Turbogenius and gambler's fallacy

[denzie]

Just go take a look in wiesbaden. ....
There you see on each day and table how many times the numbers got hit.
You will notice that in almost all sessions there are a few hotties going like fire.
Now with this info....

What would you do?
And if you happen to not get ahead in the rare occasions. .....what would you do the next session? 

Merry Christmas everyone. ...

[thelaw]

Law, are you saying precog is less credible than trying to beat roulette with progression? What do you actually know about it? And it's really hard to believe a computer player won with a few â,¬5000 bets?

Hey Steve,

Sorry for the late reply.

Well.......seeing as "precog" has never actually been proven scientifically under controlled conditions, then yes.......progressions are one step ahead......in that they do actually exist.

What I do know is that dozens of scientists over the years have been duped by people claiming to have "super-normal" powers including precognition. Hell, even our government poured millions into a remote-viewing scam that was no more complex than amateur-night at the Magic Castle.

Here's is guy that could fool nearly any high-level military personnel any day of the week:

But here is the real kicker, how many trials would you need before you were able to claim success with precognition?........same as any other bet selection I assume. Unfortunately, there's one catch. With a analog bet selection you can run the math to prove its failure long term, but with a "paranormal" bet selection you can just choose a random large number of trials (say 1,000,000) and call it a winning method.........no need for all that uncomfortable math.

The real question here is.........why did you personally buy into this bullsh*t? Might be worth going back and listening to former members of project Stargate on Coasttocoastam with Art Bell. Funny........they made a lot of predictions, but none of them came true...........probably just bad luck.

Finally, with regards to a player winning $200,000 in 1 session using your computers, maybe it's possible, but that would mean: $200,000 x 1 session per day (x365) = $73,000,000..............but it's possible.

I like you Steve........and I may have been born at night.........but I wasn't born last night.

Cheers!

[Steve]

law, you're quite wrong and Ill provide detail when I have time.

one thing ill quickly comment about is the limit of winnings is what you can win without detection. $200k every day for a year isnt possible. Also large stake players are not that uncommon. Ive had a few players wager 20k+ per spin.

[thelaw]

law, you're quite wrong and Ill provide detail when I have time.

one thing ill quickly comment about is the limit of winnings is what you can win without detection. $200k every day for a year isnt possible. Also large stake players are not that uncommon. Ive had a few players wager 20k+ per spin.

Thanks Steve.

Will it be posted on the forum, or will you be sending it via telepathy?

Cheers!

[Steve]

UPS

[RouletteGhost]

UPS

I use ups weekly shipping rare craft beer

It's fast

[denzie]

Fallacy. ...

Is it a fallacy that we get 7 numbers that repeat a second time in 37 spins?

Is it a fallacy that we get 3 numbers that repeat a third time in 37 spins?

[Steve]

Yes its a fallacy because the reality is just basic probability. Can you ever know which will repeat with better than random accuracy?

And the probability of any combination of numbers is the same.  That includes 37 x 0's in a row. It happens as often as any other combination. Just test trillions of rng spins and see.

[denzie]

37 x 0s in a row.....but nobody ever saw that. And I did tons of tests on rx. Not trillions but sure more than all members here could ever play in there life. And multiply that by 100.

And even if it came....that one session wouldn't do nothing to my br.

But could you agree those are the stats on average?

[Steve]

Nobody has ever seen many, many other combinations either.

I know it's hard to get you head around it but given enough spins, every possible combination will occur roughly the same amount of times. You don't need to take my word.  Test with my free software. That's what it's for.

Average stats are irrelevant unless calculating something like bias. All that matters is odds of winning vs payout.

[denzie]

All that matters is odds of winning vs payout.

True....but my odds are better then 37:1 with a 35:1 payout as I don't need to choose from 37 numbers. And I can tell when my numbers are coming with a few spins wrong.

TG ain't that stupid 

I know every combo can form....but I'm pretty sure 37 x 0s will never come the same amount of times as 14 x 0s in 37 spins.

And if it is like that then I better stop roulette and the earth is square 

[denzie]

Can you ever know which will repeat with better than random accuracy?

That's why I asked about vb before....Coz I don't have much numbers to choose from. But it's really hard 

[Steve]

Vb is really easy on the right wheel. Just takes practise. On the wrong wheel, it's nearly impossible.

If the rotor speed varies considerably, you don't have much hope. Thats another reason i prefer computers. They easily adapt to rotor speed changes.

I don't have easy access to pc over the holidays but can help u with vb later.

[denzie]

Thx and enjoy your holiday 

[Steve]

For now have you tried the vb videos on my site? It's a good start.  Remember that being wrong by 1 or even 2 revolutions doesn't usually kill accuracy.  There is always some error