player - so I'll just assume they would be just as wary of that as well. But not scared. I win a small amount over time. I don't go in for the kill like most AP players tend to like doing. "Milk forever or cheeseburgers once" - I'll take milk forever.

And turbo contradicts himself again...  :thumbsup:

Quote from: Andre Chass on Jun 15, 07:34 AM 2018And turbo contradicts himself again...

There is no contradiction there, do you know english ?
Please look up contradiction, then look up "scammer" - which is what you are.

Bias wheel players will end up playing the hot sections of the wheel that are hitting above average due to the bias, hot number system players will also be playing the hot numbers because of their method. Can you read that clearly ?
Contrary to "General" who wants to make it appear that bias wheel play is complicated and somehow the "hot" sections move all around, they don't.
A bias will give a section or sections of the wheel that will appear at a higher than expected rate - hence... they are HOT sections and will stay that way until the wheel is repaired. Playing Hot numbers means we will both be playing the same numbers - only "my" way works on any wheel, any RNG and anything that produces random
results and doesn't require a wheel malfunction.
You clearly don't understand what a contradiction is - and you clearly fail at scamming people out of their money... Maybe just shutting up and reading what others post is your best option. I won't reply to you again either as clearly you jump from one side to the other - remember those PMs telling me how great I was ? But not anymore - amazing why I waste time with your kind.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Nov 14, 06:07 PM 2017Any number that appears above it's expected rate of appearance is a hot number.

In your example -
32 - so now think on this. 32's chances of appearing are 1 in 37 spins yet it appeared
1 in 1 spin. I'd say that's logically a hot number. It has 37 chances to appear once and it only took 1 spin for it to appear, therefore it's hot.
From there on - if people can understand this, the road gets a little easier.
To continue on - if we get to spin #37 and 32 still has only shown once - it's clearly showing "at expected" and not hot. If we roll ahead to spin 74 and it's still shown just once - it's cold. You have to know the odds of any bet appearing and how it's actually appearing to know what number or location is hot, average or cold. It's not complicated.

I think we can do better than this. If a number is showing above expected this doesn't take into account how long ago it hit, so supposing after 60 spins numbers 13 & 24 have both hit 3 times. According to expectation they are both equally hot, even though #13 may have had all its hits within the first 10 spins and #24 had all its hits within the last 10. The expectation calculation doesn't distinguish between them even though #24 is clearly "hotter" than #13 because it hit more recently.

I suggest a simple "rating" system which works by numbering the spins. It's easier to give an example rather than trying to explain how it works. So in this example there are 75 spins which are numbered :

1   1
2  15
3  12
4  17
5  32
6  13
7   2
8  11
9  24
10   9
11   4
12  15
13   1
14  11
15  14
16  32
17   2
18  19
19  28
20  31
21  33
22  33
23  15
24   3
25  14
26  36
27   6
28  16
29  15
30  24
31  32
32  32
33  22
34   3
35  21
36  31
37  10
38   9
39   1
40  32
41  12
42  28
43  10
44  29
45  30
46  35
47  24
48  12
49  29
50  36
51  34
52   2
53  36
54  30
55   1
56  31
57  11
58  10
59  29
60  29
61   6
62  35
63   3
64  17
65   6
66   5
67  22
68  32
69  33
70  29
71   6
72  11
73  29
74  34
75  17

So starting from #0, there are no hits so its "score" is 0. For #1,

it hit once on spin #1,
again on spin #13
again on spin #39
finally on spin #55

So add up these numbers and the score for #1 is 1 + 13 + 39 + 55 = 108

Do the same for the remaining numbers and then sort by score:

#    Score
-----------
0        0
7        0
8        0
18        0
20        0
23        0
25        0
26        0
27        0
13        6
4       11
19       18
16       28
21       35
14       40
9       48
28       61
15       66
5       66
2       76
24       86
12       92
30       99
22      100
1      108
35      108
31      112
33      112
3      121
34      125
36      129
10      138
17      143
11      151
32      192
6      224
29      355

So the hottest number is #29, the second hottest is #6, and so on up the list. This ranking system automatically takes care of where in the sequence the number hit; so in the case of where 2 numbers can be equally hot (as in my example earlier) with regards to pure expectation, this ranking system weights the more recent numbers more heavily.

I recently asked the pit boss how many numbers were looked at on the display which tells you the latest hot numbers.

He told me it was over the last 500 spins.

Pretty useless.

Same for cold. Slightly more useful.

I recently asked the pit boss how many numbers were looked at on the display which tells you the latest hot numbers.

He told me it was over the last 500 spins.

Pretty useless.

Same for cold. Slightly more useful if you like that kinda thing

Quote from: Turner on Jun 21, 12:52 PM 2018Pretty useless.

Hi Turner, I agree there's not much point in looking back over 500 spins, but it's unlikely you would be playing 500 spins per session, and if you are you could reset the numbering to start from as many spins back as you like. I know the probability is still 1/37 according to the maths, but I want to do some tests to find out whether there's any statistical difference at all when betting hot or cold numbers, and this rating system seems pretty good to me.  So if there is potentially any difference between betting on say the 5 hottest and coldest numbers this rating method should show it. What do you think?

Comments from Turbo welcome. ;-)

Theres no point looking at past spins that are already out when you arrive at the table
I think its better to build your game from your own numbers you are playing...moving forward.
Anything the casino tells you about ...like hottest this and coldest that cant be of any use because they wouldnt be telling you if it was

Turner
Not true, ask Winkel (GUT)

Quote from: nottophammer on Jun 21, 02:12 PM 2018
Turner
Not true, ask Winkel (GUT)

Its just my opinion...I feel its true.

If you're playing on an RNG...

There are no hot numbers.
There are no cold numbers.
There are no sections on the wheel.
There is just the RNG.

Common sense should tell you to somehow attack the function of the RNG and it's seed.
Give up the trot.

Hi General, there are a lot of arguments about hot numbers and repeaters. Turbo thinks it's obvious that betting on them is the key to consistent winning, whereas you think it's a waste of time. There are groups in both camps each giving their arguments, but I haven't seen anyone showing data which proves or refutes one side or the other. The arguments get boring so I want to try to show using actual data whether there is any merit in betting hot numbers. Using maths, not just verbal arguments.

There are lots of ways of picking hot numbers, but I think the way I've shown is as good as any for testing purposes. However, if you have any better ideas, please suggest them. If there is any merit at all in betting hot numbers or repeaters as opposed to betting on cold numbers, then the variance of the gaps between hits ought to be smaller when betting hot numbers, so a Chi-square test of variance should be significant.

It's just a bit of fun, that's all. I already know what the maths says.  :)

Quote from: Turner on Jun 21, 01:57 PM 2018Theres no point looking at past spins that are already out when you arrive at the table
I think its better to build your game from your own numbers you are playing...moving forward.
Anything the casino tells you about ...like hottest this and coldest that cant be of any use because they wouldnt be telling you if it was

excellent post.
The hot and cold stats are freely posted for a reason, anyone using past spun hot numbers for future spins is being foolish.

Quote from: Turner on Jun 21, 12:52 PM 2018
I recently asked the pit boss how many numbers were looked at on the display which tells you the latest hot numbers.

He told me it was over the last 500 spins.

Pretty useless.

If you use this hot cold numbers to assume that it will repeat itself or reverse for future spins, then it is gamblers fallacy.

If you use this historical data to plot the frequency distribution, then use math model to exploit it, then it is useful.

Such math based rc program is not allowed and illegal to use in casinos.

Same for cold. Slightly more useful if you like that kinda thing

If you fiddle with the program you see "settings". This is where the hot cold numbers history is set. It is not necessary 500. If you look at the big screen this 500numbers setting is shown for each machine. Ofc this part of the setting is accessible to the floor manager or VP gaming. The pitboss has no access to this setting. Most of the time the machine comes factory set. These machines are mostly on lease.

Quote from: CoderJoe on Jun 21, 03:27 PM 2018
Hi General, there are a lot of arguments about hot numbers and repeaters. Turbo thinks it's obvious that betting on them is the key to consistent winning, whereas you think it's a waste of time. There are groups in both camps each giving their arguments, but I haven't seen anyone showing data which proves or refutes one side or the other. The arguments get boring so I want to try to show using actual data whether there is any merit in betting hot numbers. Using maths, not just verbal arguments.

There are lots of ways of picking hot numbers, but I think the way I've shown is as good as any for testing purposes. However, if you have any better ideas, please suggest them. If there is any merit at all in betting hot numbers or repeaters as opposed to betting on cold numbers, then the variance of the gaps between hits ought to be smaller when betting hot numbers, so a Chi-square test of variance should be significant.

It's just a bit of fun, that's all. I already know what the maths says.  :)

Read this post. Don't you think there is a disconnect with your assumption ?

link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=19732.msg203369#msg203369

If ever these forum boards are going to move forward, it starts with acknowledging this disconnect.

Quote from: Turner on Jun 21, 01:57 PM 2018Theres no point looking at past spins that are already out when you arrive at the table
I think its better to build your game from your own numbers you are playing...moving forward.

Maybe, but my "system" doesn't rely on using past spins which already out there. You can just add the numbers with the highest scores starting from spin 1.

QuoteAnything the casino tells you about ...like hottest this and coldest that cant be of any use because they wouldnt be telling you if it was

There is that, but the more basic argument is that spins are independent.  I still don't see why past spins in the current session are ok but it's not ok to use spins before the current session. They are still past spins either way and making a distinction between spins in the current session and spins previous to it seems arbitrary. If I go to the casino and see Turbo playing, I could copy his bets as soon as I arrive, without waiting for any spins. If I do that aren't I effectively using spins prior to my session? Nevertheless it should still "work" assuming that Turbo's system works.

Hot numbers, for me, only deal with the time I've been playing.  I don't really care what the marquee shows as hot/cold.  There will be a couple of hot numbers that are fairly easy to recognize during gameplay.  At some point, they will change, but I will change with it.

Quote from: cht on Jun 21, 10:49 PM 2018If you fiddle with the program you see "settings".

I think we have crossed wires.

I was referring to my local real casino and a real pit boss. The casino marque HOT/COLD numbers display.

Grosvenor, Casino Manchester UK

Quote from: Turner on Jun 22, 06:30 AM 2018
I think we have crossed wires.

I was referring to my local real casino and a real pit boss. The casino marque HOT/COLD numbers display.

Grosvenor, Casino Manchester UK

I was referring to a real b&m casino and a "real pitboss".

Casinos in Singapore and Macau.

The "real pitboss" whom you refer to holds the official title of Assistant Floor Manger.

The real bosses of the gambling floor are the Floor Manager, General Manager-Casino, and Vice-President Gaming.

I am pointing out the casino personnel authorised to change that history settings of 500 spins are those guys at that level. Or at least approval is obtained from guys at that level. Not that "real pitboss" you see and talk to on the floor.

I also pointed out that, in most cases, that history is factory set given those machines are on lease. It could be 50 or 200 or 500 or whatever as set by the manufacturer. The "real pitboss" won't take it upon himself to change the setting.

Also if you take a closer look at the main big screen, you will find that setting of 500spins shown usually at the bottom of the screen.

Good job Turner, thanks for getting rid of the spammer, I was actually starting to consider becoming a Canadian Citizen!  :xd:

Quote from: ZERO on Jun 22, 06:59 AM 2018
Good job Turner, thanks for getting rid of the spammer, I was actually starting to consider becoming a Canadian Citizen!  :xd:

Hey there are worse things than being one of us! Eh!

Quote from: ZERO on Jun 22, 06:59 AM 2018I was actually starting to consider becoming a Canadian Citizen! 

are things really that bad? lol

Being a Canadian is one of the best situation there can be, you know.  Next to being a porn star.

Quote from: CoderJoe on Jun 21, 01:17 PM 2018So if there is potentially any difference between betting on say the 5 hottest and coldest numbers this rating method should show it. What do you think?
Comments from Turbo welcome. ;-)

Interesting approach

For there to be a hot number it has to have hit several times in the past, not the future.  This means that we have to use past spins, whether we have bet on them or not doesn't matter.

Not all hot numbers are created equally.  Some hot numbers are biased numbers.  They hit more frequently than they should because of a defect on the wheel.  These are the kind of hot numbers that people want to play because they hit more frequently than probability would predict for a reason.  The accuracy of a prediction has been increased.

Defining a biased number can be achieved through standard deviation testing of a statistically relevant number of spins and by testing the over all fitness of the wheel using chi square.  Now, many people like to point to the law of the third and binomial distribution, but really chi square is a much better way to quantify how far outside the norm a wheel is performing.  Several people are now looking at how many non hit verses hit numbers there are in various samples to define how a wheel is performing.  My suggestion to them is stop using the law of the third nonsense,  collect much larger data sets, and use the chi square instead. 

Hot numbers that aren't biased numbers are just random fluctuations. Meaning they're bobbing up and down due to variance.  Unfortunately, variance/luck is not predictable.  We can define the range of variance that's possible, but that's only because we can define the size of a spin sample.  Meaning we can't have 11 reds in a row if we're only looking at 10 spins.

-The General

Those are all valid points - that have nothing to do with how I'm playing hot numbers.

Quote from: TurboGenius on Jun 23, 03:34 PM 2018
Those are all valid points - that have nothing to do with how I'm playing hot numbers.

Oh, are we still talking about you?  Ermm I thought that's what the other threads we're for?

I felt that it was time to post some facts rather than the absurd.  ;D

My apologies - carry on. I thought all of your posts were about me and contradicting anything I post. My mistake. 11 reds in a row can't happen in 10 spins, got it.

I believe hot and cold and patterns do exist in a paradoxical way
Every spin is simultaneously disconnected and also connected

A hot number is a number that influences the categorization of a set number of groups. Categorization may include the obvious characters, red, black, odd, even, high, low. So if your are tracking any of these characters, you may find a high variance in any one of these character groups. For example, 1 is red, odd, and low. The number may appear more that once in a 36 number cycle. More importantly, the number may add to the frequency of a tracked characteristic.

In 500 spins several numbers can hit up to 25 times while some numbers can hit only 5 times, let say number 21 hit 25 times and it is hot and number 7 hit 3 times cold, but in long run it means nothing important, statistic can't help you to beat roulette.

How can we beat the wheel? 

Only if you steal money while croupier isn't looking.

Well that might go sideways!  You read all the post on this form & should be able to win.

Make small profit a day adds up.  Like only play on wheel.  Set a goal stop go home.

Sounds ridiculous into you try.

Thanks for the reply.
I could not resist to make a post.