Step In To My Game

[luckyfella]

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? 

Are you saying you don't understand donik's post ?

Man, you are worse than donik.

I leave it to MoneyT to help you guys. Cheers.

[Joe]

Are you saying you don't understand donik's post ?

No, I'm saying that you told me you're not into cycles when I said that cycles don't make any difference to what comes next. Now you're saying that donik knows what he's talking about - but he's talking about cycles - which you say you don't know anything about!

If you don't understand the contradiction I can't help you.

[luckyfella]

No, I'm saying that you told me you're not into cycles when I said that cycles don't make any difference to what comes next. Now you're saying that donik knows what he's talking about - but he's talking about cycles - which you say you don't know anything about!

If you don't understand the contradiction I can't help you.

I am not stupid. I understand what I wrote.

Your post confirms to me today you are here to show off you know alot, intellectual guy. Enjoy your smart intellectual status on forum. 

[Winner]

There s only one cycle the next spin red / black
Why this long thread on cycles . Trying putting a bet selection that doesn ‘t happen .
Ex.1 loss every 2000 games .marty that is .

[MoneyT101]

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.

Joe, I honestly enjoy reading your post.  You are very knowledgeable with the math of the game.

The issue is; somethings in math are hard to explain.

I agree with you roulette is random.  But it’s random to an extent because it only has 37 numbers to be random with.

Now listen very carefully.... the ASSUMPTION is every event is equally likely.

The fact is that some events happen more then others.  This goes unnoticed when you play and only focus on 1 spin.  But when you combine spins it’s easier to notice...

Best way to explain this is using 37 numbers with a repeat on the 38 number.

How many times will we reach all 37 unique numbers if we track 1,000,000 spins.  I believe the highest recorded set was 32 uniques with no repeat.

How many times will no repeat come before spin 18?  It will happen but how many times will it happen vs not happening? 

Someone in this forum posted a chart showing how repeats come from last 18 numbers.  It proves what you already know.  You can do this test yourself and verify it. I attached the chart below

Take the last repeated number and count how many spins until the next repeat.. Once again I repeat knowing this info is just the beginning.  Finding a way to apply it is another thing.

Steve says it’s useless info but many have found a way to apply it.

So I’m playing wrong cause I’m looking at sequences and you're looking a spins?  I thought the point was to find a way to win. Shouldn’t matter how you play but to win.

[ati]

Why is this necessary to convince each other about certain views and beliefs that doesn't hurt anybody? No need to get annoyed if some members don't agree with you. Of course every non believer would like to see the proof and the application, it would be years of work saved for them.

I personally enjoy chasing the "impossible". And also playing with numbers, analyzing sets, finding connection and having cryptic discussions with like minded people. I even gained useful excel skills that I can use in my daily work.
But I won't deny that my ultimate aim is to beat the game to be able to supplement my income.

[ati]

If I'm mistaken, I WANT someone to prove it to me. I WANT someone to show me a better way to win, because then I'll use it.

I'm curious, if someone posted a proof or an actual application, would you shut down the forum? Something that everyone can have (for free), can quickly become worthless.

[MoneyT101]

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

I used pri original cycle sheet to bring the stat.  I believe there is a mistake when same happens at the beginning. 

I calculated every bet manually tho.  So each bet and each win or loss doesn’t affect the result.  I just used the sheet to count how many cycles and same/different

[MoneyT101]

Why is this necessary to convince each other about certain views and beliefs that doesn't hurt anybody? No need to get annoyed if some members don't agree with you. Of course every non believer would like to see the proof and the application, it would be years of work saved for them.

If I was saying something outrageous like I beat roulette cause I change the odds.  I can understand Steve addressing me.

But to address things cause my point of view is different even tho it still doesn’t disagree with what you’re saying. 

I’m not trying to change anyone view.  They can believe whatever....just quit participating in a topic you have no agreement on.

Like that one guy that came in here and called BS.  He still reading the thread...

Why? if you don’t agree with what is being said? ( not saying to leave, just pointing it out, why Stay?)

I guess entertainment value Hahahah

‘The repeaters club are back with their nonsense.  💻🤬

‘Let’s call the squad ☎️

‘Math police assemble 🚓🚨

😂😂😂

[Blueprint]

link:s://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/75ce6f42-8b60-4735-a3a4-6232fe1b1c09

[MoneyT101]

link:s://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/75ce6f42-8b60-4735-a3a4-6232fe1b1c09

This is the handshake no secret 🤞

👌🤘👈🖖🤙👋

[Blueprint]

 

[ati]

My post was directed to luckyfella. He went on quite a rant to argue about something that he cannot or doesn't want to prove. Writing with an angrier tone and calling everyone stupid won't have a better chance of convincing them.

[MoneyT101]

My post was directed to luckyfella. He went on quite a rant to argue about something that he cannot or doesn't want to prove. Writing with an angrier tone and calling everyone stupid won't have a better chance of convincing them.

Yea but ati, what you said is also true for steve and anyone else that has their own views.  If they don’t agree just go disagree somewhere else.  I’m not saying anything different just looking at another angle

You’ve seen people ask me about my post and I correct my language.  Sorry I can’t find the correct words to use each and every time.  But I admit when I’m wrong. 

All the people that disagree just need to understand.....

No one is talking about triggers
Or
Changing the odds
Or
Having control over the wheel

The random wheel will do what ever it wants with 37 numbers each spin.  WE have no control over the result.!  But based on the results and combine results it can only do so much because this random is finite and not infinite!

Now if anyone can tell me where did my view go against your belief?

-I didn’t claim each spin isn’t random
-I didn’t claim the odds change
-I didn’t claim to beat house edge
-I didn’t claim each spin isn’t starting with 37 numbers

So what exactly is your issue with my point of view? ( everyone saying I’m speaking fallacy and BS)

[Blueprint]

who cares?  why are you trying to explain yourself?  for what purpose?