The "Statistical Imbalance" fallacy

[carvigno]

Long life to roulette!
Joe, we are talking different languages. You are talking about math. Im talking about coincidences due to frecuencies, tendencies, rhythms, etc that are inherent to random outcomes.  It is about time and place, matrix again.
Where you see nonsense, someone else may see an opportunity.

This thread doesnt go anywhere. It is the same deja vu. 
Years away from forums to watch trends repeat.
It is the same melody all the time. Always black is favored. Red must be out of the equation.
You dont open to other ideas while knowing math based systems fail.
Good luck.

[travis]

Hola carlos soy leo su compañero de argentina creador del juego de FR.

Hello Carlos, I'm glad to read that you are active

I'm Leo with whom we share a time on Skype

I would like to contact you

greetings 555

[Steeefan2014]

Years away from forums to watch trends repeat.

Aren't repeaters one of the most debated subject in history of roulette? Why so surprised?

[carvigno]

Aren't repeaters one of the most debated subject in history of roulette? Why so surprised?

LOL Good point there!!! By chance, im talking about repeaters (events repeating) but it seems most roulette players dont see them.

[Joe]

Still there is a dependency to the last outcomes. I mean... if you had 36 different numbers in the previous 36 spins, the possibility that the 37 spin would be the last unhit number is very, very low.

The dependency you perceive is an illusion based on the patterns you see in roulette. You infer from the fact that you never see all numbers hit in 37 spins that the chance of the unhit number must be smaller than 1/37. It's the same with many other systems which are based on this principle. eg you hardly ever see 15 reds in a row so having seen 14 you reason (incorrectly) that the chance of the next red must be less than 18/37.

Apparently this cognitive bias is so strong that it overrides even empirical results (like falkor has done) which show that the probabilities don't change at all based on what's just happened. But I can understand why those who are so invested in systems believe it because it's the foundation of so many. Unfortunately, the foundation is nothing but sand.

[Joe]

Where you see nonsense, someone else may see an opportunity.

It's not a question of perception, but fact. There are no opportunities in a stream of random numbers; it's a bit like saying someone is a married bachelor.

But good luck!

[Steeefan2014]

The dependency you perceive is an illusion based on the patterns you see in roulette. You infer from the fact that you never see all numbers hit in 37 spins that the chance of the unhit number must be smaller than 1/37. It's the same with many other systems which are based on this principle. eg you hardly ever see 15 reds in a row so having seen 14 you reason (incorrectly) that the chance of the next red must be less than 18/37.

Apparently this cognitive bias is so strong that it overrides even empirical results (like falkor has done) which show that the probabilities don't change at all based on what's just happened. But I can understand why those who are so invested in systems believe it because it's the foundation of so many. Unfortunately, the foundation is nothing but sand.

It was just an example based on a very improbable situation.

[Steeefan2014]

LOL Good point there!!! By chance, im talking about repeaters (events repeating) but it seems most roulette players dont see them.

I know what you were referring to. It was just a joke.

Anyway, as far as I saw on this forum and others, there are a lot of players aware of the fact that events repeat themselves sooner or later. It's a fact! This really happens. You seem to be aware of that too. And, considering this, enlighten me/us on how should the bets be placed with the help with Kimo Li's tracker attached to this post? 
Just asking...

[Steeefan2014]

I understand, but you would not qualify for a lesson. You have not read my book.

An idea crossed my mind! Kimo, prove to me that you have the HG, share it with me and not that I will pay you whatever that cost of your lessons are, but I have a better proposal for you: 10% of the profits I will make using your method! Forever (well... with this corona virus around the world don't know how long is forever  , but still....)

[Kimo Li]

I know what you were referring to. It was just a joke.

Anyway, as far as I saw on this forum and others, there are a lot of players aware of the fact that events repeat themselves sooner or later. It's a fact! This really happens. You seem to be aware of that too. And, considering this, enlighten me/us on how should the bets be placed with the help with Kimo Li's tracker attached to this post? 
Just asking...

This is Katilla's spreadsheet, not mine.

[Kimo Li]

An idea crossed my mind! Kimo, prove to me that you have the HG, share it with me and not that I will pay you whatever that cost of your lessons are, but I have a better proposal for you: 10% of the profits I will make using your method! Forever (well... with this corona virus around the world don't know how long is forever  , but still....)

Sorry, did it with some people. They simply disappeared.

[Kimo Li]

It's not a question of perception, but fact. There are no opportunities in a stream of random numbers; it's a bit like saying someone is a married bachelor.

But good luck!

Sorry for your closed mind.

[Kimo Li]

Not only doesnt he provide proof. There are some serious red flags and contradictions.

Also I haven't seen even one thing that supports his claims.

I show you proof and you will see the HG. Not a win win situation.

[Kimo Li]

What's wrong with members of this forum? Do they not meet some of your criteria? What's to stop members of this forum going to your site?

Ok, so that means that tracking past spins can have no bearing on future spins, do you agree?

But tracking past spins is essential for using your system, is it not? Do you see the contradiction?

No mathematical logic, therefore, not subjected to your mathematical parameters. Carlos knows the concept. He tries to explain to you all but nothing is registering.

[Kimo Li]

Isn't that a little arrogant? Well apparently you're wrong, because carvigno has done it. Or at least, he's figured out how to win consistently with only the information in your book. Assuming he's telling the truth and has not just hit a lucky streak, of course.

Lesson one is not the HG
Lesson three is.