@ turbo

[daveylibra]

Quote-
Play every number on the table for 38 spins - you'll end at the house edge.
Play every number on the table but only once it shows - you won't end at the house edge.

I'm afraid this is nonsense.

Quote-
For those who want to test things - there's where to begin.

I have. Look at the thread "Turbo's Repeaters Simulation." Try the program. Enter 38 in response to "How many numbers?"  See for yourself.
I have ran a version where it totals up 100 trials and a typical outcome is  -1000 !!
(I wouldn't want anyone to lose money.)

[TurboGenius]

Quote-
Play every number on the table for 38 spins - you'll end at the house edge.
Play every number on the table but only once it shows - you won't end at the house edge.
I'm afraid this is nonsense.
Quote-
For those who want to test things - there's where to begin.
I have. Look at the thread "Turbo's Repeaters Simulation." Try the program. Enter 38 in response to "How many numbers?"  See for yourself.
I have ran a version where it totals up 100 trials and a typical outcome is  -1000 !!
(I wouldn't want anyone to lose money.)

Please read what I said (again) and then consider fixing your test program.

I just fired up RX - here's what happened : (as I'm making this post)

Spins 1-37 (euro wheel)
1 unit every number for every spin = -37 units = net% -2.70 (house edge)
1 unit every number only once it appears = +100 units = net% +21.01 (not house edge)
1 unit every number only once it repeats = -1 unit = net% -0.69 (not house edge)

I have nothing against constructive criticism - but if you aren't testing what I said,
then you can't really give an opinion.

+21.01% player's edge and -0.69% house edge are NOT equal to -2.70% house edge.
At no point would this end up being -1000 "typically" or otherwise over 100 trials.
Your own error makes it "nonsense" indeed.

@winner - great post up there

[keepontryin]

thanks turbo ........wow.....it really is simple........to bad for some.....hows that saying go...you cant see the forest because of the trees........turbo again thanks

[Steve]

You wouldn't bet a single thing on the 13 numbers that never appeared (why on earth would you ?)

Actually those 13 numbers will hit next the same amount of times as any other 13 numbers. Turbo's approach has many holes. This is just one of them.

You "could" bet on the numbers that showed up only once - but you would lose on those numbers exactly at the house edge - so a bit silly of an idea. But that's up to you.

And betting any of other numbers gives you the house edge too.

You Certainly would bet on the numbers that showed up twice - those 5 numbers would be a nice profit maker. You Most Certainly would bet on the numbers that showed up three times ! - very nice profit from those. And you would be a fool not to bet on the numbers that showed up four times !

And again, those "repeaters" will spin again soon as often as any other number, whether it's hot or cold. This is really old news again.

You'll bet a minimal amount on the numbers that had 1 show You'd bet more on the 2 show numbers
You'd bet even more on the 3 show numbers and
You'd bet a LOT on the 4 show numbers... This is a aggressive progression

It sounds logical, but it's incorrect.

Let's consider betting on the number with 3 repeats so far. You are betting higher because you expect this number is most likely to show 4 times in the cycle. Does it?... well it's already at 3 repeats, so it has a higher chance of others of making 4. But have you changed the odds of winning on this number anytime soon? NO. It still has a 1 in 37 chance each spin - exactly the same as other numbers. So Turbo your approach just wont work. You are stuck at 1 in 37.

You can say "There's no way of knowing the next spin..." and that is correct. You can say "There's no way of knowing that a number with 1 show is going to be a number that has 2 or more shows" - and that is correct. BUT - the only numbers that will have 2 shows are numbers that appeared once. See ?

You are forgetting that you are stuck at 1 in 37. You are forgetting sometimes your system will be wrong, and a 3-time repeater wont turn to 4. How often is it wrong? You'll find exactly as is expected with the odds being 1 in 37. So your bet selection method changed NOTHING.

As a matter of fact - by NOT betting on numbers that never show you are no longer playing/winning/losing at the house edge.

Really big mistake. Hot numbers spin soon just as often as cold numbers.

Play every number on the table for 38 spins - you'll end at the house edge. Play every number on the table but only once it shows - you won't end at the house edge.
Play every number on the table but only after it shows twice - again - you won't win/lose at the house edge.

So here you're saying the HG is bet more on repeaters, and you have an edge. But that doesn't work.

I understand what your system attempts to do, but it doesn't work. Your system will have bet selection that is sometimes wrong. That "slight inaccuracy" is what the house edge is: -2.7%.

You say you never lose, which is bullshit. You lost on MPR because it is a realistic simulation. On RS you have ridiculous table limits, and Parx is mathematically rigged to give players an edge - a fact you still deny.

Anywhere "fair" I've seen your approach demonstrated ends in loss.
And your theories about how to achieve accurate bet selection are easily debunked.

All that's left is you allude to some last secret being the last piece of the puzzle. But in fact you already laid out everything important, and the approach doesn't work.

All anyone needs to do is check how many times a number will spin after it has spun 2 or 3 times recently. No change in the odds/frequency? Then you can see the approach doesn't work. That's why casinos freely give you repeaters and hot number stats.

[Steve]

Turbo, according to your theory, repeaters are more likely to spin again in a 37 spin cycle.

So then at least a variant of the HG is this: Track a 37 spin cycle. Start betting on any number that repeats in the 37 spin cycle. Increase the bet size by +1 unit with each repeat.

According to what you said, this will work. You said:

You Certainly would bet on the numbers that showed up twice - those 5 numbers would be a nice profit maker.
You Most Certainly would bet on the numbers that showed up three times ! - very nice profit from those.
And you would be a fool not to bet on the numbers that showed up four times !

You'll bet a minimal amount on the numbers that had 1 show
You'd bet more on the 2 show numbers
You'd bet even more on the 3 show numbers and
You'd bet a LOT on the 4 show numbers... This is a aggressive progression
and you're not worried because with the time machine you can't lose.

The only thing undefined is the progression. But since you already have an edge from the bet selection, a simple test with +1 progression would show an edge.

Have I made a mistake here? If so, where?

[jekhb76]

 

Turbo, according to your theory, repeaters are more likely to spin again in a 37 spin cycle.

So then at least a variant of the HG is this: Track a 37 spin cycle. Start betting on any number that repeats in the 37 spin cycle. Increase the bet size by +1 unit with each repeat.

According to what you said, this will work. You said:

The only thing undefined is the progression. But since you already have an edge from the bet selection, a simple test with +1 progression would show an edge.

Have I made a mistake here? If so, where?

A +1 progression Will never work.

[Winner]

Turbo, according to your theory, repeaters are more likely to spin again in a 37 spin cycle.

So then at least a variant of the HG is this: Track a 37 spin cycle. Start betting on any number that repeats in the 37 spin cycle. Increase the bet size by +1 unit with each repeat.

According to what you said, this will work. You said:

The only thing undefined is the progression. But since you already have an edge from the bet selection, a simple test with +1 progression would show an edge.

Have I made a mistake here? If so, where?

He gave us how to win right there now go make money.
Or use your computers to test the crap out of what he's saying. There is nothing more to say

[Steve]

:yawn:A +1 progression Will never work.

If what turbo says is true, then it would. Why? Because he claims to change the odds.

Its not a debate. The math is clear. You just dont understand it.

[jekhb76]

If what turbo says is true, then it would. Why? Because he claims to change the odds.

Its not a debate. The math is clear. You just dont understand it.

Steve, please learn to Read.
Turbo isn't playing his System flatbet.
Because if you do, you would be chasing losses.

Turbo said:
The aggressive progression not only covers the numbers that appear "at average" if you choose to play them - it boosts your profits beyond flat betting and does not involve chasing a loss or digging out of a hole - it's not a negative progression, it's a positive one based on wins.

Playing repeaters, won't win flatbetting. Only with An agressive progression and a healthy bankroll. More then 3000 units is needed.

[jekhb76]

It's All about what is goin' to happen in the future! The only thing of importance that i need to know is that 0x Will be 1x and 2x Will be 3x etc etc.
I don't need to know when that event is goin' to happen, only that it will happen. It is so simple

[Steve]

jek its you who doesnt understand. If a system doesnt win with flat bets, progression only compounds losses.

Turbos system relies on progression, not changing odds. Just because he says something doesnt mean its true.  besides he has contradicted himself many times. Dont be so gullible, and do basic math.

[Winner]

jek its you who doesnt understand. If a system doesnt win with flat bets, progression only compounds losses.

Turbos system relies on progression, not changing odds. Just because he says something doesnt mean its true.  besides he has contradicted himself many times. Dont be so gullible, and do basic math.
[/quote
Flat bet  will never win.

[The General]

It's All about what is goin' to happen in the future!

Yes indeed.  I agree.  Looking toward the future our expectation is that each of the repeats should hit 1/37, and the expectation that each of the non hitters should hit 1/37. 



Now, here's the million dollar question. Why  should a repeater hit more frequently than a number that hasn't hit in the random game if the same number of pockets remain on the wheel from one spin to the next?  I'd love it if someone would attempt to answer the question using some logic and sound reasoning for a change, rather than talking about the Wright Brothers, the speed of light, and oxymorons.

[jekhb76]

Yes indeed.  I agree.  Looking toward the future our expectation is that each of the repeats should hit 1/37, and the expectation that each of the non hitters should hit 1/37. 



Now, here's the million dollar question. Why  should a repeater hit more frequently than a number that hasn't hit in the random game if the same number of pockets remain on the wheel from one spin to the next?  I'd love it if someone would attempt to answer the question using some logic and sound reasoning for a change, rather than talking about the Wright Brothers, the speed of light, and oxymorons.

Hi Napoleon 
You are right about the expectation 1/37. But we don't bet on numbers (well atleast i'm not) that are performing within their expectation.
I'm only play numbers that are performing above their expectation. Why? Well not because they Have More change to hit then any other numbers on the wheel, but because i Have less numbers to choose from. If i would bet 3 cycles of spins Every number, i would loose my entire bankroll, because the House Edge Will win every cycle. If i reduce my betpossition to only the numbers that operating above expectation i Will End at the House Edge, i won't loose nor win.
If i play all numbers that are performing above their expectation and i use An agressive possitive progression, i Will Always End my session above expectation and above the House Edge. The wonderful thing of playing like this is also that your betting opportunities Will be lesser and lesser along the way. And because a number needs to repeat at some Point, i Always win, only if i use An agressive progression that is.
I Just don't know why it is so hard for everyone to understand.
This has nothing to do how Turbo is playing by the way. This is Just about comon sense.
Why on earth would you bet on a number that hasn't showed itself?
Why on earth would you play a number that hasn't repeated itself? With the change that you Will loose alot of money when the first repeater Will knock on your door after More then 20 spins.?

If you understand this then you are closer to the awnser then you might think. Now Back to you geraldo

[Steve]

jek, those repeaters will hit at 1 in 37. You are expecting the hot numbers to continue hitting above expectation in the future. This doesnt happen. Look closely so you dont waste more time.