Sequential Roulette

[ReDsQuaD]

Matrix?

What is that. Isn't it a film?

Lmao, sorry but i laughed when i saw this reply

[ReDsQuaD]

Again, how do you KNOW this? have you actually ever tried?

Mike, Look around you, roulette is not impossible to beat. Why can't most people (9/10) do some proper research, rather than debating all the time.

James.

[ReDsQuaD]

these days every casino can have a computer to find biased wheels faster than any player and prevent any problems. Not sure they all use it, but they can for sure.

Not every casino, but yeh most do.

James.

[Nathan Detroit]

Mike, Look around you, roulette is not impossible to beat. Why can't most people (9/10) do some proper research, rather than debating all the time.

James.

Nothing is  impossible  for the one who shows determination.

Nathan Detroit
HAPPY WINNINGS!!!

[I have cookies]

So how many spins on average do you need to find a temporary bias? All I need is 100 to 150.

How can that be true as you need at least the chance of randomness being 1 in 100 as minimum.
800 to 1000 will tell if you having penitential to continue collecting data.

Later when you have a sample of data with a high std you still don't know if it is due to bias or a false positive, random fluctuation - but there is ways to tell witch one is - but that i wont write about.

[Mike]

I assume it has to pretty hard or if not impossible to work alone.
Even if defect spotting can be done so does some one need one extra hand to collect data - don't you agree.

It's always nice to have a reliable partner, but it's not necessary.

[Mike]

Looking for biased wheels is a good hobby for some people, I'm all for it. The more the merrier. Its right up here with spending all your spare time with a metal detector, looking for 'treasure'. You might get lucky.

Probably not, though..

In my experience, about 1 in 7 or 8 wheels are exploitable, so luck isn't necessary. Snowman will have more reliable data, but then it depends where you are. I don't live in Slobenia, and never intend to go there.  

[Mike]

Mike, Look around you, roulette is not impossible to beat. Why can't most people (9/10) do some proper research, rather than debating all the time.

James.

What are you talking about? I never said roulette was impossible to beat.

[Mike]

There is no such thing as temporary bias. It's randomness. That's exactly what normal random distribution does. It looks like  bias.

Wrong. It COULD be random, but if you don't take into account other "data" apart from spins, then how would you know?

It makes no sense to talk about something being random if you don't even look at possible causes as to why the ball is landing where it is and not somewhere else. Obviously something is "random" if you are completely ignorant of any cause and effect. From this position of ignorance, only then is it possible to talk about the "properties" of randomness, as though some events are inherently random, which is a meaningless concept.

[cheese]

It makes no sense to talk about something being random if you don't even look at possible causes as to why the ball is landing where it is and not somewhere else.

But that doesn't matter, its random enough for our purposes. Roulette isn't true random anyway, even though we call it that. Its kinda random, sorta random, random enough for gambling. True random, like that found in decaying radioactive material, is nothing like roulette random. A sequence of outcomes is a mess, its gobblygook. But with a wheel, it can be out of whack and still be random enough for the house to have its edge. Its sloppy random. They say a coin flip can never be true random because all coins are a little heavier on one side than the other. Yet they're fine for gambling purposes because we can't detect the subtle difference.

[gizmotron]

How can that be true as you need at least the chance of randomness being 1 in 100 as minimum.
800 to 1000 will tell if you having penitential to continue collecting data.

Later when you have a sample of data with a high std you still don't know if it is due to bias or a false positive, random fluctuation - but there is ways to tell witch one is - but that I wont write about.

My answer again:

There is no such thing as temporary bias. It's randomness. That's exactly what normal random distribution does. It looks like  bias. It ranges from 150 to 450 spins to it's natural cycles. You can track it with the normal averages for a so called "law of thirds."

[gizmotron]

Wrong. It COULD be random, but if you don't take into account other "data" apart from spins, then how would you know?

It makes no sense to talk about something being random if you don't even look at possible causes as to why the ball is landing where it is and not somewhere else. Obviously something is "random" if you are completely ignorant of any cause and effect. From this position of ignorance, only then is it possible to talk about the "properties" of randomness, as though some events are inherently random, which is a meaningless concept.

I'll ask you again. How many spins does it take for you to discover this so called "temporary bias" as you call it? I can detect a random hot set of numbers in 100 to 150 spins. They often keep going while cycling out of being hot at a rate on average that is the equivalence of a so called "law of thirds." So it takes another 300 spins to drop them from your so called "temporary bias." There never was a one day bias. It was always just normal randomness. I know a lot more than you would like for me to have known. I see right through your magical belief system. So does everyone now.

Real bias is discovered by tracking the wheel. The first people to do it used a home computer to find real bias. They tracked wheels for thousands of continuous spins. They worked in shifts until they had enough real data. They entered all that spin history into there computer at home. Back then the casinos where sitting ducks. You need to explain your concept of "temporary bias" and how you use data other than spins to detect it. Take the tin foil cone off your head this time, please.

[Kelly]

Im not quite sure which bias trackers you refer to. The ones that I know of dont do it that way. If all your info is a long string of numbers, im pretty sure you will be waisting your time.

A temporary bias can dissapear because of change in air pressure or cleaning, polishing  and hoovering the wheel. It will then slowly gain strength again after a few days.   If one runs a so called number strength scheme along with the number tracking and also notes air pressure and turning and cleaning of the wheels, it can be easy to see when the bias is going to weaken and the number strenght curve is going to drop.   The team I followed some years back tracked strike diamonds because their play was VB with a bias touch, but they also tracked the bounce lenght from each individual number.  That is, how far will the ball bounce after hitting X number on the rotor. (Not  to be confused with a scattergram a VB player might produce)

Some numbers didn`t give much energy back to the ball so the ball didn`t bounce long. Obviously ball material needs to be noted too because different material produces different scatter.   When compared with fret tests and pocket sound tests, it could easyli verify pocket biases. When these things is entered into a computer and when you add them to the data you get out of Scotts software or other VB schemes, you get some amazing data that none of the data tracking schemes the casinos use, is able to detect.   Some pocket biases simply dont exist with a specific ball type, so if suddenly a bias seems to be gone, you will have to check the ball type as well because the bias might be gone, along with the ball type. 

[gizmotron]

Im not quite sure which bias trackers you refer to. The ones that I know of dont do it that way. If all your info is a long string of numbers, im pretty sure you will be waisting your time.

That's good to know. With all that you have factored into your gathering of information, that can find a useful bias, you admittedly decided to overlook basic randomness. Here is a known fact. Sectors of the wheel have hot and cold streaks just like everything random dealing with the wheel. I'm sure that these streaks can act like short termed bias. So if I understand this correctly, you explain that a short termed bias can be a bias that goes away because of humidity or some other factor. But randomness is never considered a factor. My only conclusion is that you are finding wheels with bias that the casinos aren't aware of. You would know this because that long string of numbers is a waste of time. Sounds to me like an argument forming for conditional awareness. Or at least an argument for situational awareness.

[I have cookies]

Sectors of the wheel have hot and cold streaks just like everything random dealing with the wheel. I'm sure that these streaks can act like short termed bias.

Sounds to me like an argument forming for conditional awareness. Or at least an argument for situational awareness.

For me it sound like you try to compare hot and could numbers with cause and effect - is not the same thing.
Is a difference to know where the high probability area is and are not the same as guess where it is using 37 degree of freedom.

[I have cookies]

-