Step In To My Game

[ati]

Hi ati, Priyanka mentioned before about playing a game within a game, i.e. first to X repeats, as well as increasing the span of a biased game. She also talked about increasing predictability - but since then the Non-Random game seems to have become severely handicapped in terms of recommended play.

Yeah I know. But keep in mind that Priyanka tried never to show the direct applications of any concepts, statistics, etc. For example everyone was trying to apply vdw on spins before Pri finally posted a year or two later that it should be used on events. That's a great help, but still the hardest part remain to be solved. To find an event that has two possibilities but chances are not 50/50. I could never find or create one. I mean there are many, like after a dozen you either get a repeat, or one of the other two. 33/66, but the payouts are not 1 to 1.

[ati]

No apologies, still on topic

Ok so if waiting cause that number?  What happens when you don’t wait?

I know it sounds silly

Read this a few times....

Well, if your bet selection has no logic, then you still get random results.

[MoneyT101]

Well, if your bet selection has no logic, then you still get random results.

No that’s not the answer I’m looking for......read my comment to you again and try something different based on what I said

Specific to the percentages you posted and how exactly you arrived to those numbers

Don’t post your result

[falkor2k15]

Yeah I know. But keep in mind that Priyanka tried never to show the direct applications of any concepts, statistics, etc. For example everyone was trying to apply vdw on spins before Pri finally posted a year or two later that it should be used on events. That's a great help, but still the hardest part remain to be solved. To find an event that has two possibilities but chances are not 50/50. I could never find or create one. I mean there are many, like after a dozen you either get a repeat, or one of the other two. 33/66, but the payouts are not 1 to 1.

Is the "hardest part" analogous to simultaneous equations in maths?

[RayManZ]

No apologies, still on topic

Ok so if waiting cause that number?  What happens when you don’t wait?

I know it sounds silly

Read this a few times....

If you dont wait you get the opposite of the number you are waiting for?

[MoneyT101]

If you dont wait you get the opposite of the number you are waiting for?

Ok, so did you know what to bet on?whats the percentage now?

Don’t answer in the forum. Please answer for yourself

No more gameplay questions in this thread please.

[MoneyT101]

Assumptions List

-Assumption: Roulette is random

-Assumption:  Roulette is not beatable

-Assumption: Roulette is not beatable because of the house edge

-Assumption: No dependency in roulette

-Assumption: no mechanical system can beat the game of roulette

-Assumption: Roulette has no limit, Infinite combinations


FACTS List

-Fact - Roulette has a limit!


Now back to assumptions and facts....

Anyone have anymore assumptions they want to add to the list?

Any debate on the first fact on the list?

Anyone want to add any new facts or assumptions?

[MoneyT101]

I don't know if there are rules about BS on the forum but this thread would fit nicely.
These are already 7 pages of hinting and navel-gazing and BS without anything actionable and nothing specific.
Some guys are so burned by the game that have no money left to play. Though it seems they can't quit, because they are addicted. So they become couch roulette players and philosophers looking for... "the secret".  This is all gibberish. And pretentious. And anyone with a grain of common sense knows it.

If you have something to say, spell it out. If you don't, stop this.
Everything you have written is either wrong or obvious.
I'm amazed that you are not being ridiculed already and there are members taking you seriously. Wait, I'm not surprised. These are the players casinos make money from. It's not the house edge that gives casinos the big profits (that's a tiny bit), it's people who are reading this thread and aren't laughing.

Your posts are OFFENSIVE!
To everyone's intelligence.

I agree with you....

You should definitely quit wasting anymore time reading this BS

[luckyfella]

I agree with you....

You should definitely quit wasting anymore time reading this BS

Mel, don't bother about kav post.

Read his recent post on this forum.
link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=26296.0

After all these years he writes about negative progression betsizing.
Tells you how much he knows.

He doesn't even know that nonsense fails. He moans why nobody interested in his sure fail martingale.

Steve is nice to a fellow forum owner. Else.

[luckyfella]

Random spins means independent and unbias outcome.

This means future spin is not predictable based on past spins.

If you want to design a system that wins, you have to challenge the math fact of independent and unbias outcome.
Or at least work with more advance maths.

I wrote earlier, this is a math problem.

Jerome who understands the math of roulette wrote in math sense what it means to challenge this math fact.

Read it.

There is no other way.

And, no one who found this solution will ever post it on forums.

[MoneyT101]

Mel, don't bother about kav post.

Read his recent post on this forum.
link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=26296.0

After all these years he writes about negative progression betsizing.
Tells you how much he knows.

He doesn't even know that nonsense fails. He moans why nobody interested in his sure fail martingale.

Steve is nice to a fellow forum owner. Else.

Yes he is quick to judge but lets take a look at this experts reasoning and waiting for triggers

The bet selection is up to you. Originally, Harryj said you should play the losing Even Chance after it lost 3-4 times. And you bet for the next 3 spins. If a color runs for 5, 6 or 7 spins you win, if it runs for more than 7 spins you lose. The reasoning is that there are far more same color spin sequences with a length of  5, 6 or 7 spins, than there are with a length of 8 spins or more.
But you can chose a different trigger if you like.

What makes this really interesting, aside from the very balanced wagering plan, is the fact that you take a break after 3 losses. You see the trigger, you bet and if there is no win after 3 bets, you stop and wait for the next trigger. Though theoretically there is no difference, this approach protects you from long losing sequences.

Ill continue with my BS on this end and he can continue with his Expert BS over there. 

This basically means that if we use a mode of play what I call random play, the law of large numbers will govern our result. So what is random play?

Random play examples:
1. waiting for an event that will make you win
2. trying to predict what comes next
3. using a systems that uses: "what goes up must come down"

in other words: all systems based on gamblers fallacy are actually random play!

[Kav]

No matter how you slice it up, you can not change roulette probabilities.
There are a million ways to represent them, but they are still the same. And known.

There are 1mil ways to represent 1/2 ,
0,5, 100/200, 30/60,  1220/2440,  (5*10+ 100)/300, 10*0,05 etc.
but every way refers to the same thing.  Doesn't matter how you look at it, It is still the same thing.

It's like you see a tree. But it is too high to climb it. and you say: "Hey! I have a great idea. If we go far enough the tree will look smaller, so we can climb it." 

This is what you are doing. No matter how fancy your representation of roulette math is, it is still the same old thing. Roulette probabilities and house edge are what they are, do a search and every site will tell you what they are. You can't change that.
No matter how you look at it, you can't change it. It is there, it is known. And it is a fact. So you can add to your facts list the probabilities of each roulette bet. Why don't you do that? End of story.

[MoneyT101]

No matter how you slice it up, you can not change roulette probabilities.
There are a million ways to represent them, but they are still the same. And known.

There are 1mil ways to represent 1/2 ,
0,5, 100/200, 30/60,  1220/2440,  (5*10+ 100)/300, 10*0,05 etc.
but every way refers to the same thing.  Doesn't matter how you look at it, It is still the same thing.

It's like you see a tree. But it is too high to climb it. and you say: "Hey! I have a great idea. If we go far enough the tree will look smaller, so we can climb it." 

This is what you are doing. No matter how fancy your representation of roulette math is, it is still the same old thing. Roulette probabilities and house edge are what they are, do a search and every site will tell you what they are. You can't change that.
No matter how you look at it, you can't change it. It is there, it is known. And it is a fact. So you can add to your facts list the probabilities of each roulette bet. Why don't you do that? End of story.

I appreciate this reply...  it’s not an attack but your stressing your concern.

Now pay attention.. no where did I say I change the odds of the game! If I did I apologize to everyone.

The odds of the game cannot be changed!

-What I am sharing are ideas to lead others to play differently. 

-Also I’m breaking down misconceptions on roulette

You don’t have to agree with me.  I don’t agree with your method.   But I’m not coming in your thread talking about it. I’m in my thread minding my business.

[ati]

-Assumption: Roulette is not beatable because of the house edge

This is also an interesting one, because while it's true, no one can beat the no zero, no house edge roulette. So I prefer to say it's not beatable, because of the unpredictable variances.

There is one fact that might also be an assumption.

outcomes are equally likely

This doesn't necessarily mean next spin's outcome. Can be the next 2, 3 or more. Take even chances for example. In 3 spins there are 6 possible outcomes (no zero), RRR, BBB, RBR, RBB, BRB, BRR
4 out of 6 has one repeat. This makes it clear that any time in the next 3 spins we are more likely to see one of the outcomes that has one repeat. RRR and BBB are less likely to happen.
Remember how Priyanka wrote it a couple years ago?

1-9 is quad 1, 10-18 is quad 2, 19-27 is quad 3 and 28-36 is quad 4.  Four sets of outcomes that are equally likely (?!) and independent (?!).

[Madi]

It doesnt matter who’s thread is it. A reasonable response is always accepted and encouraged. A hint game must be underlined by red mark.