Building systems around RARE EVENTS that never happen in your lifetime

[TurboGenius]

It's like 17 spins if I'm reading right. That's your proof of concept?

How is it 17 spins ?
The first example Player 1 and 2 played 290 spins on the exact same numbers.
Player 2 waited for a rare event and player 1 didn't. If the chart alone doesn't demonstrate the difference in results - then nothing else will.

If I'm understanding your example correctly, then you've merely curve fitted the results.  Unintentionally I'm sure.
It looks like you purposefully put player one on the worst numbers you could find (by looking ahead), rather than any two numbers at random

Nonsense and you know it.
Why would it matter if I put the players on any 3 numbers on the table ?
The results would be the same according to you guys, so player 1 got unlucky and
played the 3 worst numbers there were to play. Player 2 played the exact same numbers
only he waited for the rare event before playing. Big difference in results.
But there should be no difference right ? Player 1 picked the worst 3 numbers from the start - but in any other argument you would say that's what kills system players - because the chances of those 3 being the worst are the same as picking any 3 numbers.
Now you can see you're clearly wrong but have no ability to admit it.

I'm not performing like a monkey for you two, which is the only purpose in keeping the conversation going. I'm not wasting my time and you sure as hell aren't wasting my time.
You think I'll run in circles explaining what I clearly explained - not this time.
Explain it away to yourself instead of pointing to the obvious and saying I'm correct.
Nonsense.

[Roulettebeater]

Steve, the god of roulette computer !

Dear Steve, I have managed to get your computer working as a computer program and it's doing fine, I don't need to measure speed live as you do with your computers, I use an approximation/ projection of the wheel quotes, the question is, do. you think i will have chance in deploying the program on a small device and take it with me to land based casino, will I be able to use it there, I don't need to monitor the wheel as you do, I just need to input the numbers... what do you think ?

[TurboGenius]

How is that even related to the topic ?

Yep, I think it's time to work on that book and help people
with it - instead of this "show" on forums where you're
supposed to perform for someone's entertainment and
everything is diverted to computers or bias wheels and
anyone serious about winning with systems is insulted
and put down - or made to look like a clown at a circus.
Shame. Well, you're both done wasting my time.

[Roulettebeater]

How is that even related to the topic ?

Yep, I think it's time to work on that book and help people
with it - instead of this "show" on forums where you're
supposed to perform for someone's entertainment and
everything is diverted to computers or bias wheels and
anyone serious about winning with systems is insulted
and put down - or made to look like a clown at a circus.
Shame. Well, you're both done wasting my time.

To whom are you directing your attacktalk ?

[Steve]

Turbo, i will again carefully read your explanation, but it would help if you could make it clearer. Its it that hard to accept i dont find your explanatiin clear? Can anyone else explain it to me?

Rb, the principles behind a roulette computer are simple. I have free computers, really cheap computers, value computers and the best possible. The differences are large and mostly explained on my site. Dont expect magic results with a basic algorithm unless ball scatter is easily predictable, in which case even my free vb course is enough.

Yes you can put in on a device. But give thought to how it will be used covertly.

[Steve]

Don't run away turbo. I just answered unrelated questions, no big deal.

Please address my response.

[Ricky]

But the real reason the casinos fix cards is to destroy the trends that both guessers and Pros depend on. Hand Shuffled cards produce reliable trends. But hand shuffled cards have all but disappeared in the casinos. We MIGHT see them in high stakes rooms at very high stakes. But that's about it.

Hi Bikemotorman,
I totally agree with your observation about the preshuffled cards for Baccarat. At my B&M casino they bring them in by the pallet load in the baccarat rooms. It is too easy for them to get these cards preshuffled in an order that will guarantee they clean up against the pattern systems and taking advantage of human psychology.
In terms of casinos offering hand shuffle I can vouch for the Casino Barcelona which has 2 tables both linked to electronic tables have hand shuffled games.

In terms of developing a system based on rare events, my experience is for Baccarat at least this is proving very successful using the Pattern Attack method where you are just looking for two patterns out of all the many that can form. By restricting your betting to just those patterns and ignoring the set of other patterns you are only exposing your risk to one set of conditions. Now my experience is that the MAJORITY of times the gambler WINS these bets and only rarely they get a loss thus being in overall PROFITABLE position. This is the opposite to the gambler who covers the rest of the set of patterns where the MAJORITY of the time the he will LOSE and only win less times thus being in overall LOSING position.

The key to playing any game of chance is to bet LESS not MORE. So pick the opportunities wisely with CONSISTENCY and DISCIPLINE and have the PATIENCE to NOT bet the other times and you should end up in the LONG RUN in a PROFITABLE position. This is just COMMON SENSE. LESS is MORE.

Cheers,
Ricky

[Steve]

The universe doesn't care about our perception of events, or belief they'll never happen. It just does what it does. And we don't get with the program, we lose.

[Joe]

In fairness to the General I think he might have a point here regarding possible (unintentional) curve-fitting.

I'm recording and at spin 102 I'm finally down to 2 numbers not appeared.
That means at spin 101 I had 3 numbers that hadn't appeared.
So a street going for 101 spins is a "rare event" in my example.
Now it's appeared at spin 102 !  Player "2" starts, silly bastard waited
for that "rare event" before playing.

Turbo, there's no mention of player #1 at this point. In order for player #2 to take advantage of that rare event not repeating, you obviously had to pick the worst performing set of 3 numbers.

But what about player 1 - who didn't think there was a benefit in trying to
take advantage of a "rare event".. he started from spin 1.
He finishes at the same time as player 2 - he's down 198 units !

But it seems as though you're retrospectively allocating those losing numbers to player #1, so it's not surprising that he is way behind player #2. Again, not suggesting that this deliberate in order to fool anyone; it's an easy enough mistake to make.

A more objective way to test the difference would be to use two different spin samples : bet on 3 random #s from "spin 1" in one sample and in the other pick 3 numbers which have just "woken up" after a 100+ spin sleep, then calculate the hit rates for both. You would have to repeat this over a few dozen "experiments" in order to get a statistically valid result.

[cht]

I undestand TG's explanation fully. Probably some other silent lurkers do as well. No, I am not going to explain it again. Just read his original post carefully and watch the graphs.

I was hoping if steve, general(hopefully tomorrow he does better) or anyone can give their pov. However, it must be to address more pertinent on the point of what TG posted and not something unrelated. So to contribute you have to get your understanding correct first - I don't think another round of explanation can make it any clearer.

[cht]

The topic of discussion is if there is any value in "rare events".

Can "waiting" for "rare events" make any difference in the outcomes, can they be taken advantage of ?

There are 2 separate matters - 1. "waiting", and 2. "rare events".

The contention is the consistency in applying random arguments.

Make your case.

[Joe]

It's not clear to me on what basis Turbo has made this comparison. There is supposedly a "better" way to pick numbers than randomly and he has tried to make the point, but I'm not sure he's succeeded.

In any case, if he's correct about the superiority of betting against "rare" events to repeat then the test I've suggested should confirm what he's tried to show in his post. Why don't you try it yourself?

[Steve]

Well then let's consider the principle. 3 consecutive reds is rare compared to RBR, BBR or RRB (3 combinations vs 1).

That's just basic probability. But how can we change the odds in this case with turbos approach? Anyone?

[psimoes]

So player2 won a lot betting on sleepers while player1 lost on the hot numbers. Yes, that... could happen. Haha

[jekhb76]

If we are betting against rare events, why don't we take the simple example.
37 spin cycles?
I can't remember the last Time i saw More then 30 Different numbers appear in 37 spins?
Why don't we All tey to solve that?
Less tracking and it must be possible to profit from the fact that above 30 numbers is rare and that we find atleast 4 or 5 repeaters in every cycle.
Just a thought.