Over There but Here, Reading Randomness

[Richard Meisel]

Yes, Giz, I understand. I was reading your post in Gambler's Forum where I quote you: "I run into walls at two net wins all the time. Virtual bets are good in these conditions." So I thought maybe STOPPING at two Wins could be a better option. Maybe wouldn't Win as much, but there still is an Option to Bet again.

[gizmotron2]

It has to do with the times that are difficult. You take notice of the difficulty of each session and learn how they tend to go. That's why more experience is much better. There are easy sessions and long slow grinding sessions. If it's a war just to break even then sure, take a break.

[Richard Meisel]

Thank you, Giz. Just finished reading all 72 pages of your thread in Gambler's Forum. A plethora of information. Noticed you play guitar. If you are interested see me on utube under richardmeisel playing and singing a couple originals. Waiting for the casinos to open to finally try roulette having been a craps player. I play keyboards, mostly in Churches. if you come to Phoenix, maybe we can jam and I'll record it. The music will be all improvisational and random!

[gizmotron2]

Thank you, Giz. Just finished reading all 72 pages of your thread in Gambler's Forum. A plethora of information. Noticed you play guitar. If you are interested see me on utube under richardmeisel playing and singing a couple originals. Waiting for the casinos to open to finally try roulette having been a craps player. I play keyboards, mostly in Churches. if you come to Phoenix, maybe we can jam and I'll record it. The music will be all improvisational and random!

I use this to play craps while taking a break.

[Richard Meisel]

Well, math wizard and Reading Random person. Uniform Distribution (UD throughout this thread) versus Randomness. In craps the dice can Roll 36 different numbers. For instance, the number 4, the math wizard will say will appear 3 times (1-3, 3-1, and 2-3) out of 36 Rolls, using the Odds on UD. But if the number 4 comes up say 5 consecutive times, that will skew the UD probably into the thousands. So let's say in Roulette we have 18 Spins, and they are RRRRBBBBRRRRRRRR. The math wizard will see 9 straight Reds and start calculating the Odds. He knows that the Odds of 10 consecutive REDS is 2.06 to the power of ten. He sees that that is 1 in 1,376. The odds seem so overwhelming that he puts up a large Bet on Black and he loses. On the other hand, the person Reading Randomness and looking for Trends, and Swarms, and Clusters, and other manifestations, puts up a large Bet on Red and Wins! The math wizard calls it luck, the Reading Randomness person calls it skill. So is it Luck or Skill? Being Random it's a little of both, bit I prefer the Skill Aspect of it. The whole topic of being "Introduced To Randomness And Random Numbers" is very deep and vast.

[gizmotron2]

It can be much simpler than "gambler's fallacy."  Math does not predict the next outcome. This is not a game of a single win vs a single loss. You can take multiple wins and use them against single losses. A single loss tells you that the streak has broken down unless you are in a swarm of singles on the weak side. So you stop the speculative activity until you find another opportunity. So you need to watch to see if wins come in lengths like three at a time. If that is the case then don't take the loss on the fourth step. Randomness goes into phases of consistent formations. Math has nothing to do with times like that. It takes training and experience to exploit coincidence.  Arguing with math Nazis is pointless. They are blind as a bat. They think that they see everything. They are fun to watch contortions of pretzel maneuvers in logic as they defend a mathematical gambler's fallacy. If you look at their arguments it's always mathematical expectations. They think that math predicts the future. This of course irritates them.

[Richard Meisel]

Thank you, Giz. You are like a mystery writer, giving clues in your messages. I'd like your take on RNG's. Being somewhat of a mathematician I notice that the Odds in Craps (1 in 36) and the Odds in Roulette (1 in 38) are ONLY correct in UNIFORM DISTRIBUTION (UD). I have a WinCraps program that I like very much, BUT when I speed it up to hundreds of thousands of Rolls or more and I look at the Statistics the Deviation is quite like the UD. It seems like most Random Number Generators (RNG) after many Rolls or Spins tend to end up with UD. Why is that if they are supposed to be Random? I assume you like the RNG in your program. Since my laptop is broken and I haven't been able to download your program on my smartphone in Dropbox, I've been using the RNG at Random.com. Oh, TRINGs and PRINGs are fascinating.

[nottophammer]

Richard
I no math boy.
But what i find is any rng be it a live wheel or any rng using algo's; give repeats over 40 spins, see not a cycle of 37 as
1-3-5-7 and even at 60 spins; 30 repeats, rounded up from 29.5.

Rich, the best data is the Generals posted 10330 star burst spin; it gives 1-3-5-7-30 as averages for repeats. The old wind bag can't lie, he posted them.

Even random.org gives that average.

[Richard Meisel]

Yes, Notto, thank you. Concerning Repeaters for x number of Spins, all formulas are wrong and will lose in the long run, EXCEPT Betting on Doubles on the Weak Side.

[gizmotron2]

My simulation and practice software uses a fair (non manipulated) PRNG.

on mouseUp
put random(38) into thisSpin
end mouseUp

A manipulated RNG would look for opportunities to cheat a player. It would consist of a way to make a player lose either by a percentage of bets placed or by targeting in bad streaks on purpose. Millions of ways to cheat the player can be written into the code and the execution would happen in less than a micro second.

My software uses a back protected version of implementation. This is in conjunction with a method to protect random seeding. In other words it protects against prediction algorithms.

From the documentation on the operating system's PRNG that my software uses:

Basic PRNG

All PRNGs in the system are SP800-90 AES_CTR_DRBG with 256-bit security strength
using the df() function for seeding and re-seeding (see SP 800-90 for details).
AES_CTR_DRBG is a cryptographic pseudo-random number generator. That means that
given any number of output bytes, it is computationally infeasible to determine the
internal state of the PRNG or any other output byte. As the name suggests,
AES_CTR_DRBG is based on using the AES block cipher in a counter mode, similarly to
the way it is used to create a key stream in AES-GCM.
This PRNG has backtracking resistance; after it has produced an output, the updated
PRNG state does not contain enough information to recover that output. The
backtracking resistance property is maintained throughout the RNG system.

Buffered PRNG

The Basic PRNGs are not used directly, but rather through a wrapping layer that adds
several features.

• A small buffer of random bytes to improve performance for small requests.
• A lock to support multi-threading.
• A seed version.

Buffering

The buffering is straightforward. There is a small buffer (currently 128 bytes). If a request
for random bytes is 128 bytes or larger, it is generated directly from AES_CTR_DRGB. If it
is smaller than 128 bytes it is taken from the buffer. The buffer is re-filled from the
AES_CTR_DRBG whenever it runs empty. So, if the buffer contains 4 bytes and the
request is for 8 bytes, the 4 bytes are taken from the buffer, the buffer is refilled with 128
bytes, and the first 4 bytes of the refilled buffer are used to complete the request,
leaving 124 bytes in the buffer. When bytes are taken from the buffer, their locations are
wiped (zeroed). This maintains the backtracking resistance.

The X-Talk software development language uses the Windows 10 operating system classes and libraries to execute a fair selection. After a spin is selected no manipulation of the result is used to change any outcomes. I use this software myself to practice. I don't trust RNG type Roulette games anywhere. I expect the casino to cheat the players.

[Moxy]

My simulation and practice software uses a fair (non manipulated) PRNG.

on mouseUp
put random(38) into thisSpin
end mouseUp

A manipulated RNG would look for opportunities to cheat a player. It would consist of a way to make a player lose either by a percentage of bets placed or by targeting in bad streaks on purpose. Millions of ways to cheat the player can be written into the code and the execution would happen in less than a micro second.

My software uses a back protected version of implementation. This is in conjunction with a method to protect random seeding. In other words it protects against prediction algorithms.

From the documentation on the operating system's PRNG that my software uses:

The X-Talk software development language uses the Windows 10 operating system classes and libraries to execute a fair selection. After a spin is selected no manipulation of the result is used to change any outcomes. I use this software myself to practice. I don't trust RNG type Roulette games anywhere. I expect the casino to cheat the players.

You have a link for your software.  Is it for purchase?

[gizmotron2]

You have a link for your software.  Is it for purchase?

It's right here in my signature on each post.  You go to that forums index page and look down to the software section. Somewhere is an operation and instruction thread also.

"Reading Randomness is a single thread. It is backed up by a software instruction thread and software download threads. The Even Chance Pro 1.4 version is the best version to practice on.
gamblingforums dot com/threads/reading-randomness.14733/ "

P.S. It's free. There is no secret upper level instruction. I will be happy to charge you a massive amount if you want private tutoring. I've got plenty of time.

[Moxy]

It's right here in my signature on each post.  You go to that forums index page and look down to the software section. Somewhere is an operation and instruction thread also.

"Reading Randomness is a single thread. It is backed up by a software instruction thread and software download threads. The Even Chance Pro 1.4 version is the best version to practice on.
gamblingforums dot com/threads/reading-randomness.14733/ "

P.S. It's free. There is no secret upper level instruction. I will be happy to charge you a massive amount if you want private tutoring. I've got plenty of time.

I tried the link before.  I didn't look hard enough.  Thank you, Gizmo.

[Richard Meisel]

Thank you, Giz, for all the info about the RNG you use in your software. I noticed on Random.org under the heading "Introduction . . .", they claim that TRNGs are better than PRNGs at gaming.    Oh, Giz, Randomness and Improvisation are wonderful.   POSSIBILITIES over ODDS. Mathematicians will normally choose Odds over Possibilities. Though both can be Random, the math people will Read Random Mathematical Odds over Reading Random Mathematical Possibilities. The Odds work in a UNIFORM DISTRIBUTION, while the Randomness Distribution will appear in Trends or Nontrends, SINGLES or NONSINGLES, Doubles or No doubles, Triples on Nontriples, and so forth, and Swarms and Nonswarms, etc.  Thoughnboth are Random and Coincidental, Possibilities will Win more than Odds.  Here is a crazy example that the math guys will cringe at and maybe call me names (they'll say you can't draw lines and points are in space, etc.): I draw a square cube 1 inch square. I draw a diagonal line connecting the diagonal points. The theorem says that the line is exactly the Square Root of 2. Now I'm looking at the line that I just drew, the Mathematical Odds are the line is exactly the Square Root of 2. What! I just drew a line that is impossible to draw, the square root of 2 is a number that goes out to infinity. I can't draw that line. But I can see it. I can see the POSSIBILITY but not the ODDS.   When I play the keyboards, I try to create through Improvisation (Randomness over Sight Reading), the proper Improvisation is CREATIVE and reaches the CREATOR and tends to Manifest His Glory above Praise and Worship. CREATIVE POSSIBILITIES will always oushine STAGNANT ODDS.

[gizmotron2]

A few of us ran a test to see if experienced players could tell the difference between RNG and real spins. They couldn't. In fact they called reals spins RNG most of the times.