TURBO'S REPEATERS SIMULATION.

[daveylibra]

Hi all, especially Turbo.

I've deliberately called this new thread "Turbo's Repeaters Simulations"
in the hope that he will notice it, as it would be interesting to have a response.
I have written some simple BASIC programs to simulate betting, and I have copied
one of them below. It simulates betting 1 unit on each roulette number, but only after it shows.

Now, Turbo claims this will reduce the house edge to 0, and that post inspired me to test systems
based on repeaters. Here is the quote -

"The next post is about what happens when the players (instead of flat betting their number every spin)
decide to use a system based on repeaters.
Here are the same spins - the same players - still flat betting only on their number.
The only difference is that each player begins betting on their number only once it shows.
So here are the results to compare to the last 3 cycles. We haven't even put in a progression yet -
the only thing that is different is that they are playing for a repeat to happen on their number
(and they won't remove their bets - they'll just start betting their number once it shows and then every
spin after that until the end of the 3 cycles)
This is the data for all players combined (the house edge from the last test was exactly 5.26% as it should be)
-------------------------------------
So ALL players ended as a group EVEN. The house edge 0.00 !"

The BASIC program below can be run in RUNBASIC.COM or JUSTBASIC.COM. Try it!
In RUNBASIC, go to "write your own" and copy and paste.
You can enter any amount of spins, try 111, = 3 * 37.
You will see after each spin, the amount bet, and the amount won,if any.
Then at the end the total bet and the total won is shown.
You can see that the numbers add up correctly.

While it is true that the occasional run through will show profit, most run
throughs will show a larger loss! This is not playing to a 0 house edge.
Unless I misinterpreted and Turbo meant that ONE particular simulation gave
a balance of 0?
I have written another to simulate betting on 3-shows and above, adding units in ratio to shows, with similar results.

The point is that, according to these simulations, there is no advantage at
all in playing repeaters,and yet we are all spending valuable time thinking
that there is...


1  PRINT "THIS SIM BETS 1 UNIT ON A NUMBER, ONLY AFTER IT HAS SHOWN."
5  INPUT "HOW MANY NUMBERS?  (EVEN)";N
10 DIM A(N)
20 DIM B$(N)
25 DIM B(N)
26 DIM L(N)
27 DIM P(N)
28 REM L = AMOUNTS BET. P = PROFIT EACH SPIN. B(N) = HOW MANY TIMES REPEATED
35 FOR X=1 TO N
40     A(X) = INT(RND(1)*38)
50     B$(X) = "_"
60 NEXT X
70 FOR X = 1 TO N-1
80     FOR Y = X+1 TO N
90         IF A(X) = A(Y) THEN B$(Y) = "R"
95         IF A(X) = A(Y) THEN B(Y) = B(Y) + 1
100    NEXT Y
110 NEXT X
170 L(1)=1
180  FOR X = 2 TO N
185      IF B$(X)="R" THEN L(X)=L(X-1) ELSE L(X)=L(X-1)+1     
200  NEXT X
210 FOR X = 1 TO N
220     IF B$(X)="R" THEN P(X)=36
230 NEXT X

320 FOR X = 1 TO N
330     PRINT "     ";X;"    ";A(X);"    ";B$(X);"    ";B(X);"    AMOUNT BET = ";L(X);"     PROFIT ON SPIN = ";P(X)
340 NEXT X
345 T = 0
346 U= 0
350 FOR X = 1 TO N
360     T = T + L(X)
370     U = U + P(X)
380 NEXT X
390 PRINT "   TOTAL PROFIT = ";U;"   TOTAL BET = ";T

[jekhb76]

Hi all, especially Turbo.

I've deliberately called this new thread "Turbo's Repeaters Simulations"
in the hope that he will notice it, as it would be interesting to have a response.
I have written some simple BASIC programs to simulate betting, and I have copied
one of them below. It simulates betting 1 unit on each roulette number, but only after it shows.

Now, Turbo claims this will reduce the house edge to 0, and that post inspired me to test systems
based on repeaters. Here is the quote -

"The next post is about what happens when the players (instead of flat betting their number every spin)
decide to use a system based on repeaters.
Here are the same spins - the same players - still flat betting only on their number.
The only difference is that each player begins betting on their number only once it shows.
So here are the results to compare to the last 3 cycles. We haven't even put in a progression yet -
the only thing that is different is that they are playing for a repeat to happen on their number
(and they won't remove their bets - they'll just start betting their number once it shows and then every
spin after that until the end of the 3 cycles)
This is the data for all players combined (the house edge from the last test was exactly 5.26% as it should be)
-------------------------------------
So ALL players ended as a group EVEN. The house edge 0.00 !"

The BASIC program below can be run in RUNBASIC.COM or JUSTBASIC.COM. Try it!
In RUNBASIC, go to "write your own" and copy and paste.
You can enter any amount of spins, try 111, = 3 * 37.
You will see after each spin, the amount bet, and the amount won,if any.
Then at the end the total bet and the total won is shown.
You can see that the numbers add up correctly.

While it is true that the occasional run through will show profit, most run
throughs will show a larger loss! This is not playing to a 0 house edge.
Unless I misinterpreted and Turbo meant that ONE particular simulation gave
a balance of 0?
I have written another to simulate betting on 3-shows and above, adding units in ratio to shows, with similar results.

The point is that, according to these simulations, there is no advantage at
all in playing repeaters,and yet we are all spending valuable time thinking
that there is...


1  PRINT "THIS SIM BETS 1 UNIT ON A NUMBER, ONLY AFTER IT HAS SHOWN."
5  INPUT "HOW MANY NUMBERS?  (EVEN)";N
10 DIM A(N)
20 DIM B$(N)
25 DIM B(N)
26 DIM L(N)
27 DIM P(N)
28 REM L = AMOUNTS BET. P = PROFIT EACH SPIN. B(N) = HOW MANY TIMES REPEATED
35 FOR X=1 TO N
40     A(X) = INT(RND(1)*38)
50     B$(X) = "_"
60 NEXT X
70 FOR X = 1 TO N-1
80     FOR Y = X+1 TO N
90         IF A(X) = A(Y) THEN B$(Y) = "R"
95         IF A(X) = A(Y) THEN B(Y) = B(Y) + 1
100    NEXT Y
110 NEXT X
170 L(1)=1
180  FOR X = 2 TO N
185      IF B$(X)="R" THEN L(X)=L(X-1) ELSE L(X)=L(X-1)+1     
200  NEXT X
210 FOR X = 1 TO N
220     IF B$(X)="R" THEN P(X)=36
230 NEXT X

320 FOR X = 1 TO N
330     PRINT "     ";X;"    ";A(X);"    ";B$(X);"    ";B(X);"    AMOUNT BET = ";L(X);"     PROFIT ON SPIN = ";P(X)
340 NEXT X
345 T = 0
346 U= 0
350 FOR X = 1 TO N
360     T = T + L(X)
370     U = U + P(X)
380 NEXT X
390 PRINT "   TOTAL PROFIT = ";U;"   TOTAL BET = ";T

I still strongly believe that the HG awnser is hidden in playing repeaters.

[TurboGenius]

"I still strongly believe that the HG awnser is hidden in playing repeaters."

You would be right.
Even the nay-sayers will say that the only way to win is to win at a rate higher than expected. This automatically rules out sleepers and points to hot numbers.
So at least it's something we can all agree on.
You have to win better than the odds of the location showing, random gives us ways to do this.

[jekhb76]

"I still strongly believe that the HG awnser is hidden in playing repeaters."

You would be right.
Even the nay-sayers will say that the only way to win is to win at a rate higher than expected. This automatically rules out sleepers and points to hot numbers.
So at least it's something we can all agree on.
You have to win better than the odds of the location showing, random gives us ways to do this.

Yep, only play the numbers that are showing above average is the way to go. That leaves us less numbers to bet on and a More steady bankroll.

[RouletteGhost]

its common sense

never will all 37 numbers hit in 37 spins

99% of the time there is a 3peater and 4peater so id bet on any number thats repeated

[Steve]

Davey, thankyou for that contribution.

But even with the facts in people's faces, it still gets ignored.

[Steve]

its common sense

never will all 37 numbers hit in 37 spins

99% of the time there is a 3peater and 4peater so id bet on any number thats repeated

1. Yes 37 numbers is 37 spins will show. Same as any other combination of numbers. You must understand this point.

2. You can't know which numbers will repeat this time or any other, with any change in odds. Repeaters make no difference at all. What you are talking about is illusion and fallacy. Simple testing proves it.

[jekhb76]

1. Yes 37 numbers is 37 spins will show. Same as any other combination of numbers. You must understand this point.

2. You can't know which numbers will repeat this time or any other, with any change in odds. Repeaters make no difference at all. What you are talking about is illusion and fallacy. Simple testing proves it.

1. Yes you are Right, there is Always a change that this Ultra rare event can happen. But the Odds are so astronomic Low that i Will take my changes.
2. I don't need to know when a number repeats itself, only the knowledge that it will.
As Long as i Keep playing numbers that are performing above average, i Have a headstart in the game.

Have a great Easter Monday Steve

[Steve]

1. 37 different numbers in 37 spins is exactly as rare as any other combination of numbers. Why not bet against any rare combination? Theres no difference at all.

2. Hot numbers dont work. Thats why casinos give you that data free. The odds are still 1 in 37.

You are stuck in classic fallacy and just need to test fully.

[Lucky7Red]

You are stuck in classic fallacy and just need to test fully.

You are wrong, he is on the right way and he is close to hg but need to test on real wheel and real ball, not any kind of simulator rng.

[Steve]

Turbo says he wins because spins are random, but he changes the odds anyway. Do you understand what he is saying?

Based on his claims, beating rng is easiest.

[Steve]

Also RNG = 1 in 37
Unless you can exploit a flawed RNG

[jekhb76]

The only thing i need to know, is that what goes around, comes around. 

[daveylibra]

I don't wish to be a naysayer, I would like it to work.
But I've seen all 37 numbers appear in less than 100 spins, then it's game over,
as we are betting 37 to win 36.

To my mind, a good system would not chain us to the table for hours, and have us put a huge amount of units
on the table at any time.
Turbo, there are a couple of flat-betting systems on your website, eg l.o.t  for streets, would you say it still holds up?

[jekhb76]

I don't wish to be a naysayer, I would like it to work.
But I've seen all 37 numbers appear in less than 100 spins, then it's game over,
as we are betting 37 to win 36.

To my mind, a good system would not chain us to the table for hours, and have us put a huge amount of units
on the table at any time.
Turbo, there are a couple of flat-betting systems on your website, eg l.o.t  for streets, would you say it still holds up?

No it won't be game over. Because of the simple fact that when 37 numbers came in 37 spins, i wouldn't Have bet a Penny.