@ turbo

[Lucky7Red]

Is Torbo right or not? 

[jekhb76]

Is Torbo right or not? 

You Mean Turbo, well don't know. Maybe you should ask him.

[Lucky7Red]

Turbo are you right?

[jekhb76]

Turbo are you right?

[Lucky7Red]

I did not know that you are Turbo so it mean yes, Turbo is right, thanks jekhb76turbo.

[daveylibra]

Hi Turbo & everyone!

May I go back to the beginning? To the 1st page in which Turbo describes 38 players playing at the same time, and the house edge combined being 0. Could I just ask a few questions about this?

1.  This is described after '3cycles' = 114 spins. But is this claim of the house edge being 0 mathematically correct? Can we somehow show it to be correct with a formula? Is it correct from the 1st bet placed? (Remember that, at this point, there is only one player playing? ) Or at what point does it become correct? Or is it just that, in a simulation, at some point, the profit and loss happened to balance?  (There appears to be some charts missing in Turbo's post, I think it has been copied from somewhere else. So everything isn't clear.)

2. These 38 players will eventually get to a point, when every number has shown, that every player is betting 1 unit on one number. There is 1 unit on every number of the wheel.  Then, clearly, the house edge is not 0 but is 5.26%.  So are we to believe that at the spin prior to the last number showing, the house edge is 0, and then it suddenly jumps to 5.26?

3. Do we all agree that this statement that the house edge being 0 for this case is correct? We are constantly told by anyone who considers the subject that the house edge cannot be changed.

4.  In 'Summary Statistics'   Net Win -2,652    Net % -94.44%   
     What does this mean?

Regards to all
Dave

[ozon]

It's a bit difficult to understand.
I mean, it's about the play numbers that reduces the house edge to 0.
Did you try to do it with a wheel with one zero?
Did you show a positive edge?

Generally, there are statistics in the forums that playing the last numbers reduced the house edge.
Even here on the forum were links to the game 4 last numbers, as it would reduce

Combining all elements, i.e.
Using wheels with one zero
Play only the last 4 numbers
And using a positive, very aggressive progression 1/5/25
Theoretically, we should reduce the house edge to a minimum

[daveylibra]

Hi Ozon...
No I didn't try a wheel with one zero, but if I were to bet, I would definitely only play one zero wheels.
Now if we were to play as if we were all 37 players (lets say 37, and assume a European single zero wheel) then we would simply bet each number as it appears,  keeping 1 unit on each number.

At what point would the house edge become 0? I mean, Turbo states it as a FACT. If so, surely it can be shown by maths, as the edge of 2.7% can be. Or are we saying it is a FACT because of statistics. If so, does anyone have a link to them please? I mean, I would love to believe this, but I struggle to!

By the way, in your post you mention reducing the house edge to a minimum, which is not quite the same as saying that it is 0. Reducing the edge to a minimum will still give a loss in the long run.
Could you explain this 'last 4 numbers' method please. Do you mean 3 bets- 1 unit, 5, 25 then stop?

Steve...  Turbo... any comments on this?

[ozon]

link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=19399.0

[ozon]

When I was still at the stage of faith in long negative progressions, my friend did simulations in rx, that playing even a negative progression with 4 last numbers works much better than playing, random 4 numbers.
Believe me, positive progression gives a gentle edge, there is only the right calculation how this staking should look.

I do not claim that using the theory I have presented above, we will win, but it's worth checking to  program  in rx.

[daveylibra]

Thanks Ozon!  Now I have more reading to do...
Will catch up with you soon.

[daveylibra]

Guys and girls...

I now realise that there is a lot of discussion about this on another forum.
But listen, there is only so many ways we can play this, trouble is, if someone (such as I) thought they worked it out, it
would be irresponsible to say so, because if they were wrong then people could lose a lot of money.
And, Turbo is unlikely to confirm it if it is correct.

One other thing, this 114 spin data. No matter what the house edge is, surely with this many spins in some trials we could be above 0, sometimes below. It just happens to be that this trial gave a result of 0.

Turbo, surely it is responsible of you to say that if you run your trial a few times, the results vary, sometimes small profit, sometimes small loss?

[nottophammer]

Todays #'s from Mortagon, anyone who thinks they might be playing Turbo way or similar, post your profit, you can't lose, remember the time machine, well use it.

4
8
5
31
31
15
18
22
12
9
28
22
14
32
1
35
24
25
12
17
1
2
7
27
7
35
19
16
28
4
2
36
11
18
16
30
27
28
8
36
12
16
34
36
24
14
23
36
34
11
24
3
24
14
0
9
30
19
8
2
18
2
16
27
30
17
24
11
32
36
18
33
7
20
34
8
34
15
26
20
19
11
36
34
31
30
30

[nottophammer]

basic, place a unit every spin. 37 spins =703 units, to win need 20 wins, or take 1st profit ?

[nottophammer]

spin 70; +456  (2,16,24,27,30,36) using these 6#'s