New Forum Address: ROULETTELIFE.COM
  Update your Bookmarks

Author Topic: why would someone test a method using simulation software?  (Read 1129 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mike

  • Great Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 912
  • Thanked: 188 times
Re: why would someone test a method using simulation software?
« Reply #45 on: June 11, 2018, 05:45:14 PM »
Well, Laurance Scott teach me the difference between what is random and true bias with simulation software and spreadsheets and material to explain the Monte Carlo Simulations.
Sputnik,
There's no secret method or foolproof way to determine whether results are due to chance, only degrees of probability. These methods have been around for more than 100 years and can be found in any good stats book. Mr P knows what I'm talking about, but you don't give him credit for anything.  :o
 

Sputnik

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 709
  • Thanked: 583 times
Re: why would someone test a method using simulation software?
« Reply #46 on: June 11, 2018, 06:39:52 PM »


I don't need to mention specifics about the great discovery and hypothesis Laurance concluded, you will never find such material as its unique.
Comparing that with what you find online is just a way to fool your self.

So you may think and argue all night I could not care less.

Cheers
 

Mike

  • Great Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 912
  • Thanked: 188 times
Re: why would someone test a method using simulation software?
« Reply #47 on: June 11, 2018, 06:41:47 PM »
I don't need to mention specifics about the great discovery and hypothesis Laurance concluded, you will never find such material as its unique.
LOL, deluded...  ;D
 

Sputnik

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 709
  • Thanked: 583 times
Re: why would someone test a method using simulation software?
« Reply #48 on: June 11, 2018, 07:06:09 PM »


If you want to call LS deluded you might do so I don't care, for me, he is a legend that i respect.
I can read and compare with other solution and see the weakness and strength.

There is nothing on this forum that has any value, just deluded disinformation,

You can visit a visual ballistic forum and read about done plays and further information and material.
Old outdated material that has no bearing with today's wheels.

I can compare and see what is superior and what is not,

As you stop adding any value to the conversation so will this be my last reply, we might get crossroads at other topics.
Until then have a nice evening.

 

MrPerfect.

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1939
  • Thanked: 1031 times
Re: why would someone test a method using simulation software?
« Reply #49 on: June 11, 2018, 07:25:53 PM »
Sputnik,  no need to go all defencive.  No one has interest to put you personally down.
   Mike is right. Montecarlo simulations are old dog trick. Neither it represents full method or complete playing model as you stated. It's just a way to determine what has probability of being random fluctuation and what are natural boundaries of such fluctuations, that's all about it.
   I strongly advice egainst belives you display. Do not use that software as only solution, it's to be used as reference,  additional indicator... nothing more then that.
   It's not unique either, original autors of this method had more sofisticated software written for DOS. Goggle " biased wheel handbook"... it may open your eyes.
 

mr j

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1108
  • Thanked: 330 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: why would someone test a method using simulation software?
« Reply #50 on: June 11, 2018, 07:29:09 PM »
  Mike stated >> I also agree, but if you don't know WHY a method works (or seems to work), you need strong statistical evidence that it does, and too many are satisfied with weak or no evidence. This is because they are basically amateurs and have no knowledge of statistical inference or understanding of what constitutes strong/weak evidence.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I did a great thread on this years ago, one of my better ones >> Do you need to KNOW WHY a method will do well before playing it? <<

I did this thread because of.......myself. Meaning, can a person NOT know how to write out all the equations but STILL have a great method(s)? (myself again)

EXAMPLE.....I have 2-3 very very  decent methods.

Tested/played over thousands & thousands of LIVE spins. It still kicks a**, is still a great money maker BUT I cannot explain to you the WHY of it. Is that a bad thing? Am I headed to roulette jail? Everything I know is through trial & error only.

I did it all on my own, no begging involved. So when I hear.....why does your method work Ken? I'm not too sure I NEED/can answer that?
« Last Edit: June 11, 2018, 07:31:15 PM by mr j »
 

MickyP

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1348
  • Thanked: 573 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: why would someone test a method using simulation software?
« Reply #51 on: June 11, 2018, 07:45:07 PM »
Regarding your question; how do you determine what three numbers to play? Can you give some guidelines to this method?
The details of the system don't really matter, and I didn't have a particular one in mind anyway. The point is that it's possible to evaluate the results of ANY system purely from a statistical point of view without knowing WHY it works. But as I mentioned, it's always better if you can give logical reasons (such as physics, bias etc, ie cause & effect), and then the statistical analysis only serves as confirmation of your "theory", or not.

Statistical analysis will have to be confirmed over several tests. Unfortunately this {statistics} is not a field of study I can speak with authority on but if rational, logical reasoning dictates the value of a method then that value is credible to a point where if it can be replicated in new tests then the value should be treated as fact.