Yep, more gamblers fallacy for you. GOOD TIMES!!

[Mr J]

Here is a question I asked at the Wiz site. I can always tell when its a good question based on if I get few responses. People are so inconsistent when it comes to GF.

A) All 38 numbers are in a hat. I blindly pick one number, its the #17. I go to the casino and make a small bet on the 17, for ONE spin, never bet again and then went home. Did I just use gamblers fallacy?

B) One day later I change my mind, went back for ONE MORE SPIN of the 17. Did I NOW use gamblers fallacy?

Ken

[Juiced91]

Hmmm that wasn't so hard as your first one.  And my answer would relate to your thinking.  Did you go back the second day thinking it was due as it didn't win for you the previous day?? Or did you go back cause that was you lucky number?

[Mr J]

Its simply based on the fact of blindly choosing the 17 the prior day, nothing more.

Ken

[Mr J]

An oldie but a goodie but I have to post it again. I love the different answers.

Gamblers fallacy will never help you? Hmmm

I'll pick 3 numbers for you and 3 numbers for myself, all flat betting.

I have tracked the last 600 spins. The 3 numbers I choose for you, are the 3 with the fewest hits. (by the way, there is no darn bias in the wheel)

For myself, whatever 3 numbers have three hits on it, most recently.....in the last 'X' number of spins. In other words, presently hot.

We keep betting until 2 of our 3 numbers gets a hit, that's the winner. If we did this experiment 500 times, it SHOULD come close to you winning 250 times and I win 250 times, correct?

(Close to 250, I'm not saying it would be perfect)

Who would say 'YES Ken', it would be around 250 and 250 over and over again?

Ken

[John Gold]

It's a good job Turbogenius is not around. He would post a million graphs showing you how sleepers come out just the same as hot numbers. 

Not saying I agree with him either.

[Mr J]

I'm a hot number fan, can't help it. I bet one number per spin these days.


Ken

[Mr J]

In case some of you do not read posts at VLS2, here is a HOT (pardon the punn) topic of mine >> nolinks://rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=8747.0

[Mr J]

I have a question guys.....it'll be kind of tough to answer, you might not even want to answer and to be honest, the question is a bit rhetorical, I somewhat know the answer.

A lot of us here will agree that betting on a couple (whatever) HOT numbers is 'better' to bet on compared to the cold numbers. Like I said though, its all in the wording of the method/test.

Anyways, why is it when I bring this very SAME subject up at the Wizard board, it gets shot down, laughed at, flagged (deleted) etc.

Like I said, the goofs over there like to post in unison, all agreeing with each other (LoL).

I think some of them LIE when they tell me they don't agree with my view(s). If I had a nickel for everytime I heard......"it makes no difference which numbers you bet", I'd be a millionaire today.

Ken

[Juiced91]

I wouldnt know why it gets deleted never been there or heard of the place.  (clearly havent been around long enough LOL).  Sometimes i wonder my self it would make a difference? If i take 37 spins and i bet on the 4 hottest numbers or if after 37 spins i just bet on any 4 numbers, how similar the results would be, or would they be far off. .  I suppose i ahould just do a test on RX and see what happens.

But i do wonder myself(obviously you dont as you have something that works for you)

[superman]

I suppose I ahould just do a test on RX and see what happens

Crack on and post the results then.

[Mr J]

PERFECT example of what I'm talking about. This quote is from a pro (Frank Scoblete) >>>

If I play a number long enough in roulette will it come up? One of the typical gambling systems in roulette is to look at numbers that have not hit, and say, "well if I bet the number that hasn't come up, sooner or later it'll come up" - this is a fallacy. That number may not come up for many hours or it might come up on the very next spin. Roulette is random, and betting in this way is risky. <<<

You ever notice that when the pro's talk about gamblers fallacy, the example they use is almost always the SAME one? Sticking to one number because its DUE. How often do the, "Hey, its gamblers fallacy" guys talk about the kind of things we discuss? My point once again, not every method can be linked to gamblers fallacy. The people that don't win with this game just so happen to use that phrase the most often.....Hmmm, kind of odd.


Ken

[pins]

all systems carry the same risk.

[Mr J]

all systems carry the same risk.

Meaning what? I dont follow.

Ken

[Mr J]

I guess I'm a mind reader, thanks for the reply pins.

Ken

[Mr J]

There are VERY FEW guarantees in roulette, something that is 99% a SURE THING, even the Advantage-play (cough) goofs can't deny this >> In a short period of spins.......25?....37/38?.......there will be number(s) that will get 3 hits on it. Why not take this 99% fact and *TRY* to make something of it? Now don't even tell me, a person witnessed every number hitting in 37 spins. (LoL)

I know the anti-method AGENDA is strong but come on.  Look how many methods there are out there (including my own) that are NOT 99% guaranteed something will happen. If a person really has their s**t together, they can come quite close to having a Hol. Gra. with repeaters (it must be flat betting, no progressions).

Ken

[Mr J]

-