Beating randomness

How confident is the Wizard about “the impossibility of” beating randomness?

Is it possible the Wizard secretly knows you can beat random, but won't admit it? If I really come up with a method to beat randomness at the casino, would I have to worry about getting banned? What if you have to track results and bets using pen and paper? Is it true there are no banned roulette players? If there are, please don't count people who may have illegally cheated or something like that. Is it true you can't get banned from casinos in AC? Are there any other casinos around the world that you don't have to worry about getting banned at? (casinos with single zero roulette would be preferable)

Is there a way to confirm that there really are no banned roulette players?

I'll flag your post to wizard for his attention. He could probably use a good laugh.
If you come up with a way of beating random, go get rich. You won't need bragging rights.

Quote: tough

How confident is the Wizard about “the impossibility of” beating randomness?

Is it possible the Wizard secretly knows you can beat random, but won't admit it? If I really come up with a method to beat randomness at the casino, would I have to worry about getting banned? What if you have to track results and bets using pen and paper? Is it true there are no banned roulette players? If there are, please don't count people who may have illegally cheated or something like that. Is it true you can't get banned from casinos in AC? Are there any other casinos around the world that you don't have to worry about getting banned at? (casinos with single zero roulette would be preferable)

Is there a way to confirm that there really are no banned roulette players?

I am guessing you don't understand what randomness is. If it can be beat it isn't random.

Quote: tough

How confident is the Wizard about “the impossibility of” beating randomness?

Is it possible the Wizard secretly knows you can beat random, but won't admit it? If I really come up with a method to beat randomness at the casino, would I have to worry about getting banned? What if you have to track results and bets using pen and paper? Is it true there are no banned roulette players? If there are, please don't count people who may have illegally cheated or something like that. Is it true you can't get banned from casinos in AC? Are there any other casinos around the world that you don't have to worry about getting banned at? (casinos with single zero roulette would be preferable)

Is there a way to confirm that there really are no banned roulette players?

i once overheard pit managers sort of complaining about an employee (former? not sure) who came in trying to count cards and they were laughing at her because they truly didnt think it worked and didnt care how much money people throw at the game or whatever system you use. if you are thrown out im sure its because you were drunk or thats the only reason ive ever seen anyone get kicked out of a casino most of the time

You can count cards - this has been proven.

However, if you start with a full deck/shoe, the count is zero.

In effect, every spin in roulette, and every roll in craps, is from a "full deck" situation; all of the possible results are equally likely.
No, I did not just say that rolling a 7 is equally as likely as a 12 - I did say that, on each particular die, the 1 is as likely to come up as the 6.

Quote: tough

What if you have to track results and bets using pen and paper?

At some foreign casinos I’ve seen people tracking results on paper. In the USA they make it easier by showing the last 20 or so results on a vertical screen

The only way you’d get banned is outright cheating (like placing a bet after the ball fell into a number) or if you were able to identify significantly biased wheels, which probably don’t exist in major casinos

the link is to a poster - screen name Gizmotron - from another forum who claims he can beat randomness - this guy has been claiming this stuff for years
the title of his thread is "Reading Randomness"

it's nonsense of course - incomprehensible babbling scribbles - he has surely written over the equivalent of 100 typed pages on this thread

I posted it just for curiosity's sake




hundreds of gamblers - actually more likely thousands - across the web have claimed they can beat negative expectancy games with bet selection and/or betting progressions - varying the size of the bet either to recover losses or to parlay wins

not a single one has ever been able to offer proof that they could do it or that it could be done

if anybody ever did do it - it could not be kept secret

it would be one of the biggest news stories of the century




https://www.gamblingforums.com/threads/reading-randomness.14733/

I guess no one has ever looked into information from [redacted name: system touting site redacted](the dot is a .). This can be found using the wayback machine (internet archives); go to the January 2010 snapshot or earlier. You may have to play with the site, e.g., highlighting text to see it.

I have spent about two years on this before figuring out how to put a huge dent in the house edge for european roulette. It's not that hard to figure out, and it's really simple to track. This flat bet is a formula that consistently beats no zero roulette (unfortunately, there is no such thing). Charles claimed to make about 4 million per year playing roulette and created a trust of professional roulette players that donate and help children in need.

I have also come across interesting results while trying to find other consistent winning formulas, e.g., I won every bet for about 1,000 spins; possibly, randomness doesn't always behave randomly, idk the explanation.

Quote: tough

I guess no one has ever looked into information from [redacted name: system touting site redacted] (the dot is a .). This can be found using the wayback machine (internet archives); go to the January 2010 snapshot or earlier. You may have to play with the site, e.g., highlighting text to see it.

Actually, a considerable number of people looked into the information, and most came to the conclusion that it was just another system that didn't win 100% of the time.

"Consistently" beating a game is a meaningless term. On a single-zero wheel with a maximum bet that is 1024 times the minimum bet, Martingale wins 1526 times out of 1527; I think that qualifies as "consistent," but the amount you lose that 1527th time more than wipes out your winnings from the first 1526.

As for "no-zero roulette," in theory, any system will win "eventually." However, it may take trillions of spins to get back to the break-even point. As I like to say, "eventually can be a very, very, very long time from now."

Quote: ThatDonGuy

"Consistently" beating a game is a meaningless term.

Just think of this as winning more than losing.

Quote: ThatDonGuy

Martingale wins 1526 times out of 1527; I think that qualifies as "consistent," but the amount you lose that 1527th time more than wipes out your winnings from the first 1526.

Charles never advocates progression, other than on his ultimate betting strategy, that doesn't seem to work. He says multiple times that he has a flat bet that wins every session.

Also, it is pure common sense that you would have to consistently win more than martingale "wipe outs" to consistently win using martingale.

Quote: ThatDonGuy

As for "no-zero roulette," in theory, any system will win "eventually."

I'm talking about consistently winning more sessions and units than losing. This is all very simple. For example, if I win 6 out of 10 sessions (on no zero or any roulette), using flat bets, after hundreds of thousands of sessions, this would obviously be a consistent winner.

Quote: tough

Charles never advocates progression, other than on his ultimate betting strategy, that doesn't seem to work. He says multiple times that he has a flat bet that wins every session.

"Every" session? And have you seen evidence of this, or are just taking his word for it?

Quote: tough

Also, it is pure common sense that you would have to consistently win more than martingale "wipe outs" to consistently win using martingale.

Not if you manage to avoid the wipeouts. It's not that hard to have 100 consecutive winning Martingale sessions.

Quote: tough

Just think of this as winning more than losing.


Charles never advocates progression, other than on his ultimate betting strategy, that doesn't seem to work. He says multiple times that he has a flat bet that wins every session.

Also, it is pure common sense that you would have to consistently win more than martingale "wipe outs" to consistently win using martingale.


I'm talking about consistently winning more sessions and units than losing. This is all very simple. For example, if I win 6 out of 10 sessions (on no zero or any roulette), using flat bets, after hundreds of thousands of sessions, this would obviously be a consistent winner.

Ok I have to speak up. I left the roulette forum that I normally would hang out to get away from this Charles system crap. I really hated hearing about this stuff. It’s mindless. A puzzle that doesn’t fit together, and just doesn’t work. I hate these system people and now that I see you advocateing for this Charles dude it all makes sense right now.

I am going to make accusations that this tough guy was here for this reason alone. Screw the Charles system or whoever he is because I don’t care if his system works your minions are annoying and not good at advertisements.

Quote: heatmap

Ok I have to speak up. I left the roulette forum that I normally would hang out to get away from this Charles system crap. I really hated hearing about this stuff. It’s mindless. A puzzle that doesn’t fit together, and just doesn’t work. I hate these system people and now that I see you advocateing for this Charles dude it all makes sense right now.

I am going to make accusations that this tough guy was here for this reason alone. Screw the Charles system or whoever he is because I don’t care if his system works your minions are annoying and not good at advertisements.

I tend to agree. Considering appropriate moderation options.

Quote: OnceDear

I tend to agree. Considering appropriate moderation options.

OK Member 'tough'. Welcome to the forum.
You may or may not be here just to tout someone's web site or system, but be advised that such spamming will not be tolerated. If you wish to discuss systems, the only sub-forum where that is done is https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/
But don't go promoting system sellers to any extent, under any circumstances.

Rules 3 and 10 apply

Quote: OnceDear

I tend to agree. Considering appropriate moderation options.

and this is coming from the most persistent person on here about what i normally post about, but at some point A PERSON would get tired of his own crap and move on, but this is multiple people who spread this and its probably because they are paid to do it because thats the only way to make money with the system probably

Quote: Ace2

At some foreign casinos I’ve seen people tracking results on paper. In the USA they make it easier by showing the last 20 or so results on a vertical screen

The only way you’d get banned is outright cheating (like placing a bet after the ball fell into a number) or if you were able to identify significantly biased wheels, which probably don’t exist in major casinos

Biased wheel playing is not really cheating though?

Quote: OnceDear

be advised that such spamming will not be tolerated.

Define spamming. I haven't spammed, unless you consider sharing my own personal experiences and what lead to them as spamming.

What are rules 3 and 10? That link just goes to the betting systems section.

I am selling nothing, would never sell anything, nor promote the sale of anything. There is absolutely no exchange of money happening. I don't think that you would truly think I am being paid by some invisible man to promote free roulette knowledge.

I am not selling, nor promoting the sale of anything whatsoever. I am only sharing my experiences or knowledge I have learned about randomness.

I am neither promoting nor selling systems. I am being treated unfairly.

Quote: heatmap

now that I see you advocateing for this Charles dude it all makes sense right now.

heatmap, you are obviously delusional. What makes sense? I have neither connection nor ties to Charles in any way. I am not advertising him. Maybe I'll make some accusation why you’re here too.

Quote: tough

Define spamming. I haven't spammed, unless you consider sharing my own personal experiences and what lead to them as spamming.

What are rules 3 and 10? That link just goes to the betting systems section.

I am selling nothing, would never sell anything, nor promote the sale of anything. There is absolutely no exchange of money happening. I don't think that you would truly think I am being paid by some invisible man to promote free roulette knowledge.

I am not selling, nor promoting the sale of anything whatsoever. I am only sharing my experiences or knowledge I have learned about randomness.

I am neither promoting nor selling systems. I am being treated unfairly.

heatmap, you are obviously delusional. What makes sense? I have neither connection nor ties to Charles in any way. I am not advertising him. Maybe I'll make some accusation why you’re here too.

lol im a felon what more can you say to me to make me feel bad? ive reformed my life, have 2 degrees, although only associate degrees, im still proud. trust me when i tell you all systems are crap.

The one and only system that allows you to have an advantage over the casino is if you walk away when you are up, and always walk away when you are up. Exactly what you said to do except you have a "system" attached to what you are trying to say.

You may win, but its not because of the system its because you took a chance. Maybe you are good at walking away when you are up... but thats it. its not the system. stop telling yourself it is, and give yourself more credit for doing what you do.

Quote: tough

Define spamming. I haven't spammed, unless you consider sharing my own personal experiences and what lead to them as spamming.

What are rules 3 and 10? That link just goes to the betting systems section.

I've corrected the link for you

Rules 3 and 10 apply

Quote:

I am selling nothing, would never sell anything, nor promote the sale of anything.

Glad to hear that. Nonetheless, you are implicitly promoting a system that has monetary value to it's creator. We have no way of knowing if you are a shill for him, or just one of his hapless victims. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I'll assume you have wasted your years of research and are just another victim of gamblers fallacy delusions. You sure as heck are not one enlightened by 'Charles' and shown the course to great wealth.

Quote:

There is absolutely no exchange of money happening. I don't think that you would truly think I am being paid by some invisible man to promote free roulette knowledge.

Free roulette knowledge = The house has an immutable edge and no strategy or money management system can dent that. You claimed to.
Yes. I believe that, and I can assure you that wizard believes that. We are not conspiring against you to hide the secret of beating random. :o)
There are some that post nonsense systems here just to annoy or troll the forum. Such posters can expect to get push-back.

Quote:

I am not selling, nor promoting the sale of anything whatsoever. I am only sharing my experiences or knowledge I have learned about randomness.

Thank you. Share away. But would you not be wiser to keep your house beating knowledge secret and just go out and thrash the casinos?

Quote:

I am being treated unfairly.

Your posts are possibly being treated harshly, in as much as it's being suggested that 'Charles system is crap' and that you are in error or that maybe your motives are mischievous.
We tend to attack the writing rather than the writer, as per rule 1. If you write posts about strategies for 'beating random' or defeating the edge in roulette, you might want to brace yourself. Nothing personal about it. We DO get lots of shills and trolls here.

Quote:

heatmap, you are obviously delusional.

That's the sort of insult that gets members suspended.

I'll simply suggest that if you believe you can beat random after your extensive research, that you do one last check of your research and that you then invest your time and money into getting fabulously wealthy.

Quote: OnceDear

you are implicitly promoting a system that has monetary value to it's creator. We have no way of knowing if you are a shill for him, or just one of his hapless victims.

Charles cannot possibly benefit monetarily in any way. You couldn't give him money, find him, or even contact him if you wanted to. He only writes, instructing people who have found a winning method by using his clues to give to their local children in need. Charles cannot possibly be behind every nonprofit child organization secretly stealing the money. Even if he was, people would have to be foolish enough to bet without thoroughly testing their method, win, then donate.

No one has any way of knowing whether or not anyone is a shill for anything. Why would he have shills for him? How would he benefit in any way? Is he just super rich and wanting to spread lies on roulette or what? Is he trying to create gambling addictions for people? I've actually thought that these might be reasons for his knowledge, but I have confirmed that he was telling the truth through my own research.

Quote: OnceDear

and that you then invest your time and money into getting fabulously wealthy

Part of the problem is that I can only beat no zero roulette, which doesn't exist. Another problem is that I would have to track results and bets on paper, which would expose my method; the casino could just zoom in on it via camera or something could happen. So, I wanted to see how confident the experts are that random cannot be beaten. If they are overly confident, then perhaps I can safely track results and bets on paper.

Quote: OnceDear

But would you not be wiser to keep your house beating knowledge secret and just go out and thrash the casinos?

I've considered this. I wouldn't have found this information if it wasn't for Charles, and it was on a public website, so I don't see the harm.

Quote: tough

Charles cannot possibly benefit monetarily in any way.

this is why i dont like this thing. whoever believes this system talks about him like hes a cult leader or something. And its not for money. Thats what really throws me for a loop. Like when you eventually figure out his system, he contacts you and then you disappear or something.

Quote: tough

Charles cannot possibly benefit monetarily in any way.

she/he doth protest too much. Whatever the case, you were asked to avoid doing anything that might be perceived as touting. If in doubt send a private message a moderator and clear it first with them and there won't be an issue.

Everyone keeps calling it a system, but it is just a bet selection method. Idk if you would classify this as a system. Maybe everyone who thinks all systems are bunk just classify everything they think is bunk as a system. Charles avoids calling his method a system, but calls it a consistent winning formula.

Quote: tough

Everyone keeps calling it a system, but it is just a bet selection method. Idk if you would classify this as a system. Maybe everyone who thinks all systems are bunk just classify everything they think is bunk as a system. Charles avoids calling his method a system, but calls it a consistent winning formula.

He can call it macaroni if he wants, but if he claims it is a consistent winning formula, he is not honest.

Is this what EvenBob used to do?

Quote: tough

Part of the problem is that I can only beat no zero roulette, which doesn't exist.

Even flat betting can beat no zero roulette every time, if you wait long enough.

In your testing of no zero roulette, what is the most spins you have had to bet before you had a winning session?

Quote: tough

Is there a way to confirm that there really are no banned roulette players?

There are lots of them, but none have been banned solely for winning.
If yoWaste your time trying to understand women or something.
u enjoy roulette, play it, don't waste time trying to beat the wheel.

Quote: FleaStiff

There are lots of them, but none have been banned solely for winning.
If yoWaste your time trying to understand women or something.
u enjoy roulette, play it, don't waste time trying to beat the wheel.

So REDACTED BY ME IM SORRY LOL is where I came from before I was here.

Kav, the person who owns the website, does make "systems", and he is actually employed, or his content has been bought by 888 casino although I dont think that makes it more credible. Im pretty sure his stance on this entire this is how we feel about this situation, but the thread link I have posted is a good example of where our friend tough may have been before. Scroll up a few posts, and you will see in the thread about this Charles guy, that people also are arguing with someone who is doing it based off of his "experience".

Tough i hope you know that the people you may be writing too may not all be smarter or as smart, or even be able to make money on roulette like you, but whoever made up this system, is either a really scarily smart person who has this as some kind of script, and you are a victim of this, or you somehow have to be connected to it.

either way if im wrong that one of those things are going on, then explain to us the system. Because you have figured it out from the puzzle. Because the one thing you have not done and will never do is post the system, or proof that the system works in any way. And really reading what you are saying, is all up to interpretation to us as individuals, and I personally think thats the system. This guy charles has come up with a long "con" to simply make people believe in themselves. like i tried to tell you before.

ARG? <-- thats a message for charles

Ahh its all coming back to me now. Duncan vs Charles... if you guys decide to go down the rabit hole by clicking that link above im sorry lol

Quote: heatmap

So https://www.roulettelife.com/index.php/topic,1341.msg42140.html is where I came from before I was here....

ARG? <-- thats a message for charles

Quote:

if you guys decide to go down the rabbit hole by clicking that link above I'm sorry lol.

I paid a visit and very quickly got tired of the nonsense being espoused in garbled English. Life's too short!

Life's too short to engage with the same nonsense if it gets replicated here. I suggest we call it out: Walk away: Don't feed it oxygen by constantly bumping such threads.

Quote: heatmap

Tough i hope you know that the people you may be writing too may not all be smarter or as smart, or even be able to make money on roulette like you, but whoever made up this system, is either a really scarily smart person

The thing is I am not that smart. I have an average IQ. People like the wizard are out of my league. If he really has no idea about beating randomness, then he is probably just so convinced of the math that he hasn't dedicated any time to something like this.

Another possibility is divine intervention. An oversimplification of this would be God choosing who He want to see it or not. Look. I am not all that like Charles. He is against religion and politics, where I am both religious and political. Yet Charles says that the right people (people who will keep his end of the deal to donate to children in need) will figure it out. He must be a believer of something then, right? How would the "right people" magically figure it out?

I couldn't have been conned (a "victim"), because I can beat no zero roulette (if only it existed). I figured out how to beat no zero roulette based on clues from his website.

Quote: heatmap

So https://www.roulettelife.com/index.php/topic,1341.msg42140.html is where I came from before I was here.

heatmap and Reyth's posts are the only discernable ones on that link. Those people are mean, and I won't even waste time trying to determine what they are saying. LOL.

Quote: heatmap

https://www.roulettelife.com/index.php/topic,1341.msg42140.html

In Gluckwunch's post, 5 spins result in the number 6 out of 46 spins. Do you think it is just random that Gluckwunch is behaving like someone who is demonically possessed and gives a sample like this? 666 is the devil's number. Maybe it is just random, but it is interesting to look at, right?

There were 6 spins that resulted in the number 5, so at least the number 6 wasn't the dominate one. I think it was the second most dominate number.

Quote: tough

In Gluckwunch's post, 5 spins result in the number 6 out of 46 spins. Do you think it is just random that Gluckwunch is behaving like someone who is demonically possessed and gives a sample like this? 666 is the devil's number. Maybe it is just random, but it is interesting to look at, right?

There were 6 spins that resulted in the number 5, so at least the number 6 wasn't the dominate one. I think it was the second most dominate number.

Time to jump some sharks.

Quote: ThatDonGuy

Even flat betting can beat no zero roulette every time, if you wait long enough.

In your testing of no zero roulette, what is the most spins you have had to bet before you had a winning session?

Here is a list of 50/50 runs (e.g. coin toss, or red/black on no-zero roulette) that needed 10 million or more bets to make a profit (the numbers in parentheses are how far behind they got), in order from longest run to smallest:
72,472,009,216 (266,220)
5,651,885,734 (133,932)
3,274,219,506 (51,426)
2,139,639,866 (42,084)
1,841,755,006 (53,087)
896,582,304 (38,864)
873,427,282 (35,890)
750,511,596 (40,646)
462,235,176 (49,540)
139,844,820 (18,692)
137,575,784 (13,761)
95,164,936 (8,163)
88,922,250 (10,798)
72,870,206 (9,239)
71,161,824 (15,138)
64,377,112 (10,027)
61,787,430 (7,017)
55,996,500 (10,802)
53,113,906 (12,279)
38,682,466 (8,449)
37,692,524 (12,124)
32,031,952 (5,788)
28,963,860 (8,259)
24,142,340 (7,277)
22,129,178 (4,494)
20,783,054 (5,514)
19,996,336 (6,115)
19,267,568 (4,654)
18,461,580 (3,967)
17,013,722 (4,023)
16,592,118 (5,444)
15,198,470 (3,030)
15,092,264 (6,398)
14,101,278 (2,786)
13,571,782 (3,463)
12,890,908 (4,519)
12,430,746 (6,272)
12,369,294 (5,201)
12,282,076 (3,183)
12,085,964 (5,642)
I am also in the middle of a run of over 185,000,000,000 bets as I type this.

Eat your mushrooms. Charles said he had cancer and the only thing he did differently for it to go away was consume mushrooms.

Quote: tough

Eat your mushrooms. Charles said he had cancer and the only thing he did differently for it to go away was consume mushrooms.

didnt think wed agree on anything i like the funny ones too

strategy for 𝑷𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓𝒃𝒂𝒍𝒍 that could possibly give you an edge when the payout is greater than the number of possible combinations

play these 7 numbers:

1,2,3,4,5,6,...............................7

nobody plays those numbers because they think it's impossible that they could come - so there won't be a split of the pot

but they have the same chance as any other 7 numbers

unless other people are doing this - then you don't have an edge - and this is something you cannot possibly know

and even if nobody is - the edge is likely only theoretical since it's very, very unlikely you will score

still, kind of interesting, (to me anyway)

Quote: billryan

Time to jump some sharks.

Time to jump some sharks.

Quote: lilredrooster

strategy for 𝑷𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓𝒃𝒂𝒍𝒍 that could possibly give you an edge when the payout is greater than the number of possible combinations

play these 7 numbers:

1,2,3,4,5,6,...............................7

nobody plays those numbers because they think it's impossible that they could come - so there won't be a split of the pot

but they have the same chance as any other 7 numbers

unless other people are doing this - then you don't have an edge - and this is something you cannot possibly know

and even if nobody is - the edge is likely only theoretical since it's very, very unlikely you will score

still, kind of interesting, (to me anyway)

I like this thinking. This reminds me of a time I was in an argument with someone who thinks that playing the same lotto numbers every time gives you a better chance of winning. I told this same story to someone else who also kind of agreed with him/her. This annoys me greatly.

Important note: none of Charles' information applies to rng. His tests seem to conclude rng software is rigged. You must go to a real bricks and mortar casino to win. Obviously, first run simulations to determine that you really have an edge beyond a doubt. Also, obviously, you have to travel the world going from casino to casino, because you'd be banned or something. Charles also writes about live online casinos cheating.

Quote: lilredrooster

strategy for 𝑷𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓𝒃𝒂𝒍𝒍 that could possibly give you an edge when the payout is greater than the number of possible combinations

play these 7 numbers:

1,2,3,4,5,6,...............................7

nobody plays those numbers because they think it's impossible that they could come - so there won't be a split of the pot

Actually, in the early days of California's Lotto (that had only 6 numbers), they asked a number of famous people what numbers they play, and it was either Steve Jobs or Steve Wozniak that responded, "1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, because they are just as likely as any other numbers."

This reminds me of a couple of contests Games Magazine ran - in one, you sent in a valid uncapitalized English word, and in another, you sent in an integer from 1 to 1,000,000; in both cases, the winner was the person who sent in the first (in alphabetical order, or from smallest to largest, accordingly) value that was not sent in by anyone else. The most popular responses were "a" and "1," and in just about every case, the reason was, "Just in case everybody else thinks that nobody else will do it." (I think the second most popular entry in the number contest was 1,000,000, but that was because of a flaw in the rules; the prize was capped at $1000, except that if the winning number turned out to be 1,000,000, the winner would get $10,000.)

If you want to convince people that the pattern of outcomes on a roulette wheel is not random- and that the non-randomness can be exploited by various patterns of wagering - then it seems to me that you should search for an explanation as to why the roulette wheel is "not random." Because, without such an explanation, patterns of betting make no sense.

So, just for chuckles I tried that. Keep in mind that I am an (out-of-practice) physicist.

I tried to formulate a hypothesis as follows (written in non-rigorous jargon):

Perhaps the nature of spacetime has a lower energy state, that is, it has a "causal preference" for the periodic repetition (in time) for the exact same mass and energy configurations that have earlier occurred in time in that same small position in space, To wit, if the roulette ball went into the five slot at a certain angular speed of the ball, at a certain angular speed of the wheel and at a certain angular location, then maybe the waveform of spacetime prefers the ball to go into the 5 slot again when those precise values of rotational speeds and positions are matched. (I use the word "prefer" to indicate that there might be a lower energy state for spacetime if that were to happen.) And that the nature of the fabric of space time prefers this local repetition of angular speed, position ,and ball movement so much that it distorts randomness by nudging the speeds and positions of the apparatus so as to slightly increase the probability of a a certain mass/energy state occurring again (such as the roulette ball going into the 5 slot.)

So, I was trying to hypothesize that the space-time fabric of the universe might favor that local, identical configurations of mass and energy be repeated in time. I was fancifully thinking of localized virtual wormholes that might connect time A and time B at the same spatial location if times A and B had nearly identical mass/energy configurations. Such virtual wormholes might lower the energy level of spacetime and provide a source of energy for the departure from randomness. Absolutely, no proof, of course - but striving to think of a possible reason for non-randomness in the physical universe.

Then I realized something that made this silly idea fall part.

That roulette wheel system is on a planet that is rotating around its axis, that is moving rapidly in orbit around the sun, and is part of a solar system that is in orbit around the Milky Way Galaxy. The roulette wheel is not stationary, rather it is moving through space at very high speeds (and in a non-inertial frame of reference) and thus there is no "local spacetime fabric" to recognize that the identical roulette wheel configuration exists at two different points in time and to participate in causing non-random outcomes on the wheel. There is insufficient symmetry in space, mass and energy between the two points in time.

Dang it.

So, I can't even begin to make it work. Sorry, I tried. But, I think we're still stuck with randomness.

You are thinking too small. Go big. Multi-verse or even Omni-verse.

Maybe I will snap my fingers and make half the random outcomes disappear.

Take care that you don't send the winning half to the cornfield.

actually gordon you know its impossible for the roulette wheel to exceed the number 36 so thats not random i think i get it

Quote: tough

Important note: none of Charles'

Is there a link to this Charles
person? I need a good laugh..

It takes all kinds, I've seen "random" wild plays at Blackjack that "save" the table. Some say they "felt it" or figured things aren't going well by playing correct basic strategy, so maybe they'll work out by playing against correct basic strategy.

This past Thursday, had a Caitlyn Jenner type person at the table, and they would hit nearly every hand from 12 to hard 16 regardless of what the dealer was showing, and surprisingly enough, won the majority of hands and walked out with $975 after buying in for $140. Their bets ranged from $25-$200 and unless their wig had X-ray vision that sent signals to this person, there's no way it was anything but random luck.

Quote: gordonm888

Maybe I will snap my fingers and make half the random outcomes disappear.

Random results can be influenced by outside forces that cause the "randomness" to be not so random. This isn't even part of my formula, but something I learned through my research and experiences.

When I win 1,000 bets in a row, using a specific bet selection method, I begin to think that it's not random.

Charles refused to lower his figures to make them seem more realistic. I am doing the same. Sorry, but I choose to live in the real world.