T.G "Possible H/G system" with a little tweak

[TwoCatSam]

Hello my old friend, Victor

You are so right.  I remember seeing those tiny little dips in the graphs.  In truth, they represented, say 200 spins, to be conservative.  Those 200 spins would have destroyed your bankroll.

Sam

[VLS]

trying to keep your spirit up betting 4,000 5,000 7,000+ continuous spins in the hole...

Or more!


Not to mention the past gazillion spins beaten bear no guarantee as to beating the current gazillion batch.


In the end, there might be a time to phase-out even good, playable methods.


You can ask Ken about this one too!

[Master_of_pockets]

TCS I really can t understand why you changed your mood.
If I had a winning system of course I would play it ...i don t like gambling.
Yes Vic this is one of the reasons that it s better to play it on lines and not on straight numbers because it will be 6 times faster to get out of the hole in a bad fluctuation....

This is one of the reasons why this system must be bot ed to see what could be the longest spin recovery and if its a long run winner......

I never said it can win....I just said to give it a go as it seems fairly good.

[albertojonas]

He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912)

[iggiv]

LOL

[Master_of_pockets]

i didn t know that TG was not loved by everyone.
I have read a lot of his posts and the man knows a lot about roulette maths and statistics.

The only I didn t like was his last approach.

[TwoCatSam]

Master

My mood has never changed...I don't think! 

I have no ill will toward TG.  Never spoke to him or e-mailed him.  Read a lot of his stuff.  Probably learned from him.  After all these years, I still have one of his systems archived in my files.

I feel the G.U.T. is a winning method of play.

So why don't I just go away and play it?  Hey, I could play it and my guitar at the same time!!  It's slow, you know.  Here's why.  I like the interaction I get on these forums.  I like my guitar forum.  I like to talk to people, even Jl.

In the near future, I will begin playing the G.U.T. for real as I have tested it extensively.  The idea works; not sure I can work it. 

While I am logging numbers from Dublin, I will test your idea as well as two others that have been given to me privately.

TwoCat

[iggiv]

u can love Turbogenious but the fact that all  his stuff is losing is still a fact. I don't know him personally neither i have ever interacted with him but from people which did, i know that everything is posted by him is not a winner. If he has ever had a real winner it was not published. So don't be naive.

[Bayes]

It's a shame that Turbo doesn't frequent the forums any more, I think he just tired of the endless bickering and attacks. Sound familiar? 

He was a very smart and creative guy, and it was largely his enthusiasm that got me interested in roulette. I can still vividly remember reading his posts at GG back in 2004 on the "50 Max" system he was working on. He had a way of creating suspense and excitement (a bit like our JL).

Anyway, a good example of how creative he was can be seen in his "predictor" system. Do a search at GG for it or read the attached. A couple of years ago I wrote a tracker for it, but results didn't seem to be as good as he claimed. Again, no surprise there.

[Master_of_pockets]

I never said that he has posted a winning system iggiv...so I am not naive.
I just said that he is a nice guy with solid knowledge about roulette and the other things that Bayes said like creative etc.

[iggiv]

OK i have never said anything against this guy, i just feel that all those methods are still within the same "losing frame", as others.

I never said that he has posted a winning system iggiv...so I am not naive.
I just said that he is a nice guy with solid knowledge about roulette and the other things that Bayes said like creative etc.

[Master_of_pockets]

Vile I never said that this is a possible H/G .... "Possible H/G" is the name that TG gave to this system.

If a system could be a winner in the long run(H/G) then in my opinion it would be a system that contains Maths,Probability,safe MM...and this one has it all.
With Voodoo there is no reason of why to win and that s why all systems based on it are tanking.

Anyway thank you guys...
What is left for this topic to be finished/locked is some programmer to make it into a bot and test fast a hell lot of spins...
The reason I said it must be played on LINES and not straight numbers is for the matter of facing shorter DOWNS in order to be playable in a real situation....this way also will make a smaller BR needed....

If we will see from testing that it can not recover and make always new profits(graph that is going UP) and if we will see that for ex. we have a DOWN for 500 or more spins to be in a new profit, then it s clearly a non playable system in a real casino....
I care only for a system that is playable in a real casino....no RNG and no online casinos.

[Master_of_pockets]

TG original system didn t have the RESET option....
Meaning that even if there is a stage that he is in a new profit and he was betting 3 lines with 4-4-4 chips on them and the one of them won(and brought a new profit in the overall  Br)), he was continuing betting 4-4  on the 2 lines that was left...then if the cycle of the 5 spins were over without a win he would bet 5-5-5 etc....so the bets were being very high without any reason , because instead of resetting all the bets and starting over with just 1 chip on one line(because we were already in a new profit) he was just continuing betting for ALL the lines(straight nums in his graph) until all lines would be hit.....
This very bad and creates BIG downs that can be avoided by just resetting. 
If he had include in his testing graph the reset option then the graph would have smaller DOWNS and of course smaller UPs...but I care about smaller DOWNS and I don't care about bigger UPS,,,stability is the priority.

That's why the resetting option can make this system a lot more safe and steady and with a need of a smaller Br and maybe shorter downs(in order to be playable). The system will be a lot safer with this option and this is for sure..,...the matter is HOW much safer??? and this can be seen only with testing....

Now IF the other input of mine (when 2 or 3 lines has the same amount of hits , then we are choosing the one with the furthest back appearance and not picking one  randomly as he suggests)makes any def ,then the system could be  stronger....

I know that bet selections is a fallacy....i never forget this even for a sec....but from his graph it made a major point.

Programmers have programed a lot of non sense systems....let s hope that they will program this one too that is a serious system....

[Master_of_pockets]

ok sorry for deleting the out of the topic posts but I see that there is some interest from some members and they also didn t want the topic to be ruined.

ophis will u be so kind to make the program?

[GARNabby]

"He was a very smart and creative guy... "


Okay, that's what you mean by "smart and creative".  Got it.

This thread is no different... "math but not math", ie, just no math.  (Where's the calculation of probable edge, and expected value?) "