A want to start a more filosofical idea, that a fair randomness could be expalined like: "To test a true randomness one must evaluate that all spins are connected with each other in order meet standard variations but there must be no conection beetween the spins" Is this nonsens?
Quote from: andreib1986 on May 25, 01:54 PM 2019
A want to start a more filosofical idea, that a fair randomness could be expalined like: "To test a true randomness one must evaluate that all spins are connected with each other in order meet standard variations but there must be no conection beetween the spins" Is this nonsens?
Yah, collect enough spins and we get something called a "bell curve". While the wheel is said to have no memory of the last spin, the bell curve seems to have a memory. Question is, is there a way to exploit the bell curve? Is there any way to exploit reversion to the mean (reversion to the bell curve)? This is proving very difficult. Filosofical? The devil is that which is difficult.
The bell curve is not memory. It is normal distribution. You can no more make use of it than knowing there will be around even reds/blacks.
You cant bet on balance. It changes nothing. The basics still arent being understood.
No way to exploit a normal distribution.
The standard way of "exploiting" seems to be to wait 10-30 spins and then predict numbers to repeat or catch up.
Over say 50 spins SD is about 1, so a number could ocurrs 4 times or not at all. All within 3SD of mean which is 95% confidence.
Push it up to 1 million spins and hoping for a sleeper to catch up the SD is in 100's so it can easily remain a few hundred behind and that is just normal with reasonably high chance.
So either way, impossible to exploit.
If the amount of uniques is say 15 minimum and u miss the first 2 thats 13 definate wins in 37 spins. Cant there just be a progression to ensure ur in + at the end of set.
Anas, that bet selection has exactly the same accuracy as random bets. So what's the point of it?
Quote from: Steve on May 25, 11:12 PM 2019
Anas, that bet selection has exactly the same accuracy as random bets. So what's the point of it?
Tested with 800,000 spins, with more than 4000 qualified spins, we could consistently get an edge of 4% (on top house edge) if we were to bet for a repeat after 18 numbers have been covered. Has this been tested in the past?
So you bet on 4000 spins? Thats nowhere near enough.
I've seen a news recently that scienticts are working on quantum computers wich are now in the same stage as early 60-70 computers and they could be able to anticipate patterns and predictions for desies etc. I wonder if they would give a mathematical advanvange for roulette just by memorizing the rulete 'debt' in patterns. You dont need a quantum to do that but...im kinda fascinated by the idea.
If you mean looking for patterns based on whatever variables, even if they seem irrelevant, to see what works, i did that. Would have been a lot easier with a quantum computer.
And still no advantage found? That is depressing...Is like nothing makes sense and God has disapeared when he made the world. And what Einstein said that the only way to win in the casino is to steal, might remain true forever.
Yes there was advantage, but not in trng. Only in low quality prng and real spins.
Can you give some clues about the advantage?
With rng, flaws are easier to see if you use a visual bitmap chart. Random.org explains it. Also theres free source code elsewhere to test rng quality.
For real wheels, use real physical variables.
Forget nonsense like repeaters, balance, all the typical fallacies etc. Theyre useless.
If you want to play rng, attack the rng integrity.
What did u test zhone wait 18 then bet just 18 for rest of set
You mean the method i posted 2 weeks ago? Sometimes wins, sometimes looses just not enough. I can post the excel to play with if you want.
I tested everything imaginable, including random strings for repeatability. Basically every pattern was an effect, that had a cause. Repeaters can happen with poor quality rng. Like excel which is very poor.
Pls lol someone test.
Wait 2 uniques. Bet all unhits then as they hit remove bets .if u lose add one unit and continue until uv won 13 times then stop so (15 uniques) i just wana see it lose excel pls
Remember that you also play against 0.
Quote from: Anastasius on May 26, 01:24 AM 2019
What did u test zhone wait 18 then bet just 18 for rest of set
Yes, wait till 18 numbers are covered, then bet once. No progression. Win or lose, conclude and reset for next round. Only tested using random.org numbers. Anyway, 4,000 qualifying bets could be too few to conclude anything, that's why I asked if anyone has tested this method long enough to verify the"bias" concept.
Anas, that was basically one of my old systems. It didnt work, then I added progression and reset after wins. It lasted longer because of progression but had same end result.
There are many ways to repackage shit.
Try starting by checking what others already tried. Then get to understand why the losing approaches lose.
Quote from: Steve on May 26, 01:23 AM 2019
For real wheels, use real physical variables.
If you want to play rng, attack the rng integrity.
I was thinking if there could be any edge by betting a high number with 0, as there will be 3 agains 2 spots on on the wheel covered?
Each pocket has its own independent odds.
I dont understand why you think betting 2 instead of 3 pockets is better if spins are random. Theres only a benefit to sector betting if the ball is more likely to hit around specific numbers.
Inagine the waiting for 18 uniques. I could test that heaps ill let u know zhone .so it didnt fail? How far ahead was it
I was following alone marking the layout then when shapes got made i bet like splits and squares or lines
Even if you wait for 36 uniques, the odds of any number on the next or any future spins hasnt changed. So all your waiting means jack shit. It doesnt help even a little.
Why is it so hard to understand?
Anyway, 4000 spins atack would take at least 5 days of play, and meanwhile table will reset.
Please don't be to harsh on this Steve,
My method idea would be: Bet High numbers 18 units
Bet Numbers 0,3,5,8,10,15,16 1 unit Total 25 units, On win 11 units.
Bet selection: Follow sets of 3 spins.
ALWAYS bet when table is reseted to 0.
Ex: Spin 1, win. 2 Spins spins left, mathematical 1 should be a loss. Don't bet on spin 2. If virtual loss, bet on spin 3. If spin 2 win don't bet on spin 3. If all 3 spins are wins wait untill next reset. So now we expect 2 losses in a set. If we get in the next set a loss, we might bet on spin number 2 and use a progression for spin number 3 if we loose as we consider that the reverse will not come immediatly.
Duplicate
If most of the time its 25 uniques then 24 come out in a row.thats more wins than losses for 13 spins
Quote from: Anastasius on May 26, 02:36 AM 2019
Inagine the waiting for 18 uniques. I could test that heaps ill let u know zhone .so it didnt fail? How far ahead was it
I was following alone marking the layout then when shapes got made i bet like splits and squares or lines
No, not 18 uniques. Just any 18 numbers being covered. Could be uniques, repeats, etc...
Quote from: andreib1986 on May 26, 04:28 AM 2019
Anyway, 4000 spins atack would take at least 5 days of play, and meanwhile table will reset.
Analysed 2,000 bets each, the edge was at at 6.7% (inclusive house edge) coincidentally. By this rate, I'll still advise "hit and run". The earning is just too slow for a single player.
Zhone so once 18 drawn .single or repeats u bet those 18 for the duration of the 37 spins or just one bet and re track
Quote from: Anastasius on May 26, 08:44 AM 2019
Zhone so once 18 drawn .single or repeats u bet those 18 for the duration of the 37 spins or just one bet and re track
Just one bet. I've simulated with different progressions, mild, aggressive, positive, negative, etc, and all ran into -ve eventually.
You mean, wait untill you have 18 numbers, bet repeaters 1 bet (18 numberbs), and then regardless the result wait another 18 numbers to qualify and bet again 1 bet? or you wait for 37 spin cycle to end end then start again counting 18 numbers?
I think it would be easyer if we would group numbers like 32 15 19 // 4 21 2 and we would have 12 numbers formed by 3 pockets each and try to exploit repeats this way. lower deviations maybe....
Try this *idea* Random Vs Order ( in groups of numbers) :
14 unique numbers in this order/ patterns / groups, 12341234123412
when new number hit add to the group (same group order ....3412341234....)
Bet the groups in the last 3 positions(keep update ), the enemy are the
new numbers and the numbers in positions 4,8,12,16......
No / group ( patt.)
13 1
9 2
16 3
31 4
5 1
9 2
17 3
6 4
29 1
26 2
3 3
32 4
0 1
18 2 bet 214
...................................
17 3 L1, bet 321
20 4 new L2, bet 432
24 1 new L3, bet 143
36 2 new L4, bet 214
14 3 new L5, bet 321
8 4 new L6, bet 432
3 3 W
Also can use 10 diff . splits , this way involved hit and unhit numbers
Spl / patt
4 1
9 2
7 3
11 4
14 1
6 2
2 3
17 4
1 1
13 2 bet 214
................................
8 3 new L1, bet 321
11 4 L2, bet 432
5 1 new L3, bet 143
15 2 new L4, bet 214
7 3 L5, bet 321
13 2 W
The *idea* is based on the fact that random is exactly just random
and can t stay to much in Order , groups of numbers will change
position ( for example can t stay to much in same positions 4,8,12,16....,
the other positions will hit...positions 1,2,3,5,6,7,9 ,10,11,13,14......).
And no need for the blah...blah...about the past spins ....each spin is
independent....so on, are not independent anymore because the numbers
belong to a group of numbers and an order .
Quote from: Kattila on May 26, 11:08 AM 2019
Try this *idea* Random Vs Order ( in groups of numbers)
Interesting idea, but where to reset in order not to loose at the house edge? After first win hit & run, if in loss wait untill it recovers?
If we take as example the splits way, reset at first W or at L4 ( or L5) stop take the lose.
Incrase bets only after W session , and after L session down bets , so positive progression.
And i never sayd this will win long run
Quote from: Kattila on May 26, 04:06 PM 2019
If we take as example the splits way, reset at first W or at L4 ( or L5) stop take the lose.
Incrase bets only after W session , and after L session down bets , so positive progression.
And i never sayd this will win long run
Yeah, realized that.
Quote from: andreib1986 on May 26, 06:03 AM 2019Please don't be to harsh on this Steve,
How else am i supposed to say "it doesnt work"?
I'll explain the problem with each part. Take or leave it.
Quote from: andreib1986 on May 26, 06:03 AM 2019My method idea would be: Bet High numbers 18 units
Bet Numbers 0,3,5,8,10,15,16 1 unit Total 25 units, On win 11 units.
WHY would those numbers have any better than random chance of winning? They wouldnt, without a cause.
Quote from: andreib1986 on May 26, 06:03 AM 2019Bet selection: Follow sets of 3 spins.
What makes sets of 3 special? Why would the wheel care what you prefer?
Quote from: andreib1986 on May 26, 06:03 AM 2019ALWAYS bet when table is reseted to 0.
If the accuracy is no different to random (as we know from the above points), all progression does is give you different random bets of different sizes.
Quote from: andreib1986 on May 26, 06:03 AM 2019Ex: Spin 1, win. 2 Spins spins left, mathematical 1 should be a loss. Don't bet on spin 2. If virtual loss, bet on spin 3. If spin 2 win don't bet on spin 3. If all 3 spins are wins wait untill next reset. So now we expect 2 losses in a set. If we get in the next set a loss, we might bet on spin number 2 and use a progression for spin number 3 if we loose as we consider that the reverse will not come immediatly.
None of that will make any difference because the "triggers" are random, so your accuracy is random. The system might follow logic, but the prediction accuracy is still random. That means you changed nothing.
Quote from: Kattila on May 26, 11:08 AM 2019The *idea* is based on the fact that random is exactly just random
and can t stay to much in Order
You arent understanding random. Random is all over the place. Sometimes it looks disorderly, ie 34,2,19,12,33,7
Sometimes it looks like there are pattern, like: 33,1,33,1,19,1
And you're forgetting the above two sequences will happen the same amount of times over the long term.
Your idea is shortsighted. You dont know if random is going to look like patterns you expect, patterns someone else expects, or do something completely different. It's random. And you're still stuck with random accuracy.
Quote from: Kattila on May 26, 11:08 AM 2019And no need for the blah...blah...about the past spins ....each spin is
independent....so on, are not independent anymore because the numbers
belong to a group of numbers and an order .
Blah blah. Of course they're independent. You can put them in whatever groups you want, but it's a fairytale. The wheel doesnt give a crap what groups you put numbers in.
Yes its blah blah to you and others. Because you don't understand it. If these kinds of approaches worked, there would be consistent winners everywhere. So blah blah until your accounts deplete. It's not my money.
One of the definitions of random numbers is that it is impossible to predict future results based on past or present ones. So you're all chasing your tails trying to do so except in very specific circumstances where a lot of data is collected and some connection made to physical aspects or idiosyncrasies of the wheel.
That sort of exercise involves 100's and 1000's of spins and integration with spin directions and wheel speeds.
Predictions based on numerology or the last 12 numbers on the marquee have zero chance of gaining a prediction advantage.
Yeah, but it's fun to win even if knowing it is luck and odds are against the player. One feels lucky then feels happy.
If people are happy with luck, that's their choice.
The game is rigged though. To me it makes no sense to bend over to billionaire casino owners. Wouldn't you rather do the ..
Well not literally, but you get my point.
How much are roulette tracker computers from the link for people from here like 500 or something
$49.95, with a free lollipop.
Quote from: Steve on May 27, 01:00 AM 2019
If people are happy with luck, that's their choice.
The game is rigged though. To me it makes no sense to bend over to billionaire casino owners. Wouldn't you rather do the ..
Well not literally, but you get my point.
I'm not happy with luck, so i've never gone beyond what i can see in my own spreadsheets. The worst thing that can happen is i become a better programmer and be a little disappointed with some results. I haven't tested everything that i wish to test so there is still some curiosity based on what some people here continue to claim with confidence. As a rule though, i notice the people making claims with confidence are not proficient with spreadsheets/programming, nor do they much play on MPR. I have also noticed that making a claim with confidence is sometimes a way to motivate people who are proficient with spreadsheets/programming to spend some limited amount of gun powder on another long shot.
I don't count the times i put $3 on the pass line on my way to the $7.77 buffet dinner, trying to cut that in half. I do that to get a feel for the dice, as i do hobby with dice control techniques.
Quote from: Still on May 27, 03:28 AM 2019i notice the people making claims with confidence are not proficient with spreadsheets/programming, nor do they much play on MPR
No. They prefer Parx, where players have a mathematical edge. Or RS, at least until the cheating loophole was fixed. I'd love to know Turbo's excuse for not ranking on RS now. If he could do it, he would have plastered details everywhere like he used to. Now he has vanished.
MPR is avoided because it's realistic, and bankroll resets are accounted for.
Quote from: Still on May 27, 03:28 AM 2019I have also noticed that making a claim with confidence is sometimes a way to motivate people who are proficient with spreadsheets/programming to spend some limited amount of gun powder on another long shot.
Yes a number of trolls have previously done this, to get others to do testing for them. But long after the troll has changed usernames, a few suckers continue to test, thinking the troll was the master with the HG.
It's great to have fun inventing and have fun dabbling with systems, but misleading to present that approach as giving an edge.
Unfortunately there are a lot of vulnerable people who will either get scammed into paying for something that doesn't work, and worse lose all their housekeeping money in the belief that it will.
It would be so easy to scam typical players because of fallacies, and they would fall for what they want to hear. But what works isnt as popular as typical trash.
Quote from: Steve on May 27, 02:51 AM 2019
$49.95, with a free lollipop.
How can you know if its legal to play with in particular state?
Check the laws on state gaming authority websites. Focus on the definition of cheating. Usually they clearly forbid anything that gives you an advantage from deception or tampering with results.
Computers dont tamper with results. And the edge does not come from deception. AP is clearly legal, despite needing to be covert.
Laws that make it clearly illegal state something along the lines that no device may be used to predict game outcomes. Vegas is an example. Its a bad idea to use computers there, even though you could easily get away with it. What proof does an encrypted and wiped phone leave? Still its against my contracts to break laws.
Until recently it appeared to be legal in about 50% of jurisdictions, but its more like 60%. Ive never know anyone to be convicted of using roulette computers, probably because there are enough legal jurisdictions. Besides a proper computer doesnt leave enough evidence for taxpayer funded prosecution. Governments like in the uk have the view that its the casinos responsibility to protect themselves.
Laws will change eventually, but there doesnt appear to be a hurry. Casinos lose more from collusion and their own staff than computers.
Quote
***
You arent understanding random. Random is all over the place. Sometimes it looks disorderly, ie 34,2,19,12,33,7
Sometimes it looks like there are pattern, like: 33,1,33,1,19,1
And you're forgetting the above two sequences will happen the same amount of times over the long term.
Your idea is shortsighted. You dont know if random is going to look like patterns you expect, patterns someone else expects, or do something completely different. It's random. And you're still stuck with random accuracy.
***
Your examples,
34 a
2 b
19 a
12 b
33 a
7 b
and
33 a
1 b
33 a
1 b
19 a
1 b
Both are patterns don t you see ? You see only random because you want , but there is also the
order in groups.
I don t care if the above two sequences will happen the same amount of times over the long term,
because next time when will happen that numbers will be in Other Groups of numbers and maybe
in that pattern or other pattern. This are dynamic bets not fixed ones.
Interesting that you AP and VB people can use the past data in order to win, but when we the
system players use it .... have no value !? :o :o :o
Quote :
***
Blah blah. Of course they're independent. You can put them in whatever groups you want, but it's a fairytale. The wheel doesnt give a crap what groups you put numbers in.
Yes its blah blah to you and others. Because you don't understand it. If these kinds of approaches worked, there would be consistent winners everywhere. So blah blah until your accounts deplete. It's not my money.
***
I don t give a crap what wheel give , more random better for me ..... Sometimes can catch me , yes , but most of the
times not.
happy winnings no matter how win....
Kattila, you're full of shit. There are only the patterns you think you see. They dont continue and dont give you any change in accuracy. Saying random is good for you is saying nothing changing is good for you. But you aren't experienced enough to know what you've said.
I'm not interested in debating the point. Go and win money.
Quote from: Kattila on May 28, 04:09 PM 2019Interesting that you AP and VB people can use the past data in order to win, but when we the
system players use it .... have no value !?
VB does not use past number data to win. It uses the properties of the current spin such as wheel speed, ball deceleration, and ball position.
The only past data needed is scatter plot and strike plot. These are not number data but physical properties of the wheel. They can be determined by physical experiment over hundreds of spins.
I hope you can understand how this is totally different to looking at the marquee and betting on repeats and uniques.
If you still can't see it, ask yourself does the casino provide scatter plots and diamond strike plots for the visual players in the same way they provide a marquee for system players? Why would they be trying to encourage one kind of player and trying to thwart or ban the VB player?
Even if it's right in their face, some people never understand. I'm not sure why. It's not like it's complicated.
Quote from: Steve on May 28, 07:49 PM 2019
Even if it's right in their face, some people never understand. I'm not sure why. It's not like it's complicated.
Well, I think it is like religion to some people and they find it difficult to accept another view.
Rather them listening to you or me they should perhaps look at what casinos are doing. Casinos are professional organisations whose goal is profit.
If you or I showed up and made clear what we were doing, we'd be shown the door or thwarted. And that's even if we weren't winning at the time.
If a system player turned up, they'd be welcomed with open arms, be given free food and drink and encouraged to bet more.
That's the most telling evidence they can look at, if they can't grasp the maths.
Respectfully, not all system players get the 'Red Carpet' treatment
and...
Quote from: Steve on May 28, 07:49 PM 2019
Even if it's right in their face, some people never understand. I'm not sure why. It's not like it's complicated.
The only way to beat the casinos is with dice influence. This was proven on Star Trek, right in front of everybody's face, by Data, who taught me everything i need to know.
Notice Jeb Bush as the low energy stick man.
I've been messing around with different strategies, methods...I also used 2 sets of spins like another roulette and trying to match the results to create randomness, or use dice..no result. Even if a good progression might survive 100 000 (from time to time, 90% of the time it doesn't), no where near to reach 1M spins. Sadly there are people who present martingale like the holy grail, or many other systems that have no chance on the long run. And some fall into this trap (including me) and they waste energy and money for nothing. And the deception is that on the short term u usualy win, and you get hooked...but its just an illusion. Unless you use Steve's 'methods', you have no chance... People should know this from the start that gambling is not for winning money...The problem is that, even if is obvious, if you think better, with some 'help' you can start to think that you can beat it...and with that i mean systems...and there you go...you could play for years and not understand that in fact you are loosing. For me i'm done... i'd better play poker even if i will not make money either, but at least could be fun sometimes and if you play against donkeys you might win a little. I can't afford to buy a roullete computer and even if i would, i dont like the risk in trying to win like this in a casino, even if the risk might be small. I dont want to imagine what is like to be caught...Casinos want all money for them and they would get suspicious only by seeing you winning smaller amounts...I can't even imagine about that millions you are talking Steve...
My specific approaches are not the only that work. But as far as i know, only physics-based methods work because only they consider cause and effect.
Quote from: Steve on May 30, 04:27 PM 2019
My specific approaches are not the only that work. But as far as i know, only physics-based methods work because only they consider cause and effect.
The B&Ms i visit, no one stands over the wheel watching it. So it seems anyone watching a wheel would stand out, especially if watching it carefully. I mean, isn't that a giveaway? Plus late bets? I mean, it's about as obvious as someone who sets dice and throws them the same way each time. They ignore it because the B&M doesn't believe it is possible, or they know there is a small subset of people who can influence dice, among a large subset of those who think they can. So, if you set dice and start taking too much money out, they can just say no thanks, no more play. Probably same with VB players who are actually using eye-balls to estimate the fall zones. So a computer user can mask behind the persona of a straight VB player, i guess, till one starts to take out too much money. Then they might assume there is a computer involved. But for sure, the first thing they think is probably, does this VB player use his eyes, or a computer?
Its really not that hard to avoid detection, unless youre winning millions. Everyone looks at the wheel. Many players bet late. Thats why casinos allow it. A magician does things in plain sight and nobody notices. Do you think its so hard to be careful about your behavior at a table?
I am a magician, Its alll about misdirection folks :thumbsup:
Quote from: Steve on May 30, 05:31 PM 2019
Its really not that hard to avoid detection, unless youre winning millions. Everyone looks at the wheel. Many players bet late. Thats why casinos allow it. A magician does things in plain sight and nobody notices. Do you think its so hard to be careful about your behavior at a table?
Well seems to me the only misdirection possible is to impersonate someone who thinks he can do visual ballistics by eye.
Still, do you have any experience with VB?
Basic techniques that beat a basic wheel are "piss easy" (is that international slang, Im not sure). Techniques that take into account rotor speed changes etc and a different matter.
Anyone wanting to learn VB should start with the simplest methods like in my videos. It takes minutes to be competent enough with it. Then gradually add the harder parts.
Quote from: Steve on May 30, 08:42 PM 2019
Still, do you have any experience with VB?
Basic techniques that beat a basic wheel are "piss easy" (is that international slang, Im not sure). Techniques that take into account rotor speed changes etc and a different matter.
Anyone wanting to learn VB should start with the simplest methods like in my videos. It takes minutes to be competent enough with it. Then gradually add the harder parts.
No experience there. I've always assumed it is an impossibility for me, like playing piano and reading music at the same time. I did start watching one of your videos. I should finish and check it out. But then, where to go to practice and discover what edge is to be had...or not.