0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

luckyfella

  • 250+ posts Member
  • ****
  • 462
  • Roulette Forum .cc | Member
  • Rated: +18
I anawered there now read
Ka, you can't test something which is not revealed to you.

By inference, this betselection is not seen on forum make sense ?

Pretty sure everyone knows whatever shape and form betselection posted on forum fails, 100% of them. I give you my personal guarantee, you don't have to do the test.
I respond only to math relevant post.

luckyfella

  • 250+ posts Member
  • ****
  • 462
  • Roulette Forum .cc | Member
  • Rated: +18
 I am going make one last try to make you understand.

Roulette spins is suppose to be random, meaning future spins is independent and unbias.

If this is true for YOU, YOU have zero chance of winning with your fancy systems bet or creative MM.

They lose for certain, 100%.
Don't waste your time coding, testing and analysing. Loser is the certainty.
All that short term winner talk is bullshit losers eventually.

The only way for systems betting to have positive edge is to find conditions where future spins are dependent on historic spins. If you can't find this, your bullshit system is a 100% certain loser.

Focus your discussion on this topic of dependence. The rest is bullshit.

If you think there is no such bullshit dependence, good on you. Pls stop all those testing, analysing bullshit. It fails.
Bullshit MM fails.

Claiming magical MM to somehow win a losing betselection is the biggest misleading bullshit on forums. This call out for the MM addicts.

I don't blame you calling bullshit claims posted on forum that there is this dependent condition. No I don't.

You must also know that no one who found this dependence will ever post proof of this claim.

It's a deadlock.

You can say ignorance, bad testing, contradiction, mistake, uneducated, delusional or whatever.

It does not change a thing.

Either it exist or don't.

No matter what name calling you do or whatever sceptic opinion you post on forums.

My last post on this topic.

Take it whichever way you chose.
I respond only to math relevant post.

*

Joe

  • 500+ posts Member
  • *****
  • 506
  • Member
  • Rated: +66
Claiming magical MM to somehow win a losing betselection is the biggest misleading bullshit on forums. This call out for the MM addicts.

Turbo has admitted that his system doesn't work without an aggressive progression. He never claimed it wins flat betting. Unless he's changed his mind... again.

But I agree you should focus on bet selection primarily. MM alone won't cut it.

*

Serendipity

  • 50+ posts Member
  • **
  • 88
  • Member
  • Rated: 0
How could 'bet selection' work when we all admit that roulette is nothing but random. How can you pick a number based on previously picked ones? We all know that after 8 blacks in a row there is still a 50/50 chance for another black, but having 9 blacks in a row is a rare event. So, isn't maybe a good start to bet against a pattern and change the pattern after every cycle? However, they all even out eventually...
Whether you think you can or you can't, you're probably right!

ozon

  • 250+ posts Member
  • ****
  • 499
  • Roulette Forum .cc | Member
  • Rated: +27

A long time ago I did tests on RX, one of the TURBO theories, waiting for last sleeper number, after first hit play 24 spins, completely flat, I played many hundred sessions and the results were very positive, this method is very hard for real play and in longrun can lose, she made money despite everything.

*

gizmotron2

  • 100+ posts Member
  • ***
  • 129
  • Member
  • Rated: +2
How could 'bet selection' work when we all admit that roulette is nothing but random. How can you pick a number based on previously picked ones? We all know that after 8 blacks in a row there is still a 50/50 chance for another black, but having 9 blacks in a row is a rare event. So, isn't maybe a good start to bet against a pattern and change the pattern after every cycle? However, they all even out eventually...

You do realize that you are suggesting "gambler's fallacy" don't you?

If you want a method to play off of what you are seeing then try considering flat betting in synergy with win streaks. You can make bet selections that are not funded. There is a way to make perfect sense of that. If you go thru a losing streak of bet selections that cost you nothing and you conversely go into a winning phase with funded bets then you can grind your way to a winning session. This is doable without a capacity for prediction if you perfect the skill. People here are doing just that.

You can know when you are in a win streak. You can know when you are in a losing streak. Still there are people here that don't believe that.
Reading Randomness is a single thread. It is backed up by a software instruction thread and software download threads. The Even Chance Pro 1.4 version is the best version to practice on.
gamblingforums dot com/threads/reading/randomness.14733/

*

Serendipity

  • 50+ posts Member
  • **
  • 88
  • Member
  • Rated: 0
Yeah, basically everything makes sense. There is wisdom in your sentence, but how to master that? How do I know whether is a losing or winning streak? Give me more than that please.
I wasn't suggesting a gambler's fallacy, but what would be the odds at 'guessing' or maybe 'not guessing' an always different string of 8 EC events. I know, it would be the same old martingale...
I wish I could learn more from you, enlighten me, please.
Whether you think you can or you can't, you're probably right!

*

gizmotron2

  • 100+ posts Member
  • ***
  • 129
  • Member
  • Rated: +2
Try here:
I think that I need to clear something up for those that are not clear on strategy.
https://www.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=26302.msg231070#msg231070

There are people here that are looking into something.
www.gamblingforums dot com/threads/reading-randomness.14733/
Reading Randomness is a single thread. It is backed up by a software instruction thread and software download threads. The Even Chance Pro 1.4 version is the best version to practice on.
gamblingforums dot com/threads/reading/randomness.14733/

*

Joe

  • 500+ posts Member
  • *****
  • 506
  • Member
  • Rated: +66
How could 'bet selection' work when we all admit that roulette is nothing but random.

I wasn't making any assumptions about playing systems, AP, randomness or anything else. Just saying that if you want to increase predictive accuracy, or win rate, then bet selection is paramount. All MM does is manipulate stakes and can't have any effect on predictive accuracy.

I don't believe that roulette is 'nothing but random'. It's random relative to some data and nonrandom relative to other data. That's how VB, for example, can work.

*

denzie

  • 2500+ posts member!!
  • *****
  • 2608
  • Never try , Never know
  • Rated: +115
I still get many questions about TG. As in...do you still play his way? Easy answer....No.

The only thing i do and doing for a long time now is using my eyes. Bet 10 to 15 numbers on the racetrack. If i cant read the dealer , i dont bet. Does it works ? It sure does. But its not as fun as playing systems. In fact its hard work focus on that Wheel. But the pay out is great .  :thumbsup:
Eyes on the ball and Wheel.

*

Steve

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • 5965
  • Top Bloke
  • Rated: +401

ozon

  • 250+ posts Member
  • ****
  • 499
  • Roulette Forum .cc | Member
  • Rated: +27
I'm really tired of riddles about the method TURBO uses.
Another topic has appeared on another forum.
I will write here openly what I think the method looks like.
From horse racing I concluded that we are playing the leader.
It will be from the beginning of the session a dozen with the most hits.
How do I choose numbers?
I work a dozen on the streets, if 2 different Hits numbers, I play the third number, this way we will play from 1-4 numbers.
I'm finishing sessions on hit.
But there are a few unknowns how to play during the change of leader.

*

Steve

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • 5965
  • Top Bloke
  • Rated: +401
Everything was discussed in detail in old the turbo thread here. His nonsense became obvious, so he left. Turbo is completely full of shit.

*

Tinsoldiers

  • 100+ posts Member
  • ***
  • 219
  • Member
  • Rated: +20
But do you wonder why people go back to it. There is always a difference between reality and perception. Seems like perception wins over reality on people who are desperate. Logic takes a back seat when you put heart ahead of your brain. Turbo is gone but there will be at least another 10 year someone or other will stumble on his posts and try to search more on it. Why not delete his posts Steve if we all care too much about people getting wrong advice. 

*

gizmotron2

  • 100+ posts Member
  • ***
  • 129
  • Member
  • Rated: +2
Quote from: Ka2,
Second you do agree that putting X ( your way of selecting numbers) in Y ( horse race sets ) and Y is not performing better than random. You do not need y to win! You already win with X alone ( what you already said you feed non random numbers in Y so you already win with X so whats the point you still use Y???)

You are using logic. So what you say fits. But Turbo must be using something else. He's not using math. We all know that won't beat Roulette. I doubt that he will ever say what he is using to a point of making it clear.  But I wonder why this new working method is now the one if the last one works? Why does he keep searching?

Let's just take the example above and just forget about Y because X wins.  I can take random on random to use as a bet selection and still beat Roulette to smithereens. It all comes down to the effectiveness of the moment. If you can't see clusters ( or "lumps") as someone just called randomness lumpy, then you don't have to fund times when you can't see a favorable patch (lump). The actual bet selection is meaningless as most math centrist or math oriented players, theorists, and,  gambling enthusiasts would all agree on. By using random on random I surrender using an identifiable reason for a selection and just let randomness itself make the next bet selection. In other words this really means that the selection does not matter.

I use trends and patterns because I can see them. They don't matter though. But what they do for me is they show me when they are working and when they are not. I can see the formations, once again, (Lumps), as this form of bet selection goes into a winning state or winning condition. It's that condition that matters to me. It might be a fragmented cluster of wins that grind upward toward my goal. It could be a swarm all over my many faceted charts. It can also be a swarm of losing lumps too. I can see this. Math or magic does not cause these win or lose formations to occur. They don't prevent them either. Randomness allows them to exist. I like them because I use them when it is effective to use them. When a trend cluster is also a cluster of wins then I can see both clearly.

This is the holy grail of winning. It has been for ages. "Bet big when you are doing good, bet small when you aren't." Trying to find a magical rule or a secret formula is just wishful thinking.  People want the easy fix. They want a secret rule. So Turbo gives you what you want only it's dangling like a carrot on a string hung from a stick in front of you. He thinks he has discovered another bet selection trick. When will that guy ever learn? Or more important. When will you ever learn?
Reading Randomness is a single thread. It is backed up by a software instruction thread and software download threads. The Even Chance Pro 1.4 version is the best version to practice on.
gamblingforums dot com/threads/reading/randomness.14733/

 

Visit GamblersForum.com - For discussions about other casino games.

Blackjack Forum: Card counting and professional strategies

Poker Forum: learn from the best poker players

Video Poker Forum: maximize chances of winning

Baccarat Forum: the popular and simple card game

Craps Forum: strategies and the viability of dice control

Slots Forum: Learn the legitimate ways of beating slots

Sports Betting Forum: the most widespread gambling

Horse & Dog Racing Forum: the thrill of racing

Keno & Lottery Forum: discuss potentially new strategies