Why not like AP players in forums ?

[Bigbroben]

Steve,
For sure being physicaly near a wheel and estimating speeds and stuff gives a real hedge to the player.  As for people like me who have no time nor plenty of resources to go to casinos, well, all we have left are online casinos, i.e. pretty much only rng to play with.  Quite normal we relie on systems or system ideas to try to win more than lose.

Would you say " forget about roulette" if we are from middle class with kids?  !!!
In the meantime, i'll just "play" on my couch hoping and dreaming.  What if...

[Steve]

Quite normal we relie on systems or system ideas to try to win more than lose.

I don't have any problem with that. Understand what Im saying. I'm only explaining why some approaches dont work.

Would you say " forget about roulette" if we are from middle class with kids?

I didnt say that exactly. If you are using a bad system that is guaranteed to eventually fail, and you have a family, then it makes sense to not gamble your family's money away. It's not my money, just a suggestion.

Perhaps the biggest misunderstanding here is I'm saying.....

1. TRY SOMETHING NEW. NEW.

2. TEST PROPERLY BEFORE BETTING REAL MONEY

3. KNOW WHAT TESTING PROPERLY ACTUALLY INVOLVES, AND WHY.

[Bigbroben]

Right on!

[The General]

as long as you can´t think in wider terms than until the next spin, you will not understand anything and you know nothing about statistical dependence in a sequence of random results.

On the contrary, I think in terms of the long run. The number of pockets on the wheel from one spin to the next is also true for the long run.  It doesn't matter if you count the number of pockets on the next spin, the next series of spins, the next ten thousand spins, etc...you're always going to find that the same number of pockets remain, regardless of what has hit on past spins.

[The General]

General, you're never gonna see past the house edge.  Why ask a question if you're gonna completely ignore the answer.  If I took the time, I could make 100 statements on what will happen in 100 spins, that nearly all will be true.  You don't have to be psychic, just know how probability works.  Any strategy that bets against this will fail.

Scarface,

Sorry, but the number of pockets determines the probability of a number hitting.  Not past spins. 
Follow the logic if you can.

[Steve]

Make it simple. Show one example how how your bet selection method changes the odds.

Then repeat this over different spins, many times. And check if you are winning more than random bet selection.

[winkel]

Make it simple. Show one example how how your bet selection method changes the odds.

Then repeat this over different spins, many times. And check if you are winning more than random bet selection.

This is so boring.
GUT exists nearly more than 15 years.
GUT doesn´t change the odds it uses them.
GUT doesn´t change the number of pockets, it doesn´t need it.
There are thousands of examples of GUT betting.
Is testing and playing GUT for 15 and more years not proper testing?

Do APs change the odds?
Do APs change the number of pockets?
If Aps found a number to attack, doe they win every spin?
Do APs tell the same BlaBla over years?
For the last question there is a YES.

[winkel]

OK, one example:

Are there crossing lines?
The lines have to cross, they do cross and they will cross in every spin sequence. In the past, now, and in the future.
We only bet if they are to cross (statistic shows when to bet)

[Steve]

Winkel, understand I'm giving GUT fair consideration. My comments and questions are unbiased.

GUT exists nearly more than 15 years.

So has the martingale.

GUT doesn´t change the odds it uses them.

If you don't change the odds, then your bet selection is the same as random, and you have negative expectation.

To say you dont change odds but you use them, is like saying "its still 1 in 37, the payouts are still unfair, and we use that". It's an oxymoron.

There are thousands of examples of GUT betting.

Ok I'm just asking for one clear example.

Is testing and playing GUT for 15 and more years not proper testing?

It's long enough, but I know nothing else about the testing done yet.

Do APs change the odds?

Yes.

Do APs change the number of pockets?

No. It's not possible. But we change the odds.

If Aps found a number to attack, doe they win every spin?

No, but they improve the odds for them.

Do APs tell the same BlaBla over years?

Yes, because as far as I'm aware, reality and math will never change. What's true now will continue being true.

Are there crossing lines?
The lines have to cross, they do cross and they will cross in every spin sequence. In the past, now, and in the future.
We only bet if they are to cross (statistic shows when to bet

I don't know the relevance of the crossing lines. Please explain it.

I did some research on Kolmogorov and Markov chains. There's a lot more research to do fully understand them, but so far it appears the theory is only useful when there are LIMITED possibilities, but completely useless if there are unlimited possibilities.

In the case of roulette, the possibilities increase proportionally to the number of spins. So we may start with 37 possibilities, but then there are the possibilities with values 37^2, 37^3, 37^4 and so on. More importantly, the possibilities (odds) will always be greater than the payouts. Random does NOT have any limits (unless your idea of a limit is the amount of pockets on the next spin, which doesnt help because the payouts are always lower).

Sure you could look at finite possibilities in just two spins, but it doesnt make any difference in roulette. For example, you cant just say there are 37 numbers, so you have 37 possibilities, and therefore you will win.

I think your theory with GUT is incorrect because you assume there are finite possibilities, where no such limit exists.

Markov chains could be used, in part, to predict something like stock prices, because prices may not realistically go to zero. There is a feedback loop with supply and demand. No such thing exists in roulette.

Please dont bite back at me. Dont go criticising APs. This post has nothing to do with my preferred method. I'm trying to understand your theory, and this is my understanding so far.

Please correct my understanding.

[Bebediktus3]

There are thousands of examples of GUT betting.

Look Winkel, say roulette have only 3 numbers ( can be 5 or 7) for simplicity. Can you show the situation, when you know which number have more chances to be hit accordingly GUT ?
If cant - that means, that you always do bet with the negative expectation. You understand, that if the player always has negative expectation - he can't win in long run and sooner or later he will come to minus?

[winkel]

The most simple explanation!
Attention this is not the betting rule, this is not the strategy, this is not a betting point. It is just the principle:

If we start betting our game starts with 37 unhit numbers.
After the first spin 1 number hits and the count is now
37 unhit 1 hit
after the next spin another number hits and the count is now
36 unhit 2 hit

if we follow the game we will definitely come to a point where the count is
19 unhit 18 hit

It is the nature of the game that in one of the next spins this count will change to
18 unhit to 19 hit

This principle you can transfer to
unhit vs hit
once hit vs more than once hit
twice hit vs more than twice hit
and so on.

Additional there are some more possible "crossings"
e.g.
18 vs 18
18 vs 17
17 vs 17
17 vs 16
and so on.

As KonFuSed showed the odds are not changed
In the first example we will win 19/37 of our bets and lose 18/37 of our bets long term.

And now something I didn´t explain so far:
If we note all our bets (real bets or just watched) we will find the variance.
On this variance we can make a chi square test and only bet if the test shows a difference in our favour.

[winkel]

Winkel, understand I'm giving GUT fair consideration. My comments and questions are unbiased.

So has the martingale.  we are not talking about a progression. GUT is flat betting

If you don't change the odds, then your bet selection is the same as random, and you have negative expectation.
Negative expectation doesn´t depend on the odds. The reason is the negative pay out.

To say you dont change odds but you use them, is like saying "its still 1 in 37, the payouts are still unfair, and we use that". It's an oxymoron.
as we can´t change that we have to deal with it, don´t we!

Ok I'm just asking for one clear example.
see above
...

Yes, because as far as I'm aware, reality and math will never change. What's true now will continue being true.
BlaBla

I don't know the relevance of the crossing lines. Please explain it.

I did some research on Kolmogorov and Markov chains. There's a lot more research to do fully understand them, but so far it appears the theory is only useful when there are LIMITED possibilities, but completely useless if there are unlimited possibilities.
With Roulette there are limited possibilities 37^37

In the case of roulette, the possibilities increase proportionally to the number of spins. So we may start with 37 possibilities, but then there are the possibilities with values 37^2, 37^3, 37^4 and so on.
this bet is not repeating itself spin after spin like bet red after 3 blacks. The game restarts every time newly starting with a new count. The content of the group to bet always changes.

Markov chains could be used, in part, to predict something like stock prices, because prices may not realistically go to zero. There is a feedback loop with supply and demand. No such thing exists in roulette. In Roulette it is the crossing

Please dont bite back at me. Dont go criticising APs.
AP´s started and made the rules of discussion not me

if I missed a question to answer pls ask again

[winkel]

Look Winkel, say roulette have only 3 numbers ( can be 5 or 7) for simplicity.
You are joking again. See my example with 37 numbers.
Can you show the situation, when you know which number have more chances to be hit accordingly GUT ?
I don´t bet a single number I bet a group of numbers with the expectation that this group will hit
If cant - that means, that you always do bet with the negative expectation. You understand, that if the player always has negative expectation - he can't win in long run and sooner or later he will come to minus?
BlaBla! try to think further

[Steve]

Ok so applying this principles to a wheel with 3 numbers.

We start with 3 unhit.
Then on the first spin, we get 1 hit, 2 unhit.

What happens next?

I dont see how this at all can be used for an advantage.

On this variance we can make a chi square test and only bet if the test shows a difference in our favour.

So your trigger is imbalance. That doesn't work because the odds haven't changed. Your bet selection still has random accuracy.

Im still trying to make sense of it. Specifically im trying to understand why you think this approach would work. What am i missing?

[Steve]

Yes, because as far as I'm aware, reality and math will never change. What's true now will continue being true.
BlaBla

Winkel if thats your level of logic, i probably shouldnt waste my time.