Step In To My Game

[Steve]

What almost every player isnt understanding is no matter what cycles you think exist, no matter how clever you think your system is, no matter how elaborate the triggers are, you're just making random bets. That's exactly what you do when you aren't increasing the accuracy of predictions.

And no matter how clever you think your progression is.... if you havent changed the accuracy of predictions, progression bets are just random bets with random bet sizes. Like the martingale player thinks "eventually" they'll win with 10,20,40,80. But it's exactly the same as 4 different players making random bets with different stakes.

Or maybe you think your progression allows you to bet high during winning streams, and bet low during losing periods. No, you're just making random bets with random bet size. You're changing nothing. Wagered amount only varies the amount you risk on the next spin.

We've been here before many times. The basics are all explained at :.roulettephysics.com/roulette-strategy/

No, I'm not saying everything is futile. I'm saying TRY NEW THINGS.

So no it’s not a contradiction.  The odds don’t change.  I’m not changing anything but my approach.

Sure you can change your "approach". But if you arent changing the odds, you're just making random bets. The wheel doesn't know or give a crap about what your system is, or when and why you bet. If your system doesnt change the odds, you're stuck at 1 in 37. And before you accuse me of being obsessed with 1 in 37, understand it's not my obsession. There are just 37 pockets on the wheel. It's not my fault.

[Steve]

Your rules for when cycles start and end are arbitrary. They are meaningless.

The constraints are just basic math. Like the law of a third... If you have 4 uniques, the odds of a repeat next is 4/37. If you have 5 uniques, then next it's 5/37 and so on.

You can say the constraint for maximum reds in a row is X spins. But that's not a constraint at all. It's just basic probability.

In reality there are no constraints. And what is likely to happen depends on the event, and amount of spins being considered.

[MoneyT101]

Your rules for when cycles start and end are arbitrary. They are meaningless.

Exactly... it’s just a way to get consistent statistics.  Based on those numbers is where you come up with a method.  There is nothing bad happening.  It’s just you don’t agree.

Admit it!

I’m not saying the odds change! I’m just picking better on my own based on what I see.

So you can believe in precog and see things but I can’t look at constants and make educated decisions 😳

Bets at  -1   120
   
Won bets -1   55

200 spins viewed
120 bets played on a single dozen
55 bets won
45% playing just 1 dozen

It just comes down to repeating same gibberish.

I’m not going against you...

I don’t believe in triggers.  I don’t change the odds.  They can’t be changed!

I’m not changing anything but what I bet on. 

You always say increase the accuracy of your prediction but since you don’t agree with the method it’s fallacy 😂

I’m not here to change your mind!  So this is the last response you get from me on this subject.

I’ll agree to disagree.

[MoneyT101]

In reality there are no constraints. And what is likely to happen depends on the event, and amount of spins being considered.

Events are limited to 37 numbers.  You keep forgetting this.

The word is constant by the way and it means

a situation or state of affairs that does not change

Now your saying there aren’t any constants in the game 🤦‍â™,️

Not worth going back and forth with you. 

[Joe]

I don’t believe in triggers.  I don’t change the odds.  They can’t be changed!

There is some confusion between odds and probabilities here I believe. The odds I take to be the payouts, which as you rightly point out, cannot be changed. The probabilities can be though, otherwise you couldn't win, even with a biased wheel. Steve is correct in saying that you must improve the accuracy of predictions, and that means increasing the probability of a win. You're claiming that you can do that by observing past spins. Just past spins, and nothing else. This doesn't square with the assumption that outcomes are random, because if they are, all patterns are equally likely. It's only if patterns are not all equally likely that you could hope to get an advantage just looking at past spins.

[Blueprint]

There is a bias in odds.

[Herby]

Cycles 117
Same 85
Different 32

Hi Money, thanks for sending the numbers.
Cyclelength I get 117 too, but
Same: 87
Different: 30

[Joe]

There is a bias in odds.

I don't know what this is supposed to mean. If you mean the odds (payouts) aren't fair then you're correct, lol.

[luckyfella]

There is some confusion between odds and probabilities here I believe. The odds I take to be the payouts, which as you rightly point out, cannot be changed. The probabilities can be though, otherwise you couldn't win, even with a biased wheel. Steve is correct in saying that you must improve the accuracy of predictions, and that means increasing the probability of a win. You're claiming that you can do that by observing past spins. Just past spins, and nothing else. This doesn't square with the assumption that outcomes are random, because if they are, all patterns are equally likely. It's only if patterns are not all equally likely that you could hope to get an advantage just looking at past spins.

I don't know if you are active on forum to find a way to win or to regurgitate basic statistics of the roulette game.

How is that going to help you ?

I will tell you this much.

Basic math and statistics that we read on roulette forums is not enough to solve this roulette puzzle.

And your posts is about basic math of the game. With a math major(I assume you have credit hours in stats) you ought to know that.

You have to do much better than that.

You are under-performing.

Make no mistakes, average joe like me learnt from your posts. Thank you.

[Joe]

And your posts is about basic math of the game. With a math major(I assume you have credit hours in stats) you ought to know that.

The problem is that people get distracted by all the possible ways of seeing the game. There is no end to systems, but they all must be subsumed by the basic maths. And It's not really about maths but logic. You don't have to understand fancy statistics theory to realize that if all sequences or patterns are equally likely then looking at past spins won't help to increase predictive accuracy. You haven't answered my post at all; you're just saying I'm not ignorant enough to search for the holy grail, lol.

Earlier in the thread MONEYT101 claimed that roulette has limits because a number has to repeat. In that sense, I guess it does, but it's not a dependency that's useful in any way to someone actually playing roulette, because it applies to a sequence of numbers seen as a sequence, which is not the way we play roulette. We have to place one bet at time, and there are no limits in the sense that any number can hit on the next spin. We can see when a cycle comes to an end but this in no way narrows down the possibilities, so we might as well have not bothered tracking the cycle at all.

[luckyfella]

We can see when a cycle comes to an end but this in no way narrows down the possibilities, so we might as well have not bothered tracking the cycle at all.

I am not into cycles, so I'm not able to make meaningful comment.

MoneyT101 and Blueprint are the knowledgeable members on this topic.

Why don't you think it this way.

What do layman like me who learnt the roulette math found out about this math that you educated me that enable me to find some form of predictability of the spins.

Besides, saying I am ignorant, make a mistake or a scammer.

[luckyfella]

This stat little different from 33%-44%-22%

Let me give you an example.

This post by donik7777 tells me he knows what he is talking about.

I understand the math of your simple post what you try to convey, donik.

To everyone, if you fail to understand the 3 percentages that donik posted you don't have a starting point. Educate yourself.

[Joe]

What do layman like me who learnt the roulette math found out about this math that you educated me that enable me to find some form of predictability of the spins.

What is the math which you learned and why do you think it helps with prediction? If I knew that I might be able to offer more constructive comments.

[Joe]

This post by donik7777 tells me he knows what he is talking about.

You just told me you're not into cycles, but donik's post is about cycles, so how do you know that he knows what he's talking about when you said you're not able to make any meaningful comment? 

[luckyfella]

Many routes to play, you just need one...This reference pri made is a system in itself.  I will not answer questions about game play.  Its easy to read and understand the references reading the old post.

I dont put the exact spins cause 200 is to many but i can send the exact spins that gave me this results if anyone wants to test them.

Results with 200 random spins using randbetween(1,36) and betting on dozens

Cycles 117
Same 85
Different 32

Cycle 1 - 52
Cycle 2 - 47
Cycle 3 - 18

Bets placed   126
Bets won   60
   
Bets at  -1   120
Bets at -2   6
   
Won bets -1   55
Won bets -2   5

Total Profit 48 units flatbet.....29 units flatbet by spin 100

Dillon, this post is for you!

Here MoneyT posted detail numbers.

I can see Herby is working on it.

Come on guys, MoneyT has generously posted a lot of details on this thread. Do the work to find out how he arrive at those numbers. And what they mean. Understanding of those numbers is very important. Upgrade and improve your understanding.

Understanding will be your main stumbling block.