Does random have limits?

[Blueprint]

There is no point trying to predict what will occur, from what has recently occured in the last 1 to 20 spins. There is absolutely no mileage in this. It is a complete waste of time.

If you  want to go back 100's and 1000's of spins and look at  cause and effects or repeated data, then you may have a better case.

You’re right, predicting will never work.  So, what’s the alternative?

[precogmiles]

You’re right, predicting will never work.  So, what’s the alternative?

There isn't an alternative. That is why casinos have roulette. They force you to guess while they have an edge.

The only way to beat roulette is by precognition. Once you improve the accuracy without the need of a computer. The house no longer has an edge and you win.

Its very simple.

[Blueprint]

There isn't an alternative. That is why casinos have roulette. They force you to guess while they have an edge.

The only way to beat roulette is by precognition. Once you improve the accuracy without the need of a computer. The house no longer has an edge and you win.

Its very simple.

Yes there is.

And yes it is. 

[Firefox]

Alternatives; computer play, visual ballistics, biased number play based on 1000's of spins, or advanced dealers sig methods.

All of these do not work under all conditions. You have to work hard to find  to find the right spin speeds, wheels, and dealers. And you have to work hard on your method. 1000's of hours away from the wheel.

Then there are methods like precognition. You'd have ask Miles about that, but I believe it needs also needs 1000's of hours practice, doesn't work under all conditions, and not everyone can do it.

It's the same with visual ballistics. Not everyone can do it. It needs 1000's of hours of practice and conditions drift.

The Casino is a business. If they thought putting up the last 12 numbers on a marquee helped you predict the next number, they wouldn't do it.

They don't publish 1000's of numbers from particular wheels for our delight. What they do is rotate stators and rotors, rotate numbers rings, relevel wheels and rotate dealers, or call no more bets early. All to preserve the randomness of the game, which they know can't be beaten.

Where numbers are published from many past spins eg Weisbaden permamences, you can be sure that the wheels from which they came, have had rotors swapped, numbers rings rotated, and changed from table to table.

To understand how the game can be beaten, you can look at what the Casinos are doing to counter those methods, and what they are doing to preserve random.

[Blueprint]

You keep mentioning predicting so we are obviously having 2 very different conversations (and results).

[Firefox]

The topic is whether random has limits and the associated question, if it does, then can the past results be used to predict future ones via patterns etc.

This is the only practical topic worth discussing. If you don't predict in some way before the next number arrives, the roulette wheel becomes a curiosity not worthy of discussion.

My contention is that true random has no limits, and cannot be predicted by looking at immediately previous results.

Therefore other methods must be used.

[The General]

I agree with the wise words written by Firefox.

[luckyfella]

I'm 100% sure that something like the above can be utilized somehow and can be combined with other things to create a winning method. I wish I knew how 

Keep MoneyT topic in mind ati. "Does random have limits ?"

Your purpose is not to predict the outcome of the next spin.

Your purpose is as per OP's topic. Only way that I mentioned umpteen times is it must have a basis - that's math as in a negative skewed graph.

And, if you think they do, and the numbers are still random, then you are welcome to find them, and go out there to make your fortune. Please give us a slice of the action 

Not happening 

[Robbert]

So, just bet the hit dozen with an progresiion?

[hanshuckebein]

I think that we won't be able to find out wether random has limits if we only look at "the last or the next spin " or at "thousands of spin" altogether.

in my opinion we should investigate certain spin ranges, circles, games within the game or whatever one might call it.

cheers
hans

[redhot]

Here’s something interesting...

If we record the dozens we have a stream like:
1
3
3
1
2
2
3
2
2
Etc..

Now if we look at the cycle lengths we can create a second stream of “dozens”:

2
3
2
1
Etc...

In the first stream each dozen has an equal chance of appearing (33%)

But in the second stream the “dozens” have different probabilities! Based on the cycle length stats we know that “dozen 2” in the second stream has a 44% chance of appearing while “dozen 3” only has a 22% chance.

Both streams are just random values between 1-3, anything that applies to one applies to the other.

Can we use this imbalance in the second stream to give us an edge in the first stream?

[ati]

The problem with your example is that "dozen" 2 in the second stream is never a single dozen bet. You can play for cycle length 2 in the first stream, but you need to bet both the first and second dozens in the cycle, because you don't know which one will repeat.

After 2 unique dozens in the cycle, the chance for cycle length 2 is not 44% anymore but 66%, because at that point you cannot include the possibility of cycle length 1 happening anymore in the calculation. And the 66% for a two dozen bet is no different than betting two dozens randomly.

I'm sure there is some applicability though, but every time I break down imbalances like this, I come to the conclusion that it doesn't improve the chance to win. I think here is where some clever parallel dependent play need to be added.
I have experimented with all kind of parallel dependent streams but both streams seem to be losing simultaneously, so there is something I'm missing and I probably should look at the data differently.

I never run long simulations as I'm not an expert coder, I feel that if I find something that cannot lose, I should be able to see it in 50-100 spin manual tests.

[Firefox]

Can we use this imbalance in the second stream to give us an edge in the first stream?

No.

In either stream the chance that any particular dozen will appear on the next spin is 12/37.

The chance that zero will appear is 1/37.

[MoneyT101]

Here’s something interesting...

If we record the dozens we have a stream like:
1
3
3
1
2
2
3
2
2
Etc..

Now if we look at the cycle lengths we can create a second stream of “dozens”:

2
3
2
1
Etc...

In the first stream each dozen has an equal chance of appearing (33%)

But in the second stream the “dozens” have different probabilities! Based on the cycle length stats we know that “dozen 2” in the second stream has a 44% chance of appearing while “dozen 3” only has a 22% chance.

Both streams are just random values between 1-3, anything that applies to one applies to the other.

Can we use this imbalance in the second stream to give us an edge in the first stream?

I already answered you about this question.

I remember dyksexlic telling you to work in private and see what you can come up with!

As far as this topic is concerned random doesn’t have limits!!!  Let this topic die already, thank you.

[sugtips]

Thanks God and Good Morning All.

Please ignore my this post if it seems very silly.

I am talking about "Randomness of Roulette Wheel at Local B&M Casinos" (at least here in Africa).

after 10 red in a row, I can bet of my life next 100 spins, all 100 numbers will not come reds.

I mean after continuous 10 reds, it will not continue for next 100 spins and we will not get 110 reds in a row.
Not in my entire life, not in your entire life, not in casinos history.

So means there's some limits in roulette wheel randomness.

(sorry for my bad English)

Now 2nd part, how to make money using this info.

Love and Light,
SugTips