Interesting point from the Wiz site

[Mr J]

No it's not acceptable, because if you don't know that there's a bias why are you betting on them? Just because they're 'hot' doesn't mean there is a bias, because numbers can run hot anyway due to random fluctuations. That's why I say you need to FIRST identify the bias VISUALLY, then you know that the numbers are hot because of the bias.

@Mike >> First off, this was for Kelly, not you. As long as you responded, lets rock.

I think you have my post all wrong, I'm not sure? 

"if you don't know that there's a bias why are you betting on them" >>> I dont care about a POSSIBLE bias (cough), thats my point. If I tracked numbers from that wheel and found a section to be hitting alot REGARDLESS of the reason, what is the big issue that I'm betting on that section and still labeled a 'method player'? Is there a problem with that? Do I have to be labeled an AP (cough) guy in order to bet in that manner?  I said in my post......."What if I did NOT know a bias existed".


Ken

[Steve]

I'll just say:

* Bias occurs far more frequently that casinos know. Their software is inadequate.

* Temporary or what I call "dynamic bias" occurs all the time. It can be presented as "hot numbers", but typically the temporary bias is only very slight. It is not something like 10 blacks in a row. An example of CAUSE is a temporarily stronger dominant diamond due to ball track grit IN COMBINATION with a particular bowl and rotor combination.

To exploit a temporary bias, you have to deal with much fewer spins than you normally would with typical bias analysis. You need to visually observe the wheel & ball where possible (and listen if possible), and segregate data which means things like rotor speed, direction etc. The trick is the combination of segregating data with such a small amount of spins, and observe what is happening at the wheel. To find dynamic bias, you MUST match up CAUSE AND EFFECT.

But still, there are much better ways to beat roulette.

[Mike]

@Mike >> First off, this was for Kelly, not you. As long as you responded, lets rock.

I think you have my post all wrong, I'm not sure?  

"if you don't know that there's a bias why are you betting on them" >>> I dont care about a POSSIBLE bias (cough), thats my point. If I tracked numbers from that wheel and found a section to be hitting alot REGARDLESS of the reason, what is the big issue that I'm betting on that section and still labeled a 'method player'? Is there a problem with that? Do I have to be labeled an AP (cough) guy in order to bet in that manner?  I said in my post......."What if I did NOT know a bias existed".

Ken

Ken, I believe I understood your point well enough. MY point is that if a section is "hitting a lot" you CAN'T ignore the reason, because all sectors and groups of number have periods when they "run hot" because of standard deviation, or "luck" as you might call it. If you start betting a sector having observed that it's hot, how do you know, without having looked for possible causes, that it isn't just randomness which is "causing" the sector to be hot? As kelly says, collecting spins should be for CONFIRMATION that your hypothesis of bias is correct. If you don't have a reason to think that the sector SHOULD be hot then you're just guessing (and hoping) that it will continue to run hot when you start betting on it.

However, if you record enough spins and the sector is running at 3 or 4 standard deviations then you MIGHT have reason to believe that there is a bias, even without doing visual checks.  What won't work is just looking at the last 30, 50 or 100 spins and then making a decision based only on that. You need to be more sophisticated, and as Steve says, you have to link cause and effect.

[Kelly]

Ken you made your point very well by saying that the wheel was 99.999999% perfect.  You play the hot sectors, snow don`t because there are no visible bias.  IF he played the hot sectors along with you, it would be sucker bets as well.  I can`t see why that doesn`t answer your questions.

[Mr J]

@You two >> "MY point is that if a section is "hitting a lot" you CAN'T ignore the reason" >> Sure I can, why not? I certainly dont care what the reason is. Like you said Mike, it is possible I would be betting on a hot section that is a bit bias but I really dont care about the label of it.

If I tracked 'X' numbers and found a few numbers were hitting ALOT, I dont give a s**t as to why. I'll temporarily bet on those numbers until they are hot no more. Either way, I think a SIGNIFICANT bias is a load of BS.

Ken

[Kelly]

And the reason the advantage player wouldnt is that if there were no bias your "hot" sector would only hit with the expectation, not above expectation.  Feel free to prove otherwise. 

[Mr J]

Prove? Again, if any AP (cough) guy wants to bet on a section for WHATEVER reason, I dont care, have fun. I see once again we dont agree on something, no biggie. I let my wallet do the talking for me, not a message board.

Ken

[RCEC]

@Kelly
Bist wirklich umgestiegen auf Kesselgucken?
Do you really trust in visual not math´s prefer physic´s?
Answer requested,if you want
CU
RCEC

[Mike]

I thought that there are very few bias wheels anymore, so if a number (or sector) is repeating and getting hot, does it necessarily mean that that wheel is bias at all?

Isn't it just that some areas go through hot spells, and the trick is to hang onto its coattails for a while?

WRONG. First, there are a lot more bias wheels than you believe. You're just repeating the same old garbage the casinos want you to think, their disinformation campaign is working well!  

Second, on a random wheel, betting on hot numbers gives no advantage whatsoever. WHY should it? the math is correct for random wheels and it tells you that all outcomes are equally likely. Hot numbers, cold numbers, it's all BS.  Seriously, people have been playing that way for hundreds of years without success. It's just pure ignorance, but whatever floats your boat I guess.

Yes, hot numbers don't NECESSARILY mean the wheel is biased, which is why you need to look for signs of bias, isn't that just common sense? if there is none, WHY bet anyway ASSUMING that the hot numbers will stay hot? the numbers are just as likely to turn cold. There is not and cannot ever be a RELIABLE indicator, based purely on statistics, which will tell you that the numbers will stay hot for X more spins. Something like that would contradict the math of the game.

[Mike]

The first, past numbers mean something. I'll track 200 spins. I'll choose 3 numbers for YOU and 3 numbers for me. For myself, I'll take the 3 most recent numbers that have three hits on it (hot).

For you, I choose 3 numbers with the fewest hits in the last 200 spins (very cold). We'll flat bet for the next 20 spins, my numbers against your numbers. We'll do this experiment not once but over 100 different sessions. *ANYONE* who says it will come close to balancing out is LYING, plain and simple. That is an example of past numbers with MEANING.

Ken, it's easy to show that this can't work. This is one of the first things I looked at when I was investigating systems. It DOES all balance out in the end. Computer simulations confirm the math.

[Kelly]

Ken you said that anyone who claimed that there would be a difference in betting hot and cold numbers were LYING.  I suggest you back that statement up. I can prove the exact betting preferences you describe does not yield a difference, if you can accept +- 0.20% from expectation to each side.

I can also prove that if we knock a wheel until its biased it also diverges from expectation.

Now what can you prove to back your high horse statements.

[Mr J]

This is nothing against either one of you but you guys wouldn't know a good bet selection if you tripped over it.

Continue studying THEORIES. Overall, we dont agree, oh well.

For someone to say my example is flawed is silly in the head. 

The 3 CURRENT hot numbers vs. the 3 coldest for *ONLY* 20 spins of betting (800 trials)....."Yeah Ken, it'll even out".   

Forget it and good luck in doing, whatever it is you do again. 


Ken

[Kelly]

Why so shy ?  Its a pretty bold statemet to be left hanging.

[Mike]

very disappointing Ken, I thought you were going to prove us wrong. 

[Mr J]

Prove? Should we take this to GG (if its still there) and take the gloves off? 

You 'prove' to me that YOU do well with roulette. Same rule for everyone Waiting......

Dont think you two can team up on me. (lol) I'll take 12 of you wannabee's on while eating a taco, taking a s**t, cleaning my shoes and doing my taxes. You guys scare nobody.

Ken

[Mr J]

-