Roulette has no memory but statistics have different opinion!

[precogmiles]

Sort of fun. I moved up in my win rate even though I descended at one point in the session. Gads, a plus $700 increase when I was only going after $100 in the fourth session. I'm up over a $1000, 20% increase in bankroll on the first day. And I hit it twice in one session.

That's good. It seems the 30s was annoying you, maybe roulette simulator would work better for your method.

It would be good to see some of your plays of RS and how you follow the trend.

[precogmiles]

I've  just finished a few games on MPR

theprecogmiles   
Bank: 11972   
Spins: 180   
Amount bet: 11841   
Amount won: 18612   
Winrate: 1.5718267

[gizmotron2]

maybe roulette simulator would work better for your method.

It would be good to see some of your plays of RS and how you follow the trend.

So what or where is RS ?

[huskerdu]

First of all, I would like to thank AYK for the fantastic tracker :
link:://ayk.bplaced.net/tracker8/
And also  RAYMANZ for the MPR
link:://:.rouletteplayers.org/register
I didn’t know both of them so far.
Secondly, I would like to say this:
I started this thread saying that in the roulette game, there are 2 rules, completely different each other, but at the same time both are true.:
•   Rule Nr1. Roulette has no memory and the next spin is independent of the previous spins.
•   Rule Nr.2 The previous spins have an impact on the next spins because of the statistics. Even in randomness, there are statistics that put a limit to randomness.
We all agree that the rule Nr.1 is completely right
But at the same time we all accept the rule Nr.2 , because the 99,99% of the systems in this forum from everybody are based on the previous spins.
No matter if our system is based on E/C (R/B, O/E, H/L), on dozens or columns, on streets -double streets, on matrix, on repeaters, on roulette sectors,  all of us look the previous spins in order to start betting.
Are we all wrong?

[RayManZ]

So what or where is RS ?

link:s://roulette-simulator.info/

[gizmotron2]

link:s://roulette-simulator.info/

That was not fun. I can't log in as gizmotron because it would use my gmail account's email that is already used somehow. Then it wanted me to download a bunch of extraneous software and open it. How dumb is that? I don't think so. If this website fu**s with you this much I'm pretty sure to watch out for it. There is no option to get my missing password and I don't know if I ever tried to gamble there or not before. But that shoving of software that is suspicious is way beyond realistic. My answer is no to this BS. This crap proves nothing anyway. Only real money and real play matters. I can't wait until the casinos open back up again. It could be more than a year or two.

[Joe]

there are statistics that put a limit to randomness.

No, there aren't. People say stuff like 'nobody has ever seen 100 reds in a row or 37 different numbers in 37 spins' because they think it's proof that random does have limits, but that's not because of any hard-wired limits. How can there be limits when on every spin all numbers are equally likely? There are only limits in situations where outcomes get 'used up', as in card games where the cards aren't replaced. Roulette is a bottomless pit of 37 numbers.

You might object by saying that in practical terms there are limits, if not in theory. But all the data contradicts this. If there really were limits then systems like waiting for 10 reds in a row and then betting black would make some difference and limit your losing runs, but they don't. Take the system you suggested earlier - wait for a predefined pattern to partially show and then bet that it won't complete. Try doing this with a longer pattern, say 30 spins. No matter how long the pattern is and how much of it you wait for it makes no difference to how soon you get your first win when betting against it. That's because past results are totally irrelevant to what comes next. The feeling that they are relevant is a cognitive bias, that's all.

There is really no need for endless debates about this. Anyone can test for themselves that past spins don't influence future spins. It's the only cure for the gambler's fallacy. 

[Joe]

People say stuff like 'nobody has ever seen 100 reds in a row or 37 different numbers in 37 spins' because they think it's proof that random does have limits, but that's not because of any hard-wired limits.

So why, then? It's because there haven't been enough spins yet! Stats like those are dependent on the number of spins; generate enough spins and you'll see things you've never seen before. If you generate trillions of spins on a supercomputer you'll see many more 'rare' events than you see on your home PC, because it will just take too long on it.

[Steeefan2014]

So why, then? It's because there haven't been enough spins yet! Stats like those are dependent on the number of spins; generate enough spins and you'll see things you've never seen before. If you generate trillions of spins on a supercomputer you'll see many more 'rare' events than you see on your home PC, because it will just take too long on it.

The ONLY sure thing in roulette is that in 38 spins you have at least one repeat...

[Steve]

The rare event argument means you don't understand the basics of roulette odds and payouts.

It's the basics, yet many people argue the point like there's some big conspiracy.

The proof is in their face and they don't even see it. It's like someone arguing 5+5 doesnt equal 10. And they want to argue it, because they don't get it.

[gizmotron2]

The rare event argument means you don't understand the basics of roulette odds and payouts.

You are so right . The perfect reoccurring pattern is so rare that you would be lucky to see it maybe 4 or 5 time in your lifetime and that's if you play a lot.  It's so rare. I saw the same dozen sleep for 32 spins in a row. Once. I have never seen it happen even close to that ever again. You must respect the math.

[Steve]

IT'S NOT ABOUT NOT SEEING IT.

IT'S ABOUT THE ODDS OF ANY EVENT, THE PAYOUT WHEN IT OCCURS, AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ODDS AND PAYOUT.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to build a winning system around an event that you'll probably never see. If you try to do that, you don't understand the basics.

[gizmotron2]

IT'S NOT ABOUT NOT SEEING IT.

IT'S ABOUT THE ODDS OF ANY EVENT, THE PAYOUT WHEN IT OCCURS, AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ODDS AND PAYOUT.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to build a winning system around an event that you'll probably never see. If you try to do that, you don't understand the basics.

You will pay the price of the fool if you try to build a system based on any extreme rare event. I'm only prepared to exploit them when I see them. That's five times in 25 years. I killed the casino each time and I drew a huge crowd while doing it. But I'm never hunting for them. It's like knowing a good thing and being prepared. People watching have no idea what is happening. It's just a perfect pattern executing for a good spell. And anyone that knows math knows that these things have a mathematical possibility.

[gizmotron2]

Cool, up another $1,000 just using Red /Black and reading randomness. In other words, no charts, just the marquee as a single group chart. I could have stopped at $100+ a long way back.

[precogmiles]

Theprecogmiles is now in 10th position on MPR out of 2000 players.