TURBO'S REPEATERS SIMULATION.

[Steve]

No RG, it doesnt bother me when people lose because they don't listen. My issue is when people are misled, and they lose because of it. I'm trying to help people.

Not everything is a conspiracy. Even if sales was my #1 priority, I dont think I'd feel threatened by a -2.7% edge with my 150% edge.

RG I can bet 1 or 2 numbers with computers no problem. But why do that when I could earn far more in less time if I bet more numbers?

Its not about bashing system players. It's about simple truth. Stop with the conspiracy theories.

Just do the testing. Proper testing. Then debate solved.

[Steve]

This is what I dont get....
Wait for your trigger (repeaters) then repeat the test many times to see if your trigger has given you a hit rate better than 1 in 37. Test lots to be sure. Still stuck at 1 in 37?... That means your method doesn't work. Simple, right? So why the struggle with a simple test?

Then when I say do LOTs of testing, I get the standard egghead response "oh I dont need to win over LOTS of spins, I only need short term winnings" meaning the person has no clue WHY more testing is better than less testing, or the very purpose of proper testing.

RG you at least know this. You can only show someone the door, but they need to walk through. Like most people, you dont want to walk through. You are resisting for some reason. The door in this case is simple testing to show repeaters cannot be used to change the 1 in 37 hit rate (-2.7 edge). Using repeaters is as accurate as random bets.

Again dont argue, just do the testing. Debate resolved.

[RouletteGhost]

This is what I dont get....
Wait for your trigger (repeaters) then repeat the test many times to see if your trigger has given you a hit rate better than 1 in 37. Test lots to be sure. Still stuck at 1 in 37?... That means your method doesn't work. Simple, right? So why the struggle with a simple test?

Then when I saw do LOTs of testing, I get the standard egghead response "oh I dont need to win over LOTS of spins, I only need short term winnings" meaning the person has no clue WHY more testing is better than less testing, or the very purpose of proper testing.

RG you at least know this. You can only show someone the door, but they need to walk through. Like most people, you dont want to walk through. You are resisting for some reason. The door in this case is simple testing to show repeaters cannot be used to change the 1 in 37 hit rate (-2.7 edge). Using repeaters is as accurate as random bets.

Again dont argue, just do the testing. Debate resolved.

because you are betting for something that you know is likely to occur...


also, what is the POINT of even testing a method when the math never changes......

you keep saying test. why? the math doesnt change

[Steve]

because you are betting for something that you know is likely to occur...

It's basic statistics that some numbers are likely to eventually repeat. It's also basic statistics that there will be around the same amount of reds/blacks. Again it sounds like usable fact, but its not. You cannot look at the past and say it will influence the future, because it doesnt that way. The odds, moving forward in time, are still 1 in 37. That's what I keep trying to explain. And again, just test it. It's simple. Still 1 in 37. It doesn't take a guru to know this. Its simple testing.

also, what is the POINT of even testing a method when the math never changes......

The math CAN change, but only when you change the ODDS (increasing accuracy of predictions). The problem here is repeaters do NOT change accuracy of predictions.

The testing is to see if the bet selection method is changing the odds.

You cant change payouts. But you can change the odds, although only with valid methods.

[TurboGenius]

I know my own experience, and I agree with almost everything caleb says - he's likely to same towards what I say. That's because we both actually know what we're talking about. If knowledge is anything to judge someone by, then at least his knowledge is solid.

Thanks for the giggles.
It's kind of like how I don't believe in religion but someone will say God is real
because the bible says so.   
Wait, the bible was written by people..... oh wait, it's the Word of God lol
Makes me laugh every time, popped into my head when I read that You and "Caleb"
agree and back each other up (well, of course).
When someone tells you something that you agree with and you believe to be true - it's really easy to see that as verification of your own belief.
Turns out you "could" both be wrong and just keeping each other in a loop - agreeing with one another and backing up that you're wrong without even realizing it.
You know computers work - he knows bias works - there is NO WAY a guy with a stupid system could win long term !!
I know, I know - tons of math experts have said roulette can't be beaten (not true really)
and even Einstein said it's impossible !! (proven now that he ever said that)... and there's the math where surely everyone has looked at every possibility and even those people have said it's impossible... hmm. really.
I posted a legit video from the 60's showing completely random outcomes being friggin amazingly predictable - but blah, that's all nonsense !!  Random can't be predictable can it ??
Sort of like me going into church and trying to tell people "God" isn't real - I won't win that one and I won't win against you two. The whole church will run me out of the building.
(Because of course God is real.... to them.....and they all back each other up - that's how cults are so successful).
So it's hopeless for me to try to convince you, it's all heresy, misleading and blasphemy for me to show results that go against your beliefs - and then you can turn to one another and back each other up (both being wrong) with "Rigged", "unfair results", "not realistic". You name it. Lots of people can show me why they think God is real too... there's "proof" everywhere - just look !!  Wrong... but that's hopeless to go against.
'eh I tried.

As for a competition - waste of time again.
Anyone can sign up at Parx (you believe it's rigged for people to win what with all the bonus log in points and whatnot.....) so sign up there and play a few minutes per day.
R. Simulator is free to use - the rng is just fine.. but that's not going to be realistic either I know. Wasn't there a challenge somewhere - oh wait, that was 10 million spins for 5 runs each or something to win $50.00 prize money ? lol.
My results will speak for my ability, it's that simple. Then it's just "not enough spins" you can both rely on to explain it away and still not budge from your beliefs. Fair enough.... it will never be "enough spins".

[Steve]

Whats also particularly frustrating is the whole professional gambling community knows all what I'm saying. This is ridiculously old news. You ask any gaming professional and they just know all this and take the knowledge for granted. but come to a gambling forum, and most people are oblivious to what should be common knowledge.

Not only that, when you try to explain basic concepts to everyone, they accuse you of being involved in a conspiracy to censor the HG.

Why the resistance to logic? Why not testing properly? This is really simple crap that everyone should be well past by now, so they can focus on new approaches that havent been tried a gazillion times before.

[Steve]

Turbo that was again a whole lot of dribble. The only math we see invalidates your claims, which are clumsy and demonstrate poor understanding of simple concepts.

Regarding the old video, again that's showing basic statistics you arent understanding. Nothing in the video can be used to changed odds.

[Steve]

this proves turbo is correct

caleb and steve just are not on this wave length

At about 2:10 in the video, he explains he can predict what happens over a large amount of time. but he stil cant predict exactly when the next click will occur.

In terms of roulette, this is: over thousands of spins, you know there will be around equal reds/blacks.  But you still cant use that knowledge to know exactly which number will spin next. So you are stuck at 1 in 37.

RG, dont be so gullible to believe someone when they publish a scientific sounding video. If you actually understand the video, you'll understand the above, and that again it supports the fact repeaters cant change the odds. Turbo misunderstood the video too.

[TurboGenius]

Hey Ghost -

You can set your watch to that hundredths column clicking away lol
But random isn't predictable... not one bit.
'eh bed time for me, my brain hurts - I'm prob giving off more frustration radiation than that isotope lol

[Steve]

Turbo I'd like for once for you to provide a valid argument for your theory. Literally I don't think there has been even one. Just misconceptions and misunderstandings. And it has all been debunked already. All you give is hot air. You never confront results of simple tests and logic.

[cht]

Steve, will you take on a head to head challenge with TG on parx or roulettesimulator ?

Just a YES or NO answer.

We don't want a long speech. Save it.
If you do make the speech, it's irrelevant and ignored.

YES or NO.

IF you don't provide a simple response, we have to take it as NO.

Your move.

[Steve]

YES
CHT, if someone provides me with a bot to play RS automatically, and if the RS parameters arent changed (table limits), I accept the challenge. That way I dont need to sit there hour after hour clicking to an inevitable conclusion, which is its only a matter of time to beat anyone who plays at RS.

[The General]

Steve, will you take on a head to head challenge with TG on parx or roulettesimulator ?

Just a YES or NO answer.

We don't want a long speech. Save it.
If you do make the speech, it's irrelevant and ignored.

YES or NO.

IF you don't provide a simple response, we have to take it as NO.

Your move.

Parx gives you bonus free money in the free play mode just for signing on!   

I played three spins, but my bankroll keeps growing just by signing on.  LOL!!!

[cht]

Parx gives you bonus free money in the free play mode just for signing on!   

I played three spins, but my bankroll keeps growing just by signing on.  LOL!!!

I could not pose you this similar challenge because you play wobbly wheels.

[cht]

Steve has ACCEPTED a head to head challenge with TG.

Read his complete response here.

link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=20147.msg196248#msg196248