Turbo Denzie or is it Denzie Turbo

[ozon]

Hi Bayes.
I have a question what type of progression you would recommend to play on doublestreet?
I noticed that the very stable bet selection is play hottest doublestreet up to 42 spin.

[Bayes]

Random does have limits as stated and backed up countless times on this forum...

falkor, can you give me an example of how the apparent limits give the player a practical advantage? Yes I know it's often repeated that you never see 100 reds in a row or every number hitting in 37 spins, but that doesn't mean there is any "hard-wired" limit, it just means that longer sequences like this become increasingly rare. Even if you impose some arbitrary limit, to take advantage of it you have to use "virtual" losses and wins, which would only be valid if outcomes were not independent. The standard mathematical model which most systems implicitly use is good for the casino, bad for the player. 

[Bayes]

Says who

Says maths.    And it's also backed up by empirical results. I wrote an article about the "long run" on my site and included a table which gives an approximation of how many spins a system could survive before it tanks. Note that this is flat betting; if using a progression it could be much more (or less) because a progression increases the variance.

[Bayes]

I have a question what type of progression you would recommend to play on doublestreet?

If you have an edge then 3% of your bankroll is good. This will minimise losses and maximise wins.

[falkor2k15]

falkor, can you give me an example of how the apparent limits give the player a practical advantage? Yes I know it's often repeated that you never see 100 reds in a row or every number hitting in 37 spins, but that doesn't mean there is any "hard-wired" limit, it just means that longer sequences like this become increasingly rare. Even if you impose some arbitrary limit, to take advantage of it you have to use "virtual" losses and wins, which would only be valid if outcomes were not independent. The standard mathematical model which most systems implicitly use is good for the casino, bad for the player. 

I already gave you an example, with lines and streets... No limit applies to reds in a row - an example of such limit is that red OR black MUST repeat within 3 spins (or there must be 3 reds or 3 blacks forming an arithmetic progression with equal distance within 9 spins). And if a red appears once then there's 75% chance that red will repeat instead of black - but the casino won't pay you for that 75% prediction - unless of course you can tap into it using the appropriate method to break the unfair payout odds problem of Roulette. Virtual wins/losses may be required for "capturing more spins" (the poor man's edge!) - but "capturing more wins" doesn't.

[Steve]

That's a very confusing and unclear explanation. But there is no sequence of winning numbers that ever "must" happen.

If you show me otherwise, and it increases accuracy of predictions, i will grow a monkey tail.

Make it simple. Give a super clear example of what you're talking about.

[Bayes]

falkor, your example of lines and streets doesn't give any advantage as I have already explained. And I agree with Steve; please give a clear example if you're trying to make a point. Obfuscation isn't a virtue in my book.

Regarding the VDW theorem, It's been thrashed over many times and ultimately offers no advantage because there are times when you face a choice of bets. So in the end it amounts to guessing in spite of the appearance of "non randomness".

[RouletteGhost]

Make it simple. Give a super clear example of what you're talking about.

[falkor2k15]

I've already stated many facts and provided clear examples for them...
Fact: Lines and Streets are dependent on each other
Example: when a line repeats then a street also has a high chance of repeating; when one repeats early the other is likely to do the same (or vice versa; I can't remember). Try it and see!

Fact: A repeat of red/black must happen within 3 spins (excluding zeroes)
Example: red appears once; now there is 75% chance that red will repeat within the next 2 spins. Try it and confirm what I am saying is true!

R... now 75% finish R (excl. zeroes), i.e. RR or RBR = super clear example.

What else you need example of?

[Bettingking]

 People will believe what they want to believe. So if they think it works it will work until it fails.

[Drazen]

But seriously. .... BET THE NUMBERS THAT HIT ABOVE AVERAGE! !!!!!!! 

Hi denzie

Hmm.. it is really that simple?   

Anyway while trying to figure it out, I can obviously congratulate you entry in the hall of fame   

[Steve]

Fact: A repeat of red/black must happen within 3 spins (excluding zeroes)
Example: red appears once; now there is 75% chance that red will repeat within the next 2 spins. Try it and confirm what I am saying is true!

I understand enough of what you're saying. What you described is basic probability. It does not help AT ALL.

You need to understand why I'm a broken record saying "you need to increase accuracy of predictions".

BECAUSE IF THE ODDS DONT CHANGE (INCREASE ACCURACY), AND THE PAYOUTS DON'T CHANGE, THEN EACH SPIN IS THE SAME DAMN THING. EVEN IF YOU INCREASE BET SIZE, ALL YOU DO IS INCREASE AMOUNT YOU RISK. PROGRESSION CHANGES NOTHING. STATISTICS CANT BE USED THE WAY YOU SAID. IT IS NOT MY OPINION. IF YOU CHANGE NOTHING AND NOTHING, NOTHING CHANGES.

[falkor2k15]

Guys, I know it's frustrating, and it took me a whole year to figure it out due to Priyanka's deliberate misguidance. Regarding repeats, these 3 dependencies happen to be the key to edge (they can also be used together):


1) All streams generated from the original straights stream are dependent on each other - practice parallel games for at least 6 months.
2) The repeat is dependent on the starting pigeon. What pigeons can you create other than red or black or official groups that are equally-likely? What other characteristics can the unique pigeons have?
3) Study the topic "Funny Sequences" - how do you explain them?
4) Bookmark this page. I'm more generous than Priyanka: I've informed you all about the truth of the flat earth, the twin towers being turned to dust and disappearing, the New Testament being a joke book to big up the Roman emperors, the FEMA camps of 2023, half of USA being under water in 2045 - not to mention the keys to edge that can enable you to save up and finance the building of a bunker in time for that cataclysmic event - rather than having to endlessly search for an oasis.

Playing the above dynamically can enable you to end up with more wins than losses. Unfortunately, I cannot give out a winning method for obvious reasons, but am happy to discuss the concepts and what are FACTS, like the above. And I am not even considered a good player; a real professional could win or break even at the close of every repeat and never lose a single game!

[Steve]

1) All streams generated from the original straights stream are dependent on each other - practice parallel games for at least 6 months.

There is no such connection like what you described. You described basic probability. That's not a connection.

2) The repeat is dependent on the starting pigeon. What pigeons can you create other than red or black or official groups that are equally-likely? What other characteristics can the unique pigeons have?

No a repeat happens only when specific cause and effect align to cause a winning number to be whatever it is. If you are not specifically using those or related variables to predict, then your accuracy will be random. Basically things happen because something makes things happen.

3) Study the topic "Funny Sequences" - how do you explain them?

I've seen some really funny sequences before. If you watch enough spins, you see them. It's all just basic probability, like three exact same consecutive numbers. It happens to every number. It's meaningless.

4) Bookmark this page. I'm more generous than Priyanka: I've informed you all about the truth of the flat earth, the twin towers being turned to dust and disappearing, the New Testament being a joke book to big up the Roman emperors, the FEMA camps of 2023, half of USA being under water in 2045 - not to mention the keys to edge that can enable you to save up and finance the building of a bunker in time for that cataclysmic event - rather than having to endlessly search for an oasis.

I looked into the flat earth crap seriously, because I actually wanted to know the truth. And all these so-called "proof" videos were full of ignorant, inaccurate and stupid arguments. As for the other things you mentioned, so much information on the internet is twisted deluded bullshit. Often there is some truth to parts, but the full truth is twisted.

Really I have an open mind. But there is NOTHING, NOT ONE PIECE OF VALID PROOF to support flat earth nonsense. It was someone's idea of a bad joke, and so many people actually fell for it. It just distracts from real matters. And what you're saying about roulette is incorrect too. I dont want to argue especially about flat earth. Please dont bring it here again. You were allowed to go on about it and have ample say about it. But in the end it was very clearly just a load of crap from people with really bad logic and understanding. And now it's at the point where it's just pollution on the internet.

[Bayes]

Guys, I know it's frustrating, and it took me a whole year to figure it out due to Priyanka's deliberate misguidance.

What's frustrating is that you guys seem to be totally ignorant of basic probability and statistical inference. Maybe it's just laziness, because the concepts do take some effort to understand, and gamblers as a group aren't known for their work ethic. I'm all in favour of innovation and research, but at least learn to walk before you can run. These "Guess My Grail" threads are a huge waste of time IMO and only lead to petty bickering. I also suspect that in some cases they're a way for some members to sell systems by the back door, although IMO the usual motive is simple attention-seeking and ego-inflation. People love to think they're privy to information unknown by the unwashed masses, it makes them feel special.