blockdamofo

Author Topic: Another debate about ramndomness  (Read 1008 times)

0 Members and 27 Guests are viewing this topic.

MrPerfect.

Another debate about ramndomness
« on: October 03, 2019, 07:46:59 PM »
 Rinad,  what looks like a good idea, in reality may be another thing... all needs testing.
   Randomness itself should be defined. For someone it's casual.  He looks black / red... there is no reasonable way to predict black or red... so, for purpose of randomness it can be considered as random as it gets. For such person when to play, how to play... all is same.
   Someone may look other..  numbers , for example... if you look enough of them in the bulk, you will realise that some are better then others, some may be active periodically. ..ets.
Randomness for such a person will be a bit different.
   Some other may look something else, more physics related... for him there will be few different levels of random.
   In reality, to win , need to limit randomness.  If you find a way, you may test this way for conformity. .. sometimes it will work better then others... you can determine when it works better and why... it still may be random,  but there you could find these limits of random where it doesn't go..
   Simple example... look number under diamond when ball beat it and final number... determine distance between them... collect 100 or more of these. Then plot these distances in excel or casino card. You will see that ball doesn't jump all over. Some areas on your chart ( plot) will be better then others. If you do it, you will see limit of randomness for the first time with your own eyes.
  If you are good in math, you can simulate your betting on best areas, determine how often ball go there in comparison with other areas... try few different betting systems and compare results...
   You can see if ball go there periodically or all the time...what are best intervals, determine triggers... best progression...ets..ets..ets.
   If you do such exercise,  you will never in your life consider to place a bet on black or red anymore. Maybe you will start to search a way how to predict that number under the diamond when ball beat there.
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, MickyP

MickyP

Re: Another debate about ramndomness
« Reply #1 on: October 03, 2019, 09:35:35 PM »
Another great post MrPerfect. Thank you.

I do understand your exercise and have used a similar concept to determine hot areas on the wheel. Not 100% success but definitely increases the hit rate over short spin sequences.
 

MrPerfect.

Re: Another debate about ramndomness
« Reply #2 on: October 04, 2019, 08:18:56 PM »
Another great post MrPerfect. Thank you.

I do understand your exercise and have used a similar concept to determine hot areas on the wheel. Not 100% success but definitely increases the hit rate over short spin sequences.
I just have written that black or red is random! !!! It mean that " single dosen system" is random as well. There is no difference between black or dosen,  yet you both liked my post. Hypocrisy total! !!! Or you guys do not read posts, or do not understand them, or you have very selective understanding. ... brain damage,  probably?
 

kav

  • https://www.youtube.com/c/rouletteman
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2395
  • Thanked: 1345 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Another debate about ramndomness
« Reply #3 on: October 04, 2019, 08:50:09 PM »
I admit that my "Thanks" was an act of kindness more than an endorsement.
 

MickyP

Re: Another debate about ramndomness
« Reply #4 on: October 04, 2019, 09:05:25 PM »
Rinad,  what looks like a good idea, in reality may be another thing... all needs testing.
   Randomness itself should be defined. For someone it's casual.  He looks black / red... there is no reasonable way to predict black or red... so, for purpose of randomness it can be considered as random as it gets. For such person when to play, how to play... all is same.
  Someone may look other..  numbers , for example... if you look enough of them in the bulk, you will realise that some are better then others, some may be active periodically. ..ets.
Randomness for such a person will be a bit different.
  Some other may look something else, more physics related... for him there will be few different levels of random.
   In reality, to win , need to limit randomness. If you find a way, you may test this way for conformity. .. sometimes it will work better then others... you can determine when it works better and why... it still may be random,  but there you could find these limits of random where it doesn't go..
   Simple example... look number under diamond when ball beat it and final number... determine distance between them... collect 100 or more of these. Then plot these distances in excel or casino card. You will see that ball doesn't jump all over. Some areas on your chart ( plot) will be better then others. If you do it, you will see limit of randomness for the first time with your own eyes.
  If you are good in math, you can simulate your betting on best areas, determine how often ball go there in comparison with other areas... try few different betting systems and compare results...
   You can see if ball go there periodically or all the time...what are best intervals, determine triggers... best progression...ets..ets..ets.
   If you do such exercise,  you will never in your life consider to place a bet on black or red anymore. Maybe you will start to search a way how to predict that number under the diamond when ball beat there.

Were you perhaps drunk or high when you wrote this post? Look at your last line in bold Black ink.

I play numbers and not colours. Have never played colours. I do not play EC bets either.
 

MrPerfect.

Re: Another debate about ramndomness
« Reply #5 on: October 04, 2019, 10:49:34 PM »
Isn't it the same post you said was good???  Only thing l get from your writing is cognitive dissonance. 
 

MickyP

Re: Another debate about ramndomness
« Reply #6 on: October 04, 2019, 11:29:17 PM »
Stop behaving like an idiot MrPerfect. I know its the same post. You said its about red and black...Looks like you can't read your own posts. I highlighted points in red and bold black to show that you actually discussed a way to NEVER bet on red/black again by studying the results off the wheel.
 

MrPerfect.

Re: Another debate about ramndomness
« Reply #7 on: October 05, 2019, 07:20:34 AM »
Mickey,  you defended dosen as bet selection and red for you is just fine. What is a difference?  You performed " research " , wich indicated dosen system to be valid, why you not play it? I'm more likely to belive that you found way to play red or dosen ,then consider the fact of you finding something on the wheel without knowing how to look and where to look.
   Idiot behaviour, you said?  Somehow l feel it's more your doing
« Last Edit: October 05, 2019, 07:35:38 AM by MrPerfect. »
 

MickyP

Re: Another debate about ramndomness
« Reply #8 on: October 05, 2019, 08:40:41 AM »
The difference is 6 numbers (18 for red and 12 for a dozen). In my case the difference is 10 numbers because I only play 8 numbers in a dozen. Also the placement of the numbers on the wheel differs.

Yes, I use the dozens as a basic target area for a few methods I play and I will keep on doing so because they make money for me.

One day when I lose and have to resort to selling s*** to people I'll be sure to look you up for advice.
 

Stratege

Re: Another debate about ramndomness
« Reply #9 on: October 05, 2019, 08:52:11 AM »
Isn't it the same post you said was good???  Only thing l get from your writing is cognitive dissonance. 

Why is MickyP the champion of cognitive dissonance? ... Perhaps because he wants to be in all the discussions (tradition of posting to say nothing?)? Mr. Perfect is not my friend but, he is right on many things. So, on the spinning wheel, what is the difference between red / black or the number of a dozen? Attention, MickyPeterPan will perhaps invent that there is a difference between the dozen red and the dozen black! He will tell us that it is the fruit of his research.

To bring a much more realistic discussion, why have the many authors on blackjack who offered winning certified methods (in flat bet) never demonstrated that one could win more units with a progression negative? Why in 50 years that was not said? Because it does not work in practice despite a benefit on the bank (the opponents can answer me I know very well the BJ).

Now, why does MickyProgression say that its dozen with its progression is a "jewel"? Perhaps it is still a story of "tradition" that seeks to speak to say nothing? In front of the Hazard, 111 222 333 ... are the dust of infinity of numbers. Why on the forums as many words on progressions in negative and so few tests? Is the passionate player afraid that his dreams of glory will be smashed against reality, against the wall of Hazard and this -2,7% with the roulette? We cannot cross this wall with a scale of units, there are millionaires who have already tried, as well as mathematicians.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2019, 08:59:00 AM by Stratege »
 

ahlidap

Re: Another debate about ramndomness
« Reply #10 on: October 05, 2019, 09:44:38 AM »
Funniest thing of all... my account that was banned is working now.
   I would like to use this opportunity to declare this forum dead ( main reason my account was reactivated) and say official good bye to this forum. Wish you all luck. Do not waste your time on forums, just study wheels and play.

So, why do you still wasting your time here, more than 1 month later since this statement?
You guys still all fighting for nothing... again.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2019, 10:07:56 AM by ahlidap »
 

MickyP

Re: Another debate about ramndomness
« Reply #11 on: October 05, 2019, 11:21:51 AM »
MickyP stats:
Total Posts: 2781 posts.

Total Topics Started: 142 topics.

Yes PMS, I appear to be all over the place. From my stats you can see that I initiate discussions by creating threads for that purpose.I post on all threads including those created by others to contribute, affirm and ask questions.

Is this not what the forum was designed for?I am proud to be an active member of this forum.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2019, 11:23:33 AM by MickyP »
 

MickyP

Re: Another debate about ramndomness
« Reply #12 on: October 05, 2019, 11:33:23 AM »
Back to the topic.

The numbers on the wheel are in a"random" order but there are definite patterns in their order. That includes the alternating pattern that red and black form but we don't want to look at this specific pattern at this time.

Take any small sequence of numbers from any B/M table history, say 12 or 18 numbers. Plot these numbers on the wheel and you will notice in the majority of cases that certain areas of the wheel are more active than others. Even random spins create patterns on the wheel and players can use this to their benefit when looking at bet selection.
 

MickyP

Re: Another debate about ramndomness
« Reply #13 on: October 05, 2019, 12:36:32 PM »
PMS has the following to say..."So, on the spinning wheel, what is the difference between red / black or the number of a dozen? Attention, MickyPeterPan will perhaps invent that there is a difference between the dozen red and the dozen black! He will tell us that it is the fruit of his research."
No PMS, No. Hahaha... the colours on the wheel do not interest me as much as your peacock feathered posts....lol ;D ;D :o ;D ;D ;D
« Last Edit: October 05, 2019, 12:38:29 PM by MickyP »
 

MrPerfect.

Re: Another debate about ramndomness
« Reply #14 on: October 05, 2019, 02:25:41 PM »
@Strategy,  l am your friend, you just didn't realise it yet.
   @ Mickey, there is no connection between 20 past spin results and posterior 20 spin results. Anything you see , it's just that, patterns that have no statistical bearing. Even less, if you combine it with any dosen system.  It's a gambler fallacy on its best...
    There are so many things to consider there besides final numbers dow. .. real player could do some hypothesis creation with 20 spins, but not spin results themselves. ... minus one for you.
 
The following users thanked this post: scepticus