Does random have limits?

[Steve]

It also talks about how after so many numbers it has no choice but to repeat.

Flip a coin until you have 1 head and 1 tail. The limit is reached. The next toss must be a repeat....

Can you see how silly that is? You havent changed anything.

What youre doing is no different. Its just a more complicated and fancier version, so you arent recognizing it as the same thing.

[MoneyT101]

1122122122211121...?

To win on EC straight up is possible but to takes to long.  So it’s better to make pairs to increase the payout and/or use a dependent similar result like a double street

But since you used EC let’s just do EC.  Make pairs first......I would have played in the end pair 21 in your result. I only had 2 bets and I won so I’m at +3 with your sequence!

Next Two spins I have no bet....  Now based on that result I either have a bet or I don’t.

Very simple!

[psimoes]

[Firefox]

To win on EC straight up is possible but to takes to long.  So it’s better to make pairs to increase the payout and/or use a dependent similar result like a double street

But since you used EC let’s just do EC.  Make pairs first......I would have played in the end pair 21 in your result. I only had 2 bets and I won so I’m at +3 with your sequence!

Next Two spins I have no bet....  Now based on that result I either have a bet or I don’t.

Very simple!

Sorry to say the outcome was in fact 12.  Therefore you lost.

The actual outcome 12 was exactly the same odds (25%) as your prediction 21.

Neither outcome can be given a greater weight after the sequence I gave. That it is the very definition of random.

If you think your prediction has better odds than 25% after the sequence I gave, you are deluding yourself with a fallacy varient or playing something other than random numbers.

[MoneyT101]

Sorry to say the outcome was in fact 12.  Therefore you lost.

The actual outcome 12 was exactly the same odds (25%) as your prediction 21.

Neither outcome can be given a greater weight after the sequence I gave. That it is the very definition of random.

If you think your prediction has better odds than 25% after the sequence I gave, you are deluding yourself with a fallacy varient or playing something other than random numbers.

I said I would have won the 21 pair in your sequence.   It’s the last two numbers

Then I had no bet next two spins.  So your 12 I wouldn’t have played, I made it clear I was waiting for next result.  Because it was a no bet!

That’s why you guys don’t understand anything.  You have trouble reading.

To win on EC straight up is possible but to takes to long.  So it’s better to make pairs to increase the payout and/or use a dependent similar result like a double street

But since you used EC let’s just do EC.  Make pairs first......I would have played in the end pair 21 in your result. I only had 2 bets and I won so I’m at +3 with your sequence!

see I won on your seequebce the last Two which were 21

Next Two spins I have no bet....  Now based on that result I either have a bet or I don’t.

I also made it clear next two spins is no bet! Based on this information I would make my next bet!

Very simple!

[MoneyT101]

Yes I will win at better odds then your 25% because the odds of getting all 4 outcomes happens 10% of the time in 1000 spins

435 cycles!! And this happened 39
440 cycles!! And this happens 43
444 cycles!!! And this happened 46

So you do the math!!! I will win plenty of times and when I lose, what I lose 1 unit

You math guys try to be so smart but you can’t figure it out with all your knowledge.

All you do is try to say it don’t work and blah blah blah.

I’m not playing your regular game! 
I’m not playing your random game!
I’m not even playing your repeat....

So tell me how do you know what I’m doing and how are you so sure I will lose?

Cause you can’t think of something it doesn’t mean it doesn’t work!

[Firefox]

Nobody cares about what results have ocuured, Im asking about  the ? My sequence was random

11221221222111  21

You say you would have bet  21 on the last two.

But after

11221221222111, the next two can be 12 just the same odds (25%)

If you say you would bet 21 after 11221221222111,  and your selection of 21 is guaranteed, or even just more likely,  you are simply following a fallacy varient.

[MoneyT101]

Nobody cares about what results have ocuured, Im asking about  the ? My sequence was random

11221221222111  21

You say you would have bet  21 on the last two.

But after

11221221222111, the next two can be 12 just the same odds (25%)

If you say you would bet 21 after 11221221222111,  and your selection of 21 is guaranteed, or even just more likely,  you are simply following a fallacy varient.

No it’s not guaranteed!

Anything could have happened.  But the result will show in the game of what should be played next based on the math.

Let’s use the math of cycles I posted the image.

The math says all 4 outcomes will show up 39 times out of 435

Run 1000 spins and look at the result.  You will have similar result. Same thing over and over.  8-12% you get all 4 outcomes

Run it a billion times if you have to same thing happens

Nothing is guaranteed but if I’m playing something that happens 75% vs 25% and find a way to avoid some of the losses and catch some wins of the 25%

I beat the game.

I’m playing a math game.  Math can’t be wrong.  You just don’t see what math I’m playing so you can’t understand.

[The General]

I’m playing a math game.  Math can’t be wrong.  You just don’t see what math I’m playing so you can’t understand.

No, you just really suck at math.  You're trapped in the box that is the gambler's fallacy.

[Madi]

I’m playing a math game.  Math can’t be wrong.  You just don’t see what math I’m playing so you can’t understand.

Why is your math so invisible?

Can any member help me to understand his concept.  Just the concept. Plz not in japanise language.

[Mako]

No, you just really suck at math.  You're trapped in the box that is the gambler's fallacy.

It's a nice box though.  Lot of people around, good conversation. 

Pricey to enter, but everything in life has a cost...

[MoneyT101]

No, you just really suck at math.  You're trapped in the box that is the gambler's fallacy.

yes your right

As long as it wins my math can suck, has no affect on wins or losses 

[Firefox]

So Mr MoneyT101, we have the sequence

(11221221222111)..... 

You say you would have bet  21 after this.

You say 21 would have a probability greater than 25% ?

You say  you are playing "a math game" ?

Nope, that is a fallacy game. The fallacy of Priyanka. "Seek and you shall find, the answer is there all along. I've said enough already. You will find what you need to win."

It doesn't matter what riddles or philosophy or complications you want to dress up your fallacy with, the answer to this question is 25%. You can pick 21, 12, 11 ,or 22 ... as you like, the answer to any of those is still 25%. It would be 25% knowing the previous sequence, it would be 25% a priori. That is the real maths game.

[luckyfella]

 Played dz with 25% probability gamblers fallacy way. Ofc luck is always with me.

Or perhaps MoneyT is correct about greater than 25% ?   

[Mako]

Nice LF