37 spins testing.

[Anastasius]

If anyone wants to do a likely pointless test and post ere or inbox me the results....do a flat bet test after 18  uniques. On all 18 then add any new numbers up to 37 spins then stop at spin 37. (U will catch every repeater possible within 37 spins for all 18 unique minimum sets ) all flat bet ..... Possibly won't come out + (  big bro Ben if those two graphs lines up I was thousands ahead ) it must have to do mathematically with if u  have twenty uniue then for it to finish with 20 it needs to hit those 20 for 17 spins ect) I dunno the actual math I only had a suspicion....

[Anastasius]

For the 19 spins after the 18 unique the most common game should be 10 wins vs 9 losses....worst case it all 9 in a row at start ...super unlikely.....this could come out + if someone test? Because in hindsite it skips over all the ones that won't hit even once and goes straight to the definate repeats ...

[Bigbroben]

Hi,
yes, the datas Herby posted are consistent with the ones I had.

I posted you a tracking file in the Excel Help tread, you play with it and see.

The normal distribution datas, I got them from Winkel's LOTT file, and compared the proportions with Herby's nrs. 
So, yeah, if 18 in 18, most likely it will be 26 in 37;
but there are more chances there will be 25 nrs than 27 (21% vs 17%).

See:

[Bigbroben]

For the 19 spins after the 18 unique the most common game should be 10 wins vs 9 losses....worst case it all 9 in a row at start ...super unlikely.....this could come out + if someone test? Because in hindsite it skips over all the ones that won't hit even once and goes straight to the definate repeats ...

Will test soon.

[Bigbroben]

PS:
don't forget to find Waldo in the tracker!

[Anastasius]

I saw that 24 wasn't most common after a few real life games...if it was in four situations of 200 cycles from my test I could have parlayed the wins up to like +50;000 off one unit ( almost worthy to wait for ) but I knew quickly the end results would be around 26 total numbers its actually not too far off 24==== I could do sumfin wit dis maybe...