When to Start

[ᶦ ᵃᵐ|Ä-łëx]

I am ok with that or i am on the wrong path?

[klw]

I am ok with that or i am on the wrong path?

Hi  Alexlaf -- I personally don't think you are as all you are doing is re-hashing ( great visual by the way ) a standard roulette way of thinking which loses to the house edge. Of course I might be wrong. I think he was predicting what is likely to come.
Take a look at this, it should give you some help to go down a different path.

Hmm , can't post the link , are they banned or something ?

I will re-produce the opening post of the thread here OR put " Dyksexlic's RNG Roulette Demo - HATE FREE ZONE !!
9 May 2009 " into google and the thread should come up.

Cheers.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Dyksexlic's RNG Roulette Demo - HATE FREE ZONE !!
May 09, 2009, 09:20:55 PM
SHUT AND SIT YOUR HAPPY A$$ DOWN..

Welcome to Dyksexlic's 100% Winning Roulette Demonstration..   (please open your closed 'loser' minds...  just a little!)

If you can't understand this simple roulette experiment, then please STOP playing roulette ..  You're just plain STUCK on stupid !


               
RNG Roulette Vs. Word Roulette

RNG Roulette as we all KNOW consists of 37 SEPERATE numbers. However, as I previously explained, the numbers are really just 'PLACE' holders,
and could easily be replaced with ANY other 37 'PLACE' holders (e.g 37 colours, 37 animals, 37 pictures of 'Forum Haters' etc.)

The game of RNG Roulette (contrary to 'EXPERT' oppinion) is based on unchangeable MATHEMATICAL principles and NOT random numbers.
For today's experiment I have REMOVED  the numbers from the roulette wheel / table , and replaced them with '37  RANDOM ENGLISH WORDS'.

This in NO WAY changes the 'RULES' of the game of roulette in the slightest.

GET IT ?

GOT IT ?

GOOD !


The English language consists of over 500,000 words. This number is growing daily as new words continue to be added.

To form a 38 word sentence in ENGLISH requires that you follow 'SPECIFIC' grammar rules !!!
To form a 38 spin repeating cycle using the 'PIGEONHOLE' principle in roulette requires that you follow 'SPECIFIC' betting rules !!

Am I Going Too Quickly For You?

In the game of roulette, certain 'numbers' BELONG to certain sub sets (e.g RED/BLACK/HIGH/LOW/ODD/EVEN etc).
In the English language, certain 'words' BELONG to certain sub sets (e.g NOUNS/VERBS/ADJECTIVES/ADVERBS/CONJUNCTIONS etc).

Yeh, I KNOW - You knew that 'ALREADY' right ? Silly Me.

In RNG roulette, in any group of 37 seperate 'NUMBERS' the CHANCES of anyone being able to form a coherent 38 spin cycle in a
'PIGEONHOLE' principally 'CORRECT' manner would be staggeringly HIGH, or (if you are a member of this forum, Hmm...'IMPOSSIBLE'!)

Likewise, In WORD roulette, in any group of 37 seperate WORDS, the 'CHANCES' of someone being able to form a coherent passage
using ALL 37 WORDS in an 'ENGLISH' grammatically 'CORRECT' manner would also be staggeringly HIGH ,
(funny then how members of this forum STILL manage to talk sh*t ! - Hmm...'POSSIBLE'!)

Still with me ?

:scratch_ones_head:

Time For A CHALLENGE !!!!



Now, using just one set of 37 RANDOM WORDS would be difficult enough, but supposing we added a 'CONTINUAL' SECOND data stream of random words (composed of the 37 original word 'VOCABULARY' data set) and fed them into a roulette table composed of the FIRST set (to act as our roulette 'SPIN' event) !

Would it be possible for any roulette 'System' to be able to take the SECOND data stream of words and accurately PREDICT the correct relevance of each of the 37 place holders (roulette table bets) BEFORE 1 of the words REPEATS ? - thus ORDERING them into a COHERENT English Sentence that used the 37 WORDS in the CORRECT order.

Now the 'CHANCES' of being able to do this are so high, that no computer in the world could POSSIBLY calculate the odds. If I used a machine to create the second data stream of roulette 'SPIN' words, I could be accused by 'EXPERTS' of cheating. So I thought of a better solution. Supposing I took words (which could be found on the original 37 word roulette (table') from forum posts (in the order they were posted) to act as 'RANDOM' spin events ?

Could anyone then accuse me of cheating ? I didn't choose the 'spin' words myself, did I ?
YOU DID !!!!!


STEP 1.

I chose the First Set (37 words). I selected the following passage:

Lyrics Taken from "A Spoonful Of Sugar" from the Disney movie - "Mary Poppins" -------> Hey, that sounds familiar..


"RIGHT CHILDREN, LETS PLAY A GAME.."
- "THIS IS 'FUN' ISN'T IT Mary Poppins ?"
"WELL, THAT ALL DEPENDS ON YOUR POINT OF VIEW.."
"YOU SEE, IN EVERY JOB THAT MUST BE DONE, THERE IS AN ELEMENT OF FUN.."

BTW- THere are EXACTLY 37 words in the above passage !----------------------> Well that's LUCKY isn't it ?


STEP 2.

I arranged the 37 WORDS on my 'roulette' table / 'roulette' wheel. The ordering on the carpet was unimportant as the WORDS are unrelated, however as number roulette uses a CHRONOLOGICAL ASCENDING number pattern, I used an ALPHABETICAL ASCENDING word pattern.


STEP 3.

I fed words that matched those in the 37 word set into my 100% Winning roulette system from the posts in the thread on the forum. My system created the 38 spin cycle and calculated the 'bet' amounts.


STEP 4.

I converted the 'bet' amounts to a relevance percentage for the 37 words, and ran the 100% guaranteed roulette algorithm searching for a correlation.


STEP 5.

When the system returned a REPEATER word via the 'PIGEONHOLE' principle, I translated the completed cycle into a sentence, using Babs posts as seed 'EVENTS'..

The completed 37 WORD TRANSLATION WAS THIS : -

ALL THIS FUN GAME DEPENDS ON IS A VIEW. I SEE YOUR POINT THERE !  ISN'T IT THAT CHILDREN MUST BE IN PLAY, Mary Poppins ? AN ELEMENT OF EVERY JOB IS FUN, RIGHT ?  WELL DONE, YOU !!! LET'S START..

BTW - MY ANSWER USED ALL THE EXACT SAME 37 WORDS and correctly mapped them in a grammatically correct sentence. Iit is also a PERFECT answer to Babs post.. (BOTH LOGICALLY AND GRAMMATICALLY).


GO AHEAD CHECK FOR YOURSELF  !!!!!!!

:yahoo:


BUT, THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE !!!!!!!!


The odds of this happening by 'CHANCE' are astronomical..

  :yahoo:

A CHALLENGE FOR THE HATERS...

IF YOU BELIEVE THAT I AM LYING, I DARE YOU TO TRY AND REPLICATE THIS EXPERIMENT, GENIUS !

TRY TO MAP A 37 WORD PASSAGE CORRECTLY TO ANOTHER 37 WORD PASSAGE IN A GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT WAY..

MAKE SURE YOUR 37 WORD PASSAGE CORRECTLY ANSWERS A LIVE FORUM POST, BABS !!!!!!!!!

SHOULD BE EASY FOR ALL YOU 'EXPERTS' RIGHT ?

WELL COME ON THEN 'RANDOMNESS EXPERTS', IF YOU THINK YOU CAN DO IT...

NOW ITS TIME FOR YOU TO 'PUT UP OR SHUT UP' !!!!!!!!


:yahoo:


Oh, BTW,

I had a PERFECT roulette system -----------------------> Mary Poppins is (Practically PERFECT in every way !)
I refer to believers as 'CHILDREN'------------------------> Mary Poppins (a nanny) looks after two CHILDREN
My teaching style has been called unconventional--------> Mary Poppins uses MANY unconventional magic 'methods'
The secret of my System is a mystery-------------------> Mary Poppins secrets remain a mystery.
My System appears to do the IMPOSSIBLE---------------> Mary Poppins does several IMPOSSIBLE stunts
I have INSPIRED MANY forum members-------------------> Mary Poppins INSPIRES the children in her care
         

         Nah, Its ALL just a coincidence !!!     
       

Check Babs Original Post People...
Quote from: babs on May 09, 2009, 02:08:12 PM
I never thought that you should simply hand it over, and I do no expect you to do this. You did however start the thread and boasted about being a teacher and being willing to teach us to come to a better understanding of your system, and even learning to discover your system, through your teaching.  It was my understanding that you will guide us on the path to finding the truth for ourselves. It started very promising, but now you give the impression that you were never serious about sharing your knowledge at all.  I hope that you will return to your original purpose.

A lot of us took you very serious from the beginning and we even suggested that you continue your teaching in a more private area where only those who you choose could continue. Instead you dropped the ball by getting into useless ramblings with those who oppose your ideas. We even suggested running this via an email address (thereby bypassing the members on this forum who try to "suppress your ideas")  The sad part is that you treated everybody on this forum the same way, the haters and the followers. Instead of teaching those who took you serious you submitted us to the same verbal gibberish.  I am taking you very serious and I have no reason to doubt your claim, even if some experts claim it is impossible. I have stated  in numerous posts that a huge number of impossibles have been proven possible in the past.

ok. I just hope it is not another verbal attack on those who do not believe you. I simply hope that you will take your promise seriously and give us something usefull to work with. That is all we are asking. In the beginning you gave us clues and you answered our questions honestly thereby giving us material to ponder and work with.  If you never planned to continue this, then you lied when you told us that you are a teacher... then you are simply a boaster. I believe you want to teach us, otherwise you would not have posted in the first place. Again I beseech you: leave the useless verbal debates and teach. Quite a large number take you very seriously.

Are you being deliberately thick ? Look here Mary Poppins...      :girl_wacko:

ALL THIS FUN GAME DEPENDS ON IS A VIEW. I SEE YOUR POINT THERE !  ISN'T IT THAT CHILDREN MUST BE IN PLAY, Mary Poppins ? AN ELEMENT OF EVERY JOB IS FUN, RIGHT ?  WELL DONE, YOU !!! LET'S START..


:yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo:


This will ALL make sense when you see the thread of my Roulette System Demo, Babs !!

Enjoy
Report to moderator    Logged

[TRD]

For 37 numbers to repeat themselves the probability is low .. astronomically.
Is he/she=it whatever, saying to simply bet the derived stream 37 spin as it was assembled by roulette itself !?!

As there simply ≈no chance for the roulette wheel to reproduce itself, repeating itself saying the fkcuing sentence. Someone once said roulette has no memory .. might be correct.

[TRD]

Now, using just one set of 37 RANDOM WORDS would be difficult enough, but supposing we added a 'CONTINUAL' SECOND data stream of random words (composed of the 37 original word 'VOCABULARY' data set) and fed them into a roulette table composed of the FIRST set (to act as our roulette 'SPIN' event) !

This acknowledges & defines the 37-cycle as ONE event only; in fact, goes as far as saying one EVENT = one SPIN. SPIN by SPIN the roulette randomizes its signature anew or =randonly resets itself anew.

For the new SEED to repeat itself ..

Now the 'CHANCES' of being able to do this are so high, that no computer in the world could POSSIBLY calculate the odds.

& a whole lot of camouflage.

[TRD]

Is anyone smart enough to rearrange the numbers in the way there's no repeat in the next SPIN?
Btw, I didn't choose the order so don't accuse me of cheating .. you-roulette did.

[stringbeanpc]

RIGHT
CHILDREN
LETS
PLAY
A
GAME
THIS
IS
FUN
ISNT
IT
Mary
Poppins
WELL
THAT
ALL
DEPENDS
ON
YOUR
POINT
OF
VIEW
YOU
SEE
IN
EVERY
JOB
THAT
MUST
BE
DONE
THERE
IS
AN
ELEMENT
OF
FUN

I copied the phrase into notepad, separated the words(one per line), pasted into a spreadsheet
and sorted the words alphabetically

Total of 4 words repeat
FUN
IS
OF
THAT

As first letter of each word

Seven letters did not appear            (HKNQUXZ)
Nine  letters others occurred once  (BCGJLRSVW)
Five  letters others occurred twice  (DEFMY)
Five letters occurred multiple times  (AIOPT)

Any ideas ?

[ᶦ ᵃᵐ|Ä-łëx]

?

[stringbeanpc]

Alex, Please explain what the numbers within the red box represent

[MoneyT101]

Alex, Please explain what the numbers within the red box represent

The position in the original table

[ᶦ ᵃᵐ|Ä-łëx]

Yes the position of the first 37...

[TRD]

The point of the exercise is .. is its ≈impossible, its just a derailment, & a sarcastic one .. the real point of value is made before that.

[TRD]

CHT relays:

"There are few issues that are misleading that Dyslexic posted that's mathematically incorrect.

The first is the application of PhP.

It's not the complete cycle of 37+1 spins to get a repeat that PhP is about.

It's about" x" spins that is lesser than 38 spins that use PhP principle to get a repeat. The larger value of "x" gives a higher confidence level vv.

The second is this misleading suggestion of 100% winning hermetically at 38spins.

This is not the application of PhP.

Independent trials means this is a stochastical model with uncertainty which is expressed probabilistically with confidence interval.

Third, PhP defines the probabilistic certainty of "x". By itself, it can be exploited but the edge is small.

To get the higher edge you have to define "x" with another math principle. That's not discussed on RRBB's thread.

That's why I conclude that Dyslexic does not have proper understanding of PhP and RRBB more likely does not know the complete solution.

Finally, since you guys are attempting to find a solution the first thing is to correct your understanding about "stitching". In the context of math, the current interpretation of "stitching" is wrong.

Second, the understanding about cycles is wrong. It's not about cycles per se but "PhP cycle", that is cycles with the application of PhP.

Thirdly, there's no such thing as a non-random game of independent trials. This is wrong.

For starters correct your current understanding of PhP which is wrong."

[TRD]

The way I see it is simply this.. bs

Feed the original 37 numbers (=words) into rng, to make you a new batch = derived stream.

Regarding rng generated words =numbers, the only question is =37-spins including repeats played, or using 37-marquee uniques as appeared skipping the repeats.

Rng its ≈incapable of doing =reproducing the thing all over again; some numbers ?must coincide.

There might be a detail to it of betting multiple su positions changed at each spin according with the current derived stream to bet:

eg. #26 B H E - all SUs matching the parameter,
it might be accompanied with other positions matchimg it as the guaard or laying off bets
eg: a combination of ... B H E, 3rd DZ, 2nd CL, 5th DS , Q?


But he clearly states,let the wheel randomize = choose for you the defining parameter.

[stringbeanpc]

The position in the original table

Yes the position of the first 37...

Ok, first (and last,if word appears more than once) position of the original

[6th-sense]

CHT relays:

"There are few issues that are misleading that Dyslexic posted that's mathematically incorrect.

The first is the application of PhP.

It's not the complete cycle of 37+1 spins to get a repeat that PhP is about.

It's about" x" spins that is lesser than 38 spins that use PhP principle to get a repeat. The larger value of "x" gives a higher confidence level vv.

The second is this misleading suggestion of 100% winning hermetically at 38spins.

This is not the application of PhP.

Independent trials means this is a stochastical model with uncertainty which is expressed probabilistically with confidence interval.

Third, PhP defines the probabilistic certainty of "x". By itself, it can be exploited but the edge is small.

To get the higher edge you have to define "x" with another math principle. That's not discussed on RRBB's thread.

That's why I conclude that Dyslexic does not have proper understanding of PhP and RRBB more likely does not know the complete solution.

Finally, since you guys are attempting to find a solution the first thing is to correct your understanding about "stitching". In the context of math, the current interpretation of "stitching" is wrong.

Second, the understanding about cycles is wrong. It's not about cycles per se but "PhP cycle", that is cycles with the application of PhP.

Thirdly, there's no such thing as a non-random game of independent trials. This is wrong.

For starters correct your current understanding of PhP which is wrong."

Nice summary jake,,giving you the thumbs up