Sputnik's March

[nottophammer]

Alex & P.S
5x-1; #15.
8x-3; #15
If Alex has the spins correct look at spin 3.
But 98 spins for #15 to go 8x; over 3 laps.
Enough said.

[Person S]

That's how Sputnik's march turned into Turbo's march 

[nottophammer]

I'll ask all on RF. This riddle, is it true or misleading you.
Here's the riddle.
To anyone who tests this and wants to post :
"I bet the top 3 numbers at all times and it lost !!" - please do a little bit of thinking first.

Playing just the lead number, or playing all 3 of the top 3 numbers all the time WILL not work.
You're going to figure out how to do it though and then you can either keep it to yourself or not.
If you need to use a negative progression, or you're betting all 3 every spin - you are doing it wrong.
I just wanted to throw that in because I already see a post coming with the quote I used above.
Make predictions and select your numbers properly.

[nottophammer]

1. You cherry picked a session where only 3 numbers appear in a session. There is often way more numbers, real session:
1x.....10
2x.....14
3x.....0
4x.....10
5x.....7
6x.....5
7x.....18
8x.....20
9x.....7
10x.....7
11x.....7
12x.....34
13x.....34
14x.....7
15x.....20
16x.....20
and 20 continues...
The above is Bozidar reply.
Will this sink in.
8x-1, #20. Shame we don't have the spin count.
Where is #20 on laps 9x-10x-11x-12x-13x-14x-15x.
Has it taken 252 spins?
How many spins does 8x-1 to 15x-1 take on Alex's chart?
In Turbo's opening graph, there's 11 to choose or bet.
Bozidar shows only 8. Piece of piss to be plus

[nottophammer]

Job done.

[Alberto50]

"If you make a bet with physics, it implies that the wheel is biased, right? And either the sector or the number will beat faster than expected. But if we, for example, use a system similar to yours, but only using maths, why would we be on different numbers? "

What maths? No one uses maths, they use patterns over and over, or some weird "formulas" to pretend they can log or square rott the next number, by few last numbers....... Tell me then how your your math would work, lets see.

[Alberto50]

I am not saying No on what you referring not either Yes..
 Does anyone else agree with this so we throw everything else on the bin?

It's not like you can agree or not, it's the only way, explain why any other method would work, there's none.

[ᶦ ᵃᵐ|Ä-łëx]

I want you to post here one (strategy) to be base on what you saying now and how to play it,so I can make some test let's say on live wheel with a (dealer)..

[Alberto50]

I want you to post here one (strategy) to be base on what you saying now and how to play it,so I can make some test let's say on live wheel with a (dealer)..

Steven's roulette computers, Jafco roulette computers would still do it on old wheels, about forester's stuff it should work on tilde old wheels, mark howe stuff doesn't work and probably it's out of "business" if you can call it that way, i don't know any other vendors, it's very rare thing to find these devices, even on the parts of the internet that you probably shouldn't be on, i also made a extremely potent software to use it as a computer, which should work on easy to medium wheels, as long as the ball doesn't bounce like this junk found in online casinos.

When it comes to dealer signature, i never liked it since it takes time to find a good dealer, as i said i made my own prediction software, so i can't really post anything on how to do it, except few movies that jafco made, again on old fashion wheels, easily beaten, but still the accuracy clearly is improved.

To identify a dealer signature i still would say that you need a custom-made software, in order for it to be applicable in land based casinos, modern conditions are very harsh and doing it by eye still could be done, but you might miss some opportunities.
Here a jafco video 7+ years old, but it shows that a dealer's signature clearly exists if someone would doubt it, a very obvious example  <can't post a link here>

Visual ballistics still would be applicable in some places, but it's not as good as a computer, in any way obviously. Here another guy doing it, 12 years ago, again on old wheel, Teflon ball, and it looks like it's jafco <also can't post a link here>

Now you asked to show you a method that YOU can apply, the answer is idk which method it would be, that's maybe why so many people waste their time on these things. You should first tell me where you play, what are the conditions, maybe show a similar wheel that your casinos use and then someone could say something.

I posted a thread about one month ago that i was looking up for some people to help me test my prediction software and eventually play for me, but no one seemed to be interested at all, no one even asked for a video or something, so i assume that no one want to play roulette using methods that do improve the accuracy of predictions.

(I can't post link's, because the page is returning an error saying that's a inappropriate language.... I can dm them.)

"so I can make some test let's say on live wheel"
I would rather say, get me a footage of an average wheel so i can do some tests of my system, and i send them to you, because it's not possible for me to send you a software which is first not fully protected and next is extremely rare.

[Person S]

What maths? No one uses maths, they use patterns over and over, or some weird "formulas" to pretend they can log or square rott the next number, by few last numbers....... Tell me then how your your math would work, lets see.

All mathematics is based on probability or the law of 3, naturally few people would want to give a ready-made solution, I wouldn't either. And I can't write all the formulas as I don't know this science perfectly, Do the test, take 4 numbers and see when the very last one appears - will it be 4 spins or higher? The maths tells you that the average will be 1 in 4, but the fact tells you that it's way off

[Alberto50]

All mathematics is based on probability or the law of 3, naturally few people would want to give a ready-made solution, I wouldn't either. And I can't write all the formulas as I don't know this science perfectly, Do the test, take 4 numbers and see when the very last one appears - will it be 4 spins or higher? The maths tells you that the average will be 1 in 4, but the fact tells you that it's way off

Math done in this way can't tell you anything useful for actual play, when a specific event occurs, you can't know if it's going to be that "way off", or more rather close to that 1 in 4. Many times for example in a game like dragon tiger or baccarat, you will see ties occurring few times in a row, and then for the rest 300 rounds nothing happens, same in roulette, some numbers don't hit in 100's of spins, and when you start to think that it's a good move to just bet the other numbers, now suddenly the "trend" revers, no one can predict that, the reason why specific numbers occurs it's because of the dealer, the rotor and the ball, not because of statistical deviations.

These can't tell you when a specific thing occurs, they can tell you what are the odds if it occurs, they can tell you the frequency of the occurrence, but they will never tell you when they occur, literally millions of people use this "approach", 12 times red in a row, i bet black, and it never works. The last and only question should be if what you're doing increases the accuracy of predictions, if out of a 1000 spins assuming default 50% chance of wining, you will still win just around 50% of them, you changed nothing, and that's exactly what these systems do, they change nothing.

[Person S]

If I'm not in the last four, I won't lose. But even if he shows up within the expected range, I will lose a little. And this is only a narrow window, it could be wider. If you use stats and know the frequency, you also can't know the specific spin on which your event will play, it will be a group of spins, and in one of them an event will appear. And so you also go by feel, but with the certainty that there will be a smooth road ahead, not a chasm.

There will always be extremes, and gambling is full of those extremes because it is 100% unpredictable. Even your device will not be accurate, on one forum I saw spins and a chart with a biased wheel with numbers above/below expected, so in those spins there were about 3 cycles when the number that should be above expected did not appear, how can this be explained? Because it should be better than 1/37, but no it disappeared somewhere, but then apparently it caught up, but you see it was a group of spins.

[Alberto50]

If I'm not in the last four, I won't lose. But even if he shows up within the expected range, I will lose a little. And this is only a narrow window, it could be wider. If you use stats and know the frequency, you also can't know the specific spin on which your event will play, it will be a group of spins, and in one of them an event will appear. And so you also go by feel, but with the certainty that there will be a smooth road ahead, not a chasm.

There will always be extremes, and gambling is full of those extremes because it is 100% unpredictable. Even your device will not be accurate, on one forum I saw spins and a chart with a biased wheel with numbers above/below expected, so in those spins there were about 3 cycles when the number that should be above expected did not appear, how can this be explained? Because it should be better than 1/37, but no it disappeared somewhere, but then apparently it caught up, but you see it was a group of spins.

"gambling is full of those extremes because it is 100% unpredictable"
Sounds like you just admitted what i said, but i will add that if done in a correct way in specific conditions it's clearly predictable.

"biased wheel with numbers above/below expected, so in those spins there were about 3 cycles when the number that should be above expected did not appear, how can this be explained?"

Biased wheels require thousands of spins, and sometimes deviations will just pop up and fake up the bias, it's also the most tedious and risky methods out of them all, it takes hundreds of thousands of spins for these bars to even up, no one will collect that many.


"Even your device will not be accurate"
It will absolutely be accurate in specific conditions, since not only it knows where the ball and rotor is at specific time with the deviation of 100-300ms, but it can also predict which diamond will be hit, that's the difference.

[Person S]

It will absolutely be accurate in specific conditions, since not only it knows where the ball and rotor is at specific time with the deviation of 100-300ms, but it can also predict which diamond will be hit, that's the difference.

On the extremes, I was saying that there can be very rare events with a probability of 1 in 1,000,000.00. Yes they will happen, but if the betting choices are really good they won't scare you.
So your device only determines the accuracy after the spin is triggered, this would be inappropriate for games where bets are placed before the spin.

[Alberto50]

On the extremes, I was saying that there can be very rare events with a probability of 1 in 1,000,000.00. Yes they will happen, but if the betting choices are really good they won't scare you.
So your device only determines the accuracy after the spin is triggered, this would be inappropriate for games where bets are placed before the spin.

It has both a system and data collection that allows you to bet before the spin is done, but it's not tested, and there are many doubts about it, at this moment i assume it doesn't work since i didn't test it enough yet, but we will see, still standard dealer signature would be available, if present.

Most land based casinos allows late bets, some almost let you bet when the ball already dropped, so it's not a big problem, all you need to do is just don't bet all the time late and eventually switch with someone else, but the best way obviously is as you said it "only determines", because it's the most accurate way to do it.