Is proper bet selection really necessary?

[falkor2k15]

Falkor you have a lot to learn..
.winkel if you need someone to trust to code excel or rx pm me your email address and i,ll put you in contact...this thread will go the turbo whether you want it or not..
and Falkor your comments above are wrong...you seem to be stuck in turbo scenario...
your charts and explanations are the wrong path to go and a waste of time..you will find no hg this way...

And your distance stuff is also disproved just from using the 2-repeat spreadsheet. Gaps that are filled with subsequent uniques that go on to form many repeats have equal probability of occurrence based on distance or position, hence no edge. Yet another pretender who likes to tell people he is right and others are wrong without anything to back up what he is saying. Delusion is rife for life.

[6th-sense]

And your distance stuff is also disproved just from using the 2-repeat spreadsheet. Gaps that are filled with subsequent uniques that go on to form many repeats have equal probability of occurrence based on distance or position, hence no edge. Yet another pretender who likes to tell people he is right and others are wrong without anything to back up what he is saying. Delusion is rife for life.

that was examples..if you actually new how to use the tracker properly and the average 24 out and 12 repeat..you would find the hg..your looking completley in the wrong place..
i,m no pretender..i didn,t give a system in that thread..so i have nothing to back up in that respect..
you cannot say this doesnt happen...
i only gave basic examples what happens...delusion is for people who deny the obvious
ask steve he tells us all the time..the odds

[falkor2k15]

that was examples..if you actually new how to use the tracker properly and the average 24 out and 12 repeat..you would find the hg..your looking completley in the wrong place..
i,m no pretender..i didn,t give a system in that thread..so i have nothing to back up in that respect..
you cannot say this doesnt happen...
i only gave basic examples what happens...delusion is for people who deny the obvious
ask steve he tells us all the time..the odds

Nonsense - you are baiting as a defence mechanism without a leg to stand on. I've debunked repeats inside-out in this topic and turbo's topic, and you've responded in denial without addressing any of my explanations whatsoever that so shatters this whole repeats nonsense. Accept that your whole life has been an illusion and move on - or remain an empty shell.

[daveylibra]

I see we have another debate on the merits of repeaters.

that was examples..if you actually new how to use the tracker properly and the average 24 out and 12 repeat..you would find the hg..your looking completley in the wrong place

6th sense are you saying you have a hg?

Look at the title of this thread.  In the example the numbers chosen were random that repeated.  Its important because they repeated.  Numbers are there in one of three ways, unhit, hit and repeats.  That's it.  It all depends on what you do with that info. Some will figure it out for themselves, others will figure it out with help from others,
and some will never figure it out.

Nimo, I would like to believe that we can gain advantage from repeaters. What makes me reticent to believe it is possible is my own testing. did you see me BASIC program on this thread below?

"TURBO'S REPEATERS SIMULATION."
link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=20147.0

Now it uses a random number generator, but I am of the belief that a fair wheel produces random numbers so this should be ok to use. What I'm saying is, whichever way I permutated betting, be it flat-bet, or 3 units on 3-shows etc, the result was always negative in the long run. Is the missing link to this a maximum 'gap'?

[6th-sense]

Nonsense - you are baiting as a defence mechanism without a leg to stand on. I've debunked repeats inside-out in this topic and turbo's topic, and you've responded in denial without addressing any of my explanations whatsoever that so shatters this whole repeats nonsense. Accept that your whole life has been an illusion and move on - or remain an empty shell.

lol just becouse you yourself have debunked it does that make it the be all and end all?
the only way you have tried is turbo,s way..chasing repeats...but the great Falkor has spoken...it can,t be done
i,m only pointing you and everyone where they should be looking..
if it offends you thats your problem..
the only illusion here is roulette....
broaden your mind a bit..and think outside the box..not inside the boxes your creating...they are illusions in themselves...thus making your own life an illusion too..

daveylibra...i cannot confirm or deny...plus i never did say i was chasing repeats...

[falkor2k15]

lol just becouse you yourself have debunked it does that make it the be all and end all?
the only way you have tried is turbo,s way..chasing repeats...but the great Falkor has spoken...it can,t be done
i,m only pointing you and everyone where they should be looking..
if it offends you thats your problem..
the only illusion here is roulette....
broaden your mind a bit..and think outside the box..not inside the boxes your creating...they are illusions in themselves...thus making your own life an illusion too..

daveylibra...i cannot confirm or deny...plus i never did say i was chasing repeats...

It's not that you're offensive - it's that your replies are counter-productive. You are contributing nothing to this discussion - just baiting and telling us you know best, in order to relieve your suffering whilst recovering from cognitive dissonance brought about through demonstration of repeats being nothing more than an illusion.

[Nimo]

Now it uses a random number generator, but I am of the belief that a fair wheel produces random numbers so this should be ok to use. What I'm saying is, whichever way I permutated betting, be it flat-bet, or 3 units on 3-shows etc, the result was always negative in the long run. Is the missing link to this a maximum 'gap'?

There is a missing link to your testing with your code, it's not the way to play repeaters that Turbo plays.  Think more outside the box,

[Steve]

Winkle, i need a clear answer to this....

You say your system doesn't change the odds and doesnt need to.

Say if your system required you to bet 18 numbers on a spin. Will you win more often than you would if you bet 18 random numbers?

If the answer is yes, then you do claim to change the odds, and probably didnt understand what "changing odds" means.

If the answer is no, then you are not changing the odds, and your bet selection is no different to betting random numbers.

Its a black and white question. Please give a clear answer.

[Scarface]

I thought I had finished educating you guys about the repeats illusion over at the turbo topic - was trying to get you to think in a different way so you can truly understand:

Falknor, what you were doing is nothing like what we're doing. 

[winkel]

Say if your system required you to bet 18 numbers on a spin. Will you win more often than you would if you bet 18 random numbers?

If the answer is yes, then you do claim to change the odds, and probably didnt understand what "changing odds" means.

If the answer is no, then you are not changing the odds, and your bet selection is no different to betting random numbers.

Its a black and white question. Please give a clear answer.

first of all I don´t bet 18 numbers or more I only 17 numbers or less
I don´t change the odds. the odds are always there so they are fair.
My strategy just tells me when to bet and the odds allow me to win more often than they say.

Your so sticky with the odds and their changing. Forget about it.

If I bet 14 numbers the odds are 14/37. That doesn´t change at all.
But if I lost (virtually) 22 bets out of 37 there´s a good point to start betting.
And if I´ve won 22 bets out of 37 it is a good thing to be careful and eventually start betting the opposite chance of the crossing
(This is an scripted example to show you the structure of the strategy)

[Steve]

I don´t change the odds. the odds are always there so they are fair.

My strategy just tells me when to bet and the odds allow me to win more often than they say.

You are incredibly lost. Im not wasting more time on you.

[winkel]

You are incredibly lost. Im not wasting more time on you.

But I´m fine there and I win there.

Better to be lost in some distance than stuck on the "changing the odds"

"changing odds"-"changing odds" doesn´t your brain allow you another second thought?

[The General]

But if I lost (virtually) 22 bets out of 37 there´s a good point to start betting.

Virtual bets?  (Gambler's fallacy.)

[The General]

Winkel,

How can virtual bets possibly improve your chance of winning?

[winkel]

Winkel,

How can virtual bets possibly improve your chance of winning?

It changes the odds 
(be careful: sarcasm)