@ turbo

[Steve]

You also need to understand casino staff laugh their asses off at players on forums who still don't get it. The players are a joke to them.

Anyone with even basic understanding of the games and math take the knowledge for granted.

[cht]

Proof of cause and effect? Ok, here's proof..

Go to the nearest brick wall, then punch into it as hard as you can with your bare fist. It will hurt. That's cause and effect.

Cause and effect, beyond any reasonable doubt, is very easy to determine. For more complex matters, you need more extensive tests and observation. But you know here we arent talking about anything complicated. Actually it's really simple. The dynamics of why most players lose is simply they dont win enough to overcome the unfair payouts.

Yeah right.

[cht]

You also need to understand casino staff laugh their asses off at players on forums who still don't get it. The players are a joke to them.

Anyone with even basic understanding of the games and math take the knowledge for granted.

While they are laughing they disallow the use of mobile phones.

Oops I forgot it's the cheat physics computers.

[Steve]

Your response to logic is "yeah right". And you take a stab at what is without a doubt the most effective way of winning roulette.

You know we only use the computers where they are legal. We never break laws. It is never the legal definition of "cheating" where we play. They are never "allowed" though. Exactly the same as constant winning is never "allowed". Any constant winner needs to avoid detection, no matter how they win.

Anyway now you're just posting crap because you don't have anything better. 

[cht]

Your response to logic is "yeah right". And you take a stab at what is without a doubt the most effective way of winning roulette.

You know we only use the computers where they are legal. We never break laws. It is never the legal definition of "cheating" where we play. They are never "allowed" though. Exactly the same as constant winning is never "allowed". Any constant winner needs to avoid detection, no matter how they win.

Anyway now you're just posting crap because you don't have anything better. 

No better crap than yours.

PUT UP ACADEMIC PAPER FOR PEER REVIEW.

ELSE IT'S CRAP. 

[Madi]

. If there are three spins and the first spin is 31.  Odds of next spin being 31 is 37:1. Odds of next spin being 5 is 37:1. Odds of next spin being 31 as a repeater is 37:1. Odds of next spin being 5 as a repeater is 0.

U shouldnt disagree. As 5 has not appear ,
after 31 next spin 5 as repeater has 0 chance.

[cht]

And baiting is allowed for the owner.

[Steve]

You want an academic paper for the primary school math, or basic roulette wheel physics?

I'm not sure I'm smart enough to cover the plus tables. As for roulette computers, start with Claude Shannon's work. There's a whole book explaining the basics. Also try the book "The Romeo Project". Then try the lab testing report, detailing the testing requested by the UK Gambling Commission, and done by the UK Weights and Measures Laboratory - although they applied only very basic approaches more as a proof of concept. Academic papers such as those are great for armchair scientists (people who never actually "do").

But if you're after more hands-on proof, anyone can visit me for a demo. You can even aim a camera at a wheel you own and let my computers send you predictions live via skype - use a wheel "they" see cant be beaten. You see everything down to beeps when the ball is predicted to fall or hit diamonds. It's clear enough proof even for a stoned chimpanzee.



I think you're barking up the wrong tree here. I'm not trying to convince you of anything except how the house edge works, and why most systems fail. I don't care if you have a hard time believing what roulette computers do. I only brought them up as an example of cause, effect, and statistics, like bias analysis.

cht really I'm not arguing with you or anyone. I'm just saying do proper testing, and let that clear up things.

[Steve]

U shouldnt disagree. As 5 has not appear ,
after 31 next spin 5 as repeater has 0 chance.

What are you talking about? After every spin, no exception, the odds of any numbers spinning next are always 1 in 37.

To be technical though, the odds of any number spinning next are actually 100%. That's because everything happens as a sequence of events. What happens just happens. But you dont know and cannot calculate the variables with anywhere near 100% accuracy. You can still usually calculate enough of the important variables to be accurate enough to overcome the house edge -- but that's another story.

[Tinsoldiers]

Regarding the red part, WHY have the odds changed?

Clearly either you are not able to see past what you believe or you don’t want to. if you read the sentence again, you will get the answer you are asking.  That is end of discussion for me.  Thanks for patiently answering my questions.

[Steve]

Tin, what you said was clear in my language. The problem is you were wrong. Or maybe you didn't convey your message clearly. The odds of the next number don't magically drop to zero. Its pretty hard to justify that logic.

[denzie]

Anyone paying attention would know I explain many different ways its possible to beat roulette, without a computer.

Oh really ? If i recall i did made a topic specially for that. But no answer came.

Lets try again...you sit down at the table with chips , drinks and NO electronic stuff.... whats your next move? 

[Tinsoldiers]

Or maybe you didn't convey your message clearly. The odds of the next number don't magically drop to zero.

I don’t think I can be more clear than what I have written. There is no magic here. What I have tried explaining is odds of a number and odds of that Number to be called a repeater can be different.

You are stuck on odds of next Number and hence you are not able to see past that to read what I have written.  I suggest you read that one last time and if you think you still not get why I have written the odds of repeater to be 5 is zero, then let’s play a game of question and answers.

I go to a roulette table. I place my bet on 25. What is the odds of next Number being 25?  No added sentences, if you really want to give me a chance to explain and want you to be given a chance to understand just answer these in one word.  This is first of three questions. 

[Steve]

Tin, the odds of repeaters are no different. You dont know what youre talking about.

Denzie, and i already said roulettephysics.com has free systems that work. Start with the free vb system. Rather than me repeat the information, its easier you see the material already there.

[Tinsoldiers]

Tin, the odds of repeaters are no different. You dont know what youre talking

I know what am talking. Please answer my question if we need to get the bottom of this. Else don’t blame someone that they are wrong. If you would like to continue am still waiting for the answer to my pointed question. What are the odds of next Number being 25.  Only two more questions, I promise.