It works - RNG

[Herby]

I didn't say that the law of the third doesn't work

Nobody said that you said this above.
Reading, understanding and logic ....

[Herby]

the law of the third only 'works' because spins are independent!

The word only is wrong.

[Herby]

Of course Joe is right with most of what he says, but here is a (very) little logical mistake.

[gizmotron2]

Previous numbers and stats can't tell you what the next spin or spins are going to be on their own any more than the map can tell you what it feels like to actually walk up the hill.

I'm glad that we all agree on that point. So to be clear as crystal, past spins have no ability to predict the future.  So to beat Roulette you must use something other than prediction. Math will not predict when a trend will start, how long it will last, and when it will end. So you can't use math to beat Roulette either. So what do you have to work with? There is coincidence and luck. Both of these things exist. They don't use math and they don't use prediction. They do exist.

There are phases of good luck and phases of bad luck. They occur in randomness as coincidence. There is no predictability to them either. But they do have a common characteristic to them. They have time. They have a length to them that can be used against them or for them.  That is the skill of this.

But you mathZombies want it to always be about prediction and how right you are to point out that prediction is impossible. That makes you the donkey. You are a donkey that is stuck up to his eyeballs in mud. I'm glad too. You will be last in line and a day late to the party.

[Moxy]

I'm glad that we all agree on that point. So to be clear as crystal, past spins have no ability to predict the future.  So to beat Roulette you must use something other than prediction. Math will not predict when a trend will start, how long it will last, and when it will end. So you can't use math to beat Roulette either. So what do you have to work with? There is coincidence and luck. Both of these things exist. They don't use math and they don't use prediction. They do exist.

There are phases of good luck and phases of bad luck. They occur in randomness as coincidence. There is no predictability to them either. But they do have a common characteristic to them. They have time. They have a length to them that can be used against them or for them.  That is the skill of this.

But you mathZombies want it to always be about prediction and how right you are to point out that prediction is impossible. That makes you the donkey. You are a donkey that is stuck up to his eyeballs in mud. I'm glad too. You will be last in line and a day late to the party.

I have you gotten laid yet.  It's on me.

[gizmotron2]

I have you gotten laid yet.  It's on me.

That needs translation.

[Herby]

I have you gotten laid yet.  It's on me.

This kind of trolls makes this board very very unpleasant.

This board is a product of Steve , the quality of this board is a sign of the quality of his other products.

[Herby]

Sorry, moxy is no that bad,
the name who I meant was something like " precoxman", I forgot, it was not important enough to remember.

[Joe]

The word only is wrong.

Herby, try proving the law of the third without assuming spins are independent. It can't be done. 

[Joe]

Math will not predict when a trend will start, how long it will last, and when it will end. So you can't use math to beat Roulette either.

I'm not trying to. But physics? Yes, that can beat roulette.

[Moxy]

That needs translation.

It's a good stress reliever.   Vegas is open.   My treat.

[Herby]

proving the law of the third

proving was not the question,

the law of the third can be fullfilled if the spins are not independent

[Joe]

the law of the third can be fullfilled if the spins are not independent

Prove it. 

[INTERCEPTOR]

Newbie players 🤔

[cht]

Instead of betting on the unhit numbers after 37 spins, try betting the same number of numbers picked randomly. You'll find that the results are the same. Why? because outcomes are independent and past spins don't influence future spins.

Here're the 3 sessions where I rolled 37spins for history data then make a 37units(cover zero) even chance bet for every spin for the next 18spins to spin55. The result for each spin is either breakeven=-1, win=+35, loss=-37

Summary

session1   9w       5L        4BE       18bets
session2   6w       4L        8BE       18bets
session3   7w       4L        7BE       18bets
                  41%    24%     35%

54bets, 41%win, 24%loss and 35% breakeven(-1)

Small sample size bets based on historical data.

I provide this sample proof to disagree what you wrote.