I hate it when a person uses the same definition for two different situations. Due/gamblers fallacy are one such example. I use the word DUE as meaning COLD........waiting/betting on a cold number(s) to hit because they have not hit in a long time.
In the past, I would play those methods all the time. Some very good days and some VERY BAD days. Here is my question in terms of a HOT number(s) >>> Lets say I tracked the last 250 spins. We'll say the 22 has hit the most. I start a 110 step progression on the 22. Keep in mind, that 22 has been hitting the MOST in recent spins.
Would you say I'm betting on a number that I feel is DUE? Can DUE also mean a HOT number? I look at due (cold) as gamblers fallacy. I'm NOT saying the 22 is past DUE to hit, I'm saying the 22 is presently hitting a lot. I thought DUE meant, 'PAST' due, not the same as presently hot.
An anti-method person can not have it BOTH ways. If you say I'm NOT betting on something due (in this example), you also can NOT say I'm betting with gamblers fallacy, correct??
Ken
If you play physical wheel AND there is a chance there exists any kind of bias not caused by random, then it is better to follow what hits most than go with a head against a wall. If such reason does not exists, it does not matter what you play, but if it is there, then you could get some advantage, even if you don't get positive expectancy, so you only lose less. Following what hits most cannot be worse than anything else, so go with that if you like it. Even randomness itself can cause a number to hit above expectancy for several thousands of spins, and every long winning streak starts with a short winning streak...
BTW Number cannot be DUE because it was not hitting or because it was hitting, nothing is DUE what is really random. There is no "present", there is always only "past". Maybe the only "present" is between ball being released and "no more bets" being called...
"nothing is DUE" >>> This is what you said. Do you agree, DUE also means gamblers fallacy?
In my above example (the #22)......would I be playing a method based on gamblers fallacy AND assuming no bias in the wheel (somehow I knew that term would get into the conversation)?
Ken
As #22 has been hot for so long it is fair to presume it will stay hot
Yes it could sleep but it could also keep hitting
so for me that is not gamblers fallacy,
D1.
in my opinion it does not matter what number you pick the chances are the same. say i back five numbers first spin no win. should i change or stick with the five numbers. if 22 has hit three or four times you would think it is less likely to hit again. your guess is as good as mine. i have come to the conclusion that winning or losing is pure chance. no skill involved. :clapping:
Quote from: pins on November 01, 2011, 06:34:01 PM
in my opinion it does not matter what number you pick the chances are the same. say I back five numbers first spin no win. should I change or stick with the five numbers. if 22 has hit three or four times you would think it is less likely to hit again. your guess is as good as mine. I have come to the conclusion that winning or losing is pure chance. no skill involved. :clapping:
But would you say that betting on a hot number is also considered gamblers fallacy?
Ken
The definition of Due is something that has to be paid or is expected.
So, if you are "expecting" an event to happen based on previous results
of what did (hot), or did not happen (cold), then you are knee-deep in the Fallacy.
As well, the Fallacy can encompass things like; if the "balance" and "averages" tell
you which numbers are expected to hit, or you are relying on a very steep neg prog,
or you are relying on the so-called "Law Of The Third".
An interesting read is nolinks://rouletteraped.com/ (nolinks://rouletteraped.com/). It isn't selling anything
and doesn't really explain a system but it goes into how roulette is a man-made
machine and no man-made machine has a zero failure rate.
Lee
Hi Lee
A very good read my friend,
Thank you for posting the link,
Dave.
Quote from: leroy on November 02, 2011, 10:19:36 AM
The definition of Due is something that has to be paid or is expected.
An interesting read is nolinks://rouletteraped.com/ (nolinks://rouletteraped.com/). It isn't selling anything
and doesn't really explain a system but it goes into how roulette is a man-made
machine and no man-made machine has a zero failure rate.
Lee
The guy who wrote that site is wrong. All i did was read the title "Roulette cannot be beaten". He may be old but he hasen't a clue what he is talking about it.
ReDsQuaD,
The site is unsigned and the domain is registered through a Proxy,
so who is the guy and does he have a name/website?
I hate when someone says "I beat the wheel" then fails to
divulge the technique. The site is very long and self-indulgent
but what I take away from it is that roulette is a man-made machine
and no man-made machine has a zero failure rate.
So, if all the site does is motivate me to learn enough about this
man-made machine to beat it, then it was worth my time reading.
I'm of the mind that a mechanical betting method using a mild
negative and positive progression is the way to go and not relying
on things associated with the Fallacy.
For example, betting against a pattern such as the Dozens hitting
in a consecutive order.
Like 1-2-3-1-2-3-1-2-3 or 3-1-2-3-1-2-3-1-2 or any variation where
three diff dozens continue hitting in a consecutive order.
Can they hit this way over and over? Yes, but the odds they continue
past a mild neg prog is small which means you can win more than you lose.
Combine this when the scenario of dozens sleeping for 5+ spins and using
a mild pos prog, again, you can win more than you lose.
interesting......
IF memory serves the website (rouletteraped.com) is "setup" by the same guys who "set up" the win3million site (DomainsByProxy.com)
strange but true........ :scratch_ones_head: :scratch_ones_head: :scratch_ones_head:
Thank you,
win3million is for sale and belonged to Charles Edward Hampshire.
After goggling him I found some good links and will look into it.
Initial investigation indicates this is very old news and didn't
produce useful results.
Sorry about getting off topic Mr J.
You don't have to look past this forum to find the w3m owner
was a scammer.
nolinks://vlsroulette.com/gambling-and-roulette-related/a-list-of-testimonies-of-those-scammed-by-win3million/ (nolinks://vlsroulette.com/gambling-and-roulette-related/a-list-of-testimonies-of-those-scammed-by-win3million/)
@ leroy
just out of interest how did you come across that rouetteraped website ?
Thanking you in advance.... :good:
Quote from: leroy on November 02, 2011, 11:26:01 AM
ReDsQuaD,
The site is unsigned and the domain is registered through a Proxy,
so who is the guy and does he have a name/website?
I hate when someone says "I beat the wheel" then fails to
divulge the technique. The site is very long and self-indulgent
but what I take away from it is that roulette is a man-made machine
and no man-made machine has a zero failure rate.
So, if all the site does is motivate me to learn enough about this
man-made machine to beat it, then it was worth my time reading.
I'm of the mind that a mechanical betting method using a mild
negative and positive progression is the way to go and not relying
on things associated with the Fallacy.
For example, betting against a pattern such as the Dozens hitting
in a consecutive order.
Like 1-2-3-1-2-3-1-2-3 or 3-1-2-3-1-2-3-1-2 or any variation where
three diff dozens continue hitting in a consecutive order.
Can they hit this way over and over? Yes, but the odds they continue
past a mild neg prog is small which means you can win more than you lose.
Combine this when the scenario of dozens sleeping for 5+ spins and using
a mild pos prog, again, you can win more than you lose.
You are wasting your time reading that site mate.. You need to look at roulette from a different prospective -
The physical side - Which is the only way to beat the game.
Xman, just stumbled across it in a web search, "roulette systems".
ReDsQuaD, I agree, the guy's intentions turned out to be bad. This
all happened, apparently, prior to 09, a little before my interest in roulette.
But the one argument that roulette is a man-made machine and no
man-made machine is unbreakable is a good one. With that perspective
and motivating fact(?) one can embark on the quest to learn everything
about the machine with some hope of success.
When you mention the "physical" side I assume you mean Visual Ballistics/Dealers Signature.
I studied both and discounted them primarily because I play online.
I will concede that an outcome is related to physics as opposed to expectation in
the fact that the outcome is dependent on 5 physical parameters; the wheel condition,
speed of the wheel at release, speed of the ball at release, point on the wheel of release,
and the hop.
In looking at these 5 factors;
1) most casinos monitor and adjust their wheels regularly to prevent bias
2) one has no idea what the wheel speed fluctuation upon release is from spin to spin
3) one has no idea of the ball speed fluctuation upon release is from spin to spin;
4) you can determine the point of release (sometimes, if you are standing by the wheel)
5) and the hop is never predictable.
When you then factor in the endless variables of the combination of all the physical dynamics
involved I can only conclude using physics is extremely hard to do playing online.
If you then accept the hypothesis that VB/DS is unreliable online, and "expecting" an event from
past events in a random game is a Fallacy, what's left.
I think it is trying to find a drop pattern that "does/does not" happen more often than it
"does/does not". One that does not rely on the Fallacy or the physical variables.
I think if your system takes a small BR and requires a small neg/pos progression
your on your way to beat the machine. Add a reasonable session length with
a reasonable win/loss stop, all that's left is it just has to win more than it looses.
I discovered an analogy awhile back using blackjack...
Blackjack is exactly the same as roulette in the fact that the cards you get are determined
by physics. 1) how many decks are in the shoe 2) the order they end up in after the shuffle
3) where you are sitting ,etc. But the bet is mechanical. I look at my hand and I react based
on what the dealers up card is. His up card and my hand determines if I double down, split,
hit or stand. Because, with so many cards in the shoe, you have no idea what is going to be
dealt next.
Again, if you hypothetically accept the hypothesis that VB/DS is unreliable online, and "expecting"
an event from past events in a random game is a Fallacy, what's left.