Roulette has no memory but statistics have different opinion!

[huskerdu]

Rule nr. 1:
Roulette has no memory and the next outcome is independent from the previous outcomes.
Rule nr.2 :
The next outcomes are affected by the previous outcomes.

If Rule nr.1 is right then Rule nr.2 is wrong and  vice versa .
- Right ?
- Wrong!
Both rules have right and I will explain:

Let’s start with Rule nr.1.
No body will say that it is wrong.
Ex. For an EC outcome to come up  BLACJK or RED is 50% (ok, there is the zero, but don’t stick for the moment in this) no matter what the previous outcome have been. It will always be 50% because it will be either BLACK or RED.

Let’s continue with Rule nr.1 to examine if it is wrong or right.
Let’s say that B comes out.
On the next spin there is a 50% for another B to come.
But keeping in mind that the previous spin was B, for the BB to come out the chances are 25%. The other 75% of chances are for the creation of BR, RB and RR.
After BB for the next B to come out (independently) is again 50%, but for having in mind the previous BB for a string BBB to come out is 12,5%.
So based on the 1st rule we have for the 3rd BLACK 50% of chances to come, but at the same time, having in mind the previous BB there is 12,5% chances for the 3rd BLACK to come and have a string of BBB.
That’s why statistics show that for 2.036 spins, those 1023 results are created:
10 in a row - will occur __1 time 
09 in a row - will occur __2 times 
08 in a row - will occur __4 times 
07 in a row - will occur __8 times 
06 in a row - will occur _16 times 
05 in a row - will occur _32 times 
04 in a row - will occur _64 times 
03 in a row - will occur 128 times 
02 in a row - will occur 256 times 
01 in a row - will occur 512 times 

Let’s say another example:
For a number to come is 1/37 chances
For the same number to come in the next spin independently, there are also 1/37 chances.
But for both the same numbers to come one after the other the ccances are 1 / 1396
For the third same number to come after the same two numbers the possibilities are: 1 / 50653
For a 4th same number to come in a row it is 1 / 1874161
For a 5th is about  1 / 70 millions
For a 6th is 2,5 billions!
……..
But at the same time for every spin independently for a number to come the chances remain /137.
So, even if it’s very weird, both rules nr.1 & 2 are right.
How can we take advantage of the above ?
I have come up with an idea, which I will elaborate in my next post
Until then, I would appreciate your positive or negative comments.
Thanks

[Serendipity]

totally agree!
I'll be waiting for your next post!
thx!

[JAMBOBRA2020]

Rule nr. 1:
Roulette has no memory and the next outcome is independent from the previous outcomes.
Rule nr.2 :
The next outcomes are affected by the previous outcomes.

If Rule nr.1 is right then Rule nr.2 is wrong and  vice versa .
- Right ?
- Wrong!
Both rules have right and I will explain:

Let’s start with Rule nr.1.
No body will say that it is wrong.
Ex. For an EC outcome to come up  BLACJK or RED is 50% (ok, there is the zero, but don’t stick for the moment in this) no matter what the previous outcome have been. It will always be 50% because it will be either BLACK or RED.

Let’s continue with Rule nr.1 to examine if it is wrong or right.
Let’s say that B comes out.
On the next spin there is a 50% for another B to come.
But keeping in mind that the previous spin was B, for the BB to come out the chances are 25%. The other 75% of chances are for the creation of BR, RB and RR.
After BB for the next B to come out (independently) is again 50%, but for having in mind the previous BB for a string BBB to come out is 12,5%.
So based on the 1st rule we have for the 3rd BLACK 50% of chances to come, but at the same time, having in mind the previous BB there is 12,5% chances for the 3rd BLACK to come and have a string of BBB.
That’s why statistics show that for 2.036 spins, those 1023 results are created:
10 in a row - will occur __1 time 
09 in a row - will occur __2 times 
08 in a row - will occur __4 times 
07 in a row - will occur __8 times 
06 in a row - will occur _16 times 
05 in a row - will occur _32 times 
04 in a row - will occur _64 times 
03 in a row - will occur 128 times 
02 in a row - will occur 256 times 
01 in a row - will occur 512 times 

Let’s say another example:
For a number to come is 1/37 chances
For the same number to come in the next spin independently, there are also 1/37 chances.
But for both the same numbers to come one after the other the ccances are 1 / 1396
For the third same number to come after the same two numbers the possibilities are: 1 / 50653
For a 4th same number to come in a row it is 1 / 1874161
For a 5th is about  1 / 70 millions
For a 6th is 2,5 billions!
……..
But at the same time for every spin independently for a number to come the chances remain /137.
So, even if it’s very weird, both rules nr.1 & 2 are right.
How can we take advantage of the above ?
I have come up with an idea, which I will elaborate in my next post
Until then, I would appreciate your positive or negative comments.
Thanks

I would say the probability remains the same. If the last result was B then the probability of BB and BR are both 50 percent (not including 0). Same if it was BB. The probability of being BBB or BBR would be 50 percent and so on. Before any results the probability of BB, BR, RR, RB are all 25 percent. But once the spins  start the probability changes as there are a lower number of possible outcomes based on the set of spins you are calculating odds for . This is my understanding. Could be wrong

[Joe]

After BB for the next B to come out (independently) is again 50%, but for having in mind the previous BB for a string BBB to come out is 12,5%.
So based on the 1st rule we have for the 3rd BLACK 50% of chances to come, but at the same time, having in mind the previous BB there is 12,5% chances for the 3rd BLACK to come and have a string of BBB.

There is no contradiction between the rules if you put it like that, but your argument is faulty.

Both rules cannot be right at the same time considering the next spin, so you cannot say, 'given black has already hit twice, the chance of it hitting again is 12.5%'.

You can correctly say, before you have observed any outcomes, that the chance of 3 blacks in a row is 12.5%, but when you see BB, the 12.5% no longer applies because the BB is in the past and independent (consistent with rule 1). Probability is about the uncertain future, not the past which we know is certain therefore its probability is 100%. 

[gizmotron2]

Both rules cannot be right at the same time considering the next spin, so you cannot say, 'given black has already hit twice, the chance of it hitting again is 12.5%'.

Let's look at what the real odds are. If you see BB then the next bet is still 47% chance of hitting black again. Each spin is independent. There are no odds for a trend occurring at an exact moment in time in the future. There is no way to predict how long it will last either. You must begin with a guess and nothing more.  If you see 10 blacks in a row and bet on it to continue, and it does keep hitting black for ten more spins, a total of 20 blacks in a row, then you just won 9 net wins. But if you don't speculate on it for math reasons then you get nothing. So you are speculating on 1 lost bet vs all the bets that you win from the trend. The issue now becomes the idea that you will lose way more first tries than is mathematically expected. Funny how math works against you at twice the level as it really does in these discussions, if just by math alone you lose half of all first try bets But you get to keep all the rest of the bets that go on to 2, 3, 4, etc... The point is to get good at observing times when it is working and times when it is not. That is a trend too. There are times when swarms of wins group strongly as in a kind of domination. The same goes for a losing streaks. You must know what the betting on trends conditions are. There is no math that works for the current occurring conditions. If there were this game would have died centuries ago.

[Joe]

There are no odds for a trend occurring at an exact moment in time in the future.

Not so. Tell me what the trend is and I'll tell you what the odds are for it occurring at any time. For instance, if a trend is 3 reds or blacks in a row the odds are 12.5%!

Or if the trend is bit more subtle, say at least 5 reds out of the last 8 spins, the probability of that happening in the next 8 spins (at any time) is about 36%. In fact however you define a trend, you can calculate the odds of it occurring. But you're right that there is no way of predicting it, so a guess is as good as anything.

The point is to get good at observing times when it is working and times when it is not.

But you can only say it's working during the event. You can only get good at it if there are reliable signs or indicators for it, but you agree that spins are independent and prediction isn't possible. What use is it to just observe the times when it's working - any fool can do that. Observing that it's currently working is not a sign that it will continue to work.

[gizmotron2]

Binomial distribution arithmetic will tell you the odds or chances for a continuous chain of events but they have no capacity to say when a continuous chain of events start, how long they will last, or when they will end.

But you can only say it's working during the event. You can only get good at it if there are reliable signs or indicators for it, but you agree that spins are independent and prediction isn't possible. What use is it to just observe the times when it's working - any fool can do that. Observing that it's currently working is not a sign that it will continue to work.

You have just stated the obvious. "any fool can do that."  And the follow up is true too. There IS no indicator that it will continue.  What I find funny most of all is that you can't see a value in knowing this much and finding a way to use it to your advantage. Instead you use it to not see something that I have been successful in teaching others. I appreciate your point of view even more now. Any fool can ignore something that is beyond their scope of understanding because it offers no guarantees. It must be a prediction of the future in order to work. So I'm pleased beyond words that there a people that will learn the truth much later and perhaps too late. I get a huge sense of accomplishment from knowing that I'm right about this now and will one day be proven to have been right all along. You don't need to know the future in order to speculate on chance. You just need to target when speculation is in a favorable or positive condition. Nobody wants to talk about how favorable conditions tend to act when they are swarming. That would imply that they accept the notion of favorable conditions while not having a mathematical guarantee.

[6th-sense]

Joe it’s all about odds to you..not what actually is happening..

What the wheel must do or has to do...

People like yourself cannot perceive the total overall concept..

You do know it’s impossible to get 19 numbers out without a pair or a repeat the restrictions won’t allow it..

A lot less with table numbers and wheel numbers combined

Yet you know it’s mathematically possible to get 37 unique numbers out

It will never happen

Of course maths say it could but it won’t

It never has and never will

Lots you don’t understand away from maths I don’t think you ever will

Examples are let’s take unhits from cycle one ..say 12...

Or 10

Next cycle they won’t all come out rarely do but you can basically guarantee that the unhits count hit will match next cycle give one or two with repeats will match that number

Same for islands etc

It’s not all about the odds or maths but what’s in front of you

It’s what’s happening and will happen

How you capitalise on it is different then you can use your maths with statistics

[Steve]

Husker and 6th sense, you're repeating gamblers fallacy. It has all been explained before.

[Joe]

Giz, no offense, but you're full of hot air. Why not stop the blather and show us how great your system is on MPR? Actions and results speak louder than words.

[Joe]

People like yourself cannot perceive the total overall concept..

You do know it’s impossible to get 19 numbers out without a pair or a repeat the restrictions won’t allow it..

A lot less with table numbers and wheel numbers combined

Yet you know it’s mathematically possible to get 37 unique numbers out

It will never happen

Of course maths say it could but it won’t

It never has and never will

Lots you don’t understand away from maths I don’t think you ever will

6th, and what you and others don't seem to understand is that if your ideas had any merit they would have been 'mathematized' already.  Someone would have come up with a formula or algorithm which formalized 'reading randomness, or 'situational awareness' etc. Would you then be saying that there is more to it than the maths?  The fact that there is no such formula shows that the theory is bunkum, or at least highly subjective and unreliable. Until someone comes up with some new maths which proves that the old maths is flawed, I prefer to stick with the tried and trusted. And by the way, it's not just the maths which proves your ideas don't work, actual play and simulations do too. 

I'd love for you to be right, but we have to respect reality. It should always have the final say. Again, you just repeat this stuff over and over like many others, but there is no data which backs up your claims - none! Show me the data! It's easy for the 'mathboys' to prove that systems don't work, now it's time for those who disagree to prove that we're wrong instead of endlessly asserting it on forums like religious zealots.

[cht]

Joe it’s all about odds to you..not what actually is happening..

What the wheel must do or has to do...

People like yourself cannot perceive the total overall concept..

You do know it’s impossible to get 19 numbers out without a pair or a repeat the restrictions won’t allow it..

A lot less with table numbers and wheel numbers combined

Yet you know it’s mathematically possible to get 37 unique numbers out

It will never happen

Of course maths say it could but it won’t

It never has and never will

Lots you don’t understand away from maths I don’t think you ever will

Examples are let’s take unhits from cycle one ..say 12...

Or 10

Next cycle they won’t all come out rarely do but you can basically guarantee that the unhits count hit will match next cycle give one or two with repeats will match that number

Same for islands etc

It’s not all about the odds or maths but what’s in front of you

It’s what’s happening and will happen

How you capitalise on it is different then you can use your maths with statistics

Hi Gordon, This is the game I played flatbet from spin38 onwards.
Bet 18 pockets plus zero.
Every bet has different 18 numbers.
So I control,
1. when I bet that's when odds is in my favour, and
2. I select the 18numbers to bet

Don't want to spend more time on rs. This idea may be useful to you.
I will send the game to your gmail.

[cht]

repeat

[precogmiles]

You do know it’s impossible to get 19 numbers out without a pair or a repeat the restrictions won’t allow it..

It's not impossible it happened just the other day.

[Joe]

Examples are let’s take unhits from cycle one ..say 12...

Or 10

Next cycle they won’t all come out rarely do but you can basically guarantee that the unhits count hit will match next cycle give one or two with repeats will match that number

How many times does it have to be said? Outcomes are independent so what's happened in a previous cycle has no effect on what will happen in the next!