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

News:

Test the accuracy of your method to predict the winning number. If it works, then your system works. But tests over a few hundred spins tell you nothing.

Main Menu
Popular pages:

Roulette System

The Roulette Systems That Really Work

Roulette Computers

Hidden Electronics That Predict Spins

Roulette Strategy

Why Roulette Betting Strategies Lose

Roulette System

The Honest Live Online Roulette Casinos

Is a method based on probability ALSO the same as gamblers fallacy?

Started by MrJ, Mar 23, 08:08 PM 2011

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

mr.ore

No system can win forever, that is proved. But we still can play for a long time, having fun. So far best seems progression in risk only, flat betting one unit. It has same expectation as flat betting even chance, but we need some progression to have a chance of winning mid-term. Progression in risk is a good compromise if we want to play, but not to lose so fast.

Both positive and negative progression can be done this way. After winning on line, try some corners and streets, and if they wins more than expected, try splits or even a number for few spins, if it repeats, it is a nice positive progression win, and nobody says it can't go for a long time.

Negative progression can also be done, after losing on dozen, play sixlines, then corners, and so on, and if something hits, go back, continue this style until recoup.

If it is not hitting, then as a defense mechanism, play even chance for a few spins. I usually track a dozen and if it is not hitting, I play low/high shared with that dozen, and when it hits, I try to play repeating lines, corners or streets, if it does not work, back to even chance.

It might get to struggle, and losing slowly without any happy hits, then I usually stop, there is no point going against wheel. It might theoretically happen everytime I play, but so far it usually works for some time.

So I think that some progression is necessary, and it is good to have one.

RantRF

My Friends the real question is not Re: probability v radomness but the extent to which either the sofware used by the gambling site or computerised land based wheel is rigged....is there any non-computer based brick/mortar casino out there?

VLS

Quote from: RantRF on Dec 10, 10:28 PM 2011
is there any non-computer based brick/mortar casino out there?


:.dublinbet.com


Bonafide results from an actual land-based casino table with actual patrons :)
🡆 ROULETTEIDEAS․COM, home of the RIBOT FREE software bot, with GIFTED modules for the community! ✔️

RantRF

Where is your head....my evidence tells me they are rigged...Have you ever visited them in ireland and observe how they are altering the computer linked controls based on the bets?

MrJ

I say you're dead wrong. Do you mean cheating the bettors that are actually THERE playing or the on-line players? Can you be more specific.

Ken
Watch us big doggs, the MEN, play at a REAL casino, on a REAL table. All we ask is that you stay out of our way. The rest? Bots, airball, RNG...that's more for the Kitty Kat Klub. Its the big doggs and the kittens!! Winning is not an event, it's a process and it takes YEARS and YEARS to master > link:://:.eonline.com/eol_images/Entire_Site/2014127/rs_560x415-140227131132-1024.bulldog-kittens3.jpg... To be great, you have to be willing to be mocked, hated and misunderstood.

nitrix

"Probability says that a single number should appear once in 37 spins in roulette but it doesn't happen practically."

I noticed the same, it might sleep longer, but chosing this as a key component for your system is gambler's fallacy, because the number might as well repeat or appear quicker.

I estimate "gambler's fallacy" being a false impression on the game odds, and trust me, there's a TONS of things to take into account to get precise probabilities.

MrJ

I have no issue with this as long as the SAME definition is for all. Meaning, even the AP crew say they need to look at a couple spins (numbers) to possibly spot a bias/tilt (cough). These are the SAME people that say, even if you observe *ONE* past number (and base that on FUTURE bets), its called 'gamblers fallacy'.

Ken
Watch us big doggs, the MEN, play at a REAL casino, on a REAL table. All we ask is that you stay out of our way. The rest? Bots, airball, RNG...that's more for the Kitty Kat Klub. Its the big doggs and the kittens!! Winning is not an event, it's a process and it takes YEARS and YEARS to master > link:://:.eonline.com/eol_images/Entire_Site/2014127/rs_560x415-140227131132-1024.bulldog-kittens3.jpg... To be great, you have to be willing to be mocked, hated and misunderstood.

kelly

Just for the record, no AP players would start betting on something after 2 spins.  2 spins could indicate where an analysis could begin but even that, is not likely.  If the "zero" pocket was twice the size as the rest of the pockets, it would indicate that zero might kick out in appearances but only a proper analysis would confirm that.


If zero was estimated to be biased and it also kicked out with 3 - 4 SD, the "True" probability for a real bias would be extremely high. Compared to just watching numbers looking for a random 3 SD kick out.


The real reason for betting zero would be:


1. The visual look.
2. The analysis that confirms the look.


Not because it appears hot (watching for a random +3 SD) or a sleeper (watching for a random -3 SD). 


It all can be transferred to VB where the issue might be that the ball keeps hitting 2 specific diamonds when it drops.  Which means that you have the rotor position "locked" when you place your bets. 


J, i don`t expect you to be willing to understand it since its what you have been fighting against the last 4 years on the boards. Even if you deep down understood the argumentation you would never admit it.

-