@ turbo

[Andre Chass]

And there you go again... Lol

[TurboGenius]

Are you two a double act? Which one?

I was picturing :

lol

[The General]

Falkor reminds me of Bayes, but intentionally trying to be funny and obtuse about the flat earth.  He's actually very articulate.  Secretly probably one of the more intelligent members on this forum. 

Ghost, Notto, and Turbo could all learn from him.

[daveylibra]

This "we will never have all 37 numbers in 37 spins" debate is simple-
As Turbo says, the likelihood is infinitesimal.
We can all agree on that, and be on the same page, so, how does this help?

I don't believe it can. All we are assuming is that we will have 1 repeat somewhere.
We bet numbers as they appear. So 1 unit, then 2, 3, 4 ,5 ,6 7, 8, wait a minute, that's 36 units! we need a progression.
Well we can easily see 20 or more uniques before a repeat. 18 is quite common. I won't do the maths here, but the dent in the bankroll would be huge. Its a bit like saying, "bet against 20 reds with a martingale", yes you will probably win if you are prepared for the huge risk.

Can I refer anyone interested to my thread "TURBO'S REPEATERS SIMULATION."
link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=20147.0

As you can see I have done some testing, I'm sure others have done much more extensive testing.
But the insinuation with all the "no 37 uniques in 37 spins" talk is that you can win with repeaters within 37 spins!

My programs show that you can flat-bet, you can bet 1 unit on 1-shows, 2-units on 2-shows etc, or you can wait for 3-shows until betting, whatever, you won't win in 37 spins! Or 100 spins.

Actually I think Steve is doing Turbo a favour by pointing out the fallacy. Anyone who believes he has a hg could win for a while, but then end up losing a whole lot more. And as Turbo didn't choose to reply to my question about is it possible to actually write mathematical proof, then I assume there is no mathematical proof.

So..... although you may laugh, Turbo, beware of your own hg. (you read it here 1st.)

[The General]

Look, the 37 numbers in 37 spins is just silly.  It's like saying 18 reds in 37 spins.
Knowing the probability doesn't enable you to side step it and win.   

[maestro]

Falkor reminds me of Bayes,

never

Secretly probably one of the more intelligent members on this forum. 

lol

[The General]

Everything you've suggested has already been tested meticulously and in great detail. Even the dozens example covers everything you mention at a microcosm. Of course you don't understand the basics about how all groups repeat and all groups break even. There's no advantage/disadvantage to playing numbers, streets, lines or dozens in terms of repeats. None are better than the other in terms of trying to escape break even. All concepts that apply in the dozens universe are also true in the numbers universe. And I already showed you how front runners can cost you your life savings. However, since you fail to acknowledge the basics there's no point me going into detail about how your strategy will break even like the rest, and that the significance you see in hotties is not reflected at the individual spin level. The more repeats you play the longer it will take you to get to the next repeat level. It's really old news. And that's why hotties get overtaken as I showed...  No money management gets around that because you can't win flat-betting and you can't predict, so you are left with independent static bets of differing sizes.

Maestro,

Like it or not, he's correct.   He's one of the smartest people in the room...toying with the simple minded.  That much is obvious after having read some of his posts.

[maestro]

Of course you don't understand the basics about how all groups repeat and all groups break even.

true but yes but they do not break at the same time..is another question if you can find way to be on it when hits...but my guess is one has to be very smart just like the above named< falkor>

[The General]

Maestro,

Read his posts.  REally read what and how he writes.  The guy is articulate.  His vocabulary indicates that he's smarter than most people.   Compare what he's written to what you have posted.   

[maestro]

asumptions are bad you should know that...but thanks for the advice i will read his writings

[The General]

These fairy tale topics do not help progress any new understandings and serve selfish agendas instead with circular conversations about hot numbers. So the problem is not how to beat Roulette - but how to avoid false prophets/clowns along the way.-Falkor

Everything you've suggested has already been tested meticulously and in great detail. Even the dozens example covers everything you mention at a microcosm. -Falkor.

Falkor ain't dumB!

[maestro]

for sure you read it before


Driven by hunger, a fox tried to reach some grapes hanging high on the vine but was unable to, although he leaped with all his strength. As he went away, the fox remarked 'Oh, you aren't even ripe yet! I don't need any sour grapes.

[Turner]

Falkor reminds me of Bayes, but intentionally trying to be funny and obtuse about the flat earth.  He's actually very articulate.  Secretly probably one of the more intelligent members on this forum. 

LOL....this will come back to haunt you. I wont forget it.

[Scarface]

Not speaking for Turbo, because I dont know his play style.  But I do not use an aggressive progression.  I look at it like playing in sessions.  Start out flat betting single repeaters....once I get a hit, that session ends...I only raise bet after a hit....play 2s to become 3s, then a 3s to become 4s, 4s to become 5s, etc

I only need one session to be positive expectation to end game.  I have yet to see that not happen in a short period of time.  Basically, if there were always an equal distribution of numbers I would lose.  But there is always a leader that passes by 2 or more repeats...this is what I count on happening

[Scarface]

Falkor reminds me of Bayes, but intentionally trying to be funny and obtuse about the flat earth.  He's actually very articulate.  Secretly probably one of the more intelligent members on this forum.