Question for the roulette on-line guys
QUESTION: If you lived 5 minutes from a REAL casino (0 wheel) would you STILL play on-line and for God sakes why? I'll even add this.....at the B&M casino, the spins are every two minutes with a low min. bet. I think some are addicted to on-line betting, just my opinion.
Ken
Ken
Quote: mrjjjI wouldn't play it but I guess if thats the only choice, okay.
QUESTION: If you lived 5 minutes from a REAL casino (0 wheel) would you STILL play on-line and for God sakes why? I'll even add this.....at the B&M casino, the spins are every two minutes with a low min. bet. I think some are addicted to on-line betting, just my opinion.
Ken
If you have a large bankroll, discipline, and a method that you think works, wouldn't you want to play online and maximize the number of spins that you get to see? Faster is better if your method works, isn't it? If you're making money on a net basis, then maximizing the number of spins would maximize your profit. Do you just not trust the online casinos?
Quote: rdw4potusIf you have a large bankroll, discipline, and a method that you think works, wouldn't you want to play online and maximize the number of spins that you get to see? Faster is better if your method works, isn't it? If you're making money on a net basis, then maximizing the number of spins would maximize your profit. Do you just not trust the online casinos?
To be fair, I should be more specific. On-line can mean two different things.......On-line RNG are we you about? A person would have to be CRAZY to play it, in my opinion.
OR
On-line, DublinBet is a great example to play at. In terms of 'faster spins', thats why I stated one every two minutes, which is NOT terrible.
So, a real B&M casino (0 wheel) 5 minutes away OR....on line RNG?
Ken
Quote: mrjjjTo be fair, I should be more specific. On-line can mean two different things.......On-line RNG are we you about? A person would have to be CRAZY to play it, in my opinion.
OR
On-line, DublinBet is a great example to play at. In terms of 'faster spins', thats why I stated one every two minutes, which is NOT terrible.
So, a real B&M casino (0 wheel) 5 minutes away OR....on line RNG?
Ken
If wheel bias doesn't exist and the AP crew really can't use it in B&M roulette and the online random number generator is fair, then the real wheel and the RNG should be equally fair. So if you don't actually like the game and you just want to make money using your method, I still think the speed differential would make RNG better than B&M.
Quote: rdw4potusIf wheel bias doesn't exist and the AP crew really can't use it in B&M roulette and the online random number generator is fair, then the real wheel and the RNG should be equally fair. So if you don't actually like the game and you just want to make money using your method, I still think the speed differential would make RNG better than B&M.
Sometimes I dont believe my eyes, what I read. Thats why I ask if I 'got this right'.
So playing (under the conditions you posted) at an RNG on-line casino, is BETTER than a B&M casino? On that note, time to get ready for bed.
Ken
Quote: mrjjjSometimes I dont believe my eyes, what I read. Thats why I ask if I 'got this right'.
So playing (under the conditions you posted) at an RNG on-line casino, is BETTER than a B&M casino? On that note, time to get ready for bed.
Ken
Well, yes. If you think your method is actually going to make you money (cough) (lol), then playing at a faster pace at a fair online casino will make you more money.
Quote: mrjjj
So playing (under the conditions you posted) at an RNG on-line casino, is BETTER than a B&M casino? On that note, time to get ready for bed.
If you think your game is +EV, and you are playing in order to exploit it and make money, then yes, absolutely, it is better to play online, because it is faster, and you don't have to waste time on getting to and from the casino. If it does not let you play fast enough, open two windows. You don't have to interrupt your betting while you eat or (if you have a laptop) even pee. Of course it is better, because (in your world) you will make more money that way.
On a different note. RNG stands for Random Number Generator. A roulette whell is an RNG as it generates random numbers.
Quote: weaselmanIf you think your game is +EV, and you are playing in order to exploit it and make money, then yes, absolutely, it is better to play online, because it is faster, and you don't have to waste time on getting to and from the casino. If it does not let you play fast enough, open two windows. You don't have to interrupt your betting while you eat or (if you have a laptop) even pee. Of course it is better, because (in your world) you will make more money that way.
On a different note. RNG stands for Random Number Generator. A roulette whell is an RNG as it generates random numbers.
To elaborate, the game of American roulette is played with a uniform (i.e. equally-likely) distribution of numbers between 0-36 plus 00. In other words, the intent is that each of those 38 numbers occurs with the same probability 1 in 38. Regardless of whether the RNG is implemented in software or with a rotating wheel and bouncing ball, if the outcome distribution is indeed uniform then the math for the game is correct. In other words, it doesn't matter whether you use a software RNG/PRNG, a roulette wheel, a deck of 38 cards, a set of 38 keno balls, or anything else -- if the odds of each number are 1 in 38 then the game math is the same.
So if you have a method/system/technique/strategy for playing roulette that does not require a bias in the distribution of roulette numbers, it will be equally successful regardless of how those numbers are generated. On the other hand, if your system does require a bias to be present, and you can only detect that bias with a physical roulette wheel, then playing online won't have the same results. Or if you can identify a bias in the implementation of the software RNG, that obviously doesn't translate to the physical world, so playing in a physical casino won't have the same results.
Quote: weaselmanIf you think your game is +EV, and you are playing in order to exploit it and make money, then yes, absolutely, it is better to play online, because it is faster, and you don't have to waste time on getting to and from the casino. If it does not let you play fast enough, open two windows. You don't have to interrupt your betting while you eat or (if you have a laptop) even pee. Of course it is better, because (in your world) you will make more money that way.
On a different note. RNG stands for Random Number Generator. A roulette whell is an RNG as it generates random numbers.
I DID SAY.....if it was 5 minutes away and one spin every two minutes. I know what RNG is.....'Intercasino' is one such example. You guys are wacky wack.
You would TRUST your hard earned money on...."its probably fair. I love the coastal islands this time of year". (If you dont understand that comment, you should not be playing on-line).
OR.....5 minutes away is a real wheel with a real ball and a real dealer. Hey, its your money, have a blast.
Ken
Quote: MathExtremistQuote: weaselmanIf you think your game is +EV, and you are playing in order to exploit it and make money, then yes, absolutely, it is better to play online, because it is faster, and you don't have to waste time on getting to and from the casino. If it does not let you play fast enough, open two windows. You don't have to interrupt your betting while you eat or (if you have a laptop) even pee. Of course it is better, because (in your world) you will make more money that way.
On a different note. RNG stands for Random Number Generator. A roulette whell is an RNG as it generates random numbers.
To elaborate, the game of American roulette is played with a uniform (i.e. equally-likely) distribution of numbers between 0-36 plus 00. In other words, the intent is that each of those 38 numbers occurs with the same probability 1 in 38. Regardless of whether the RNG is implemented in software or with a rotating wheel and bouncing ball, if the outcome distribution is indeed uniform then the math for the game is correct. In other words, it doesn't matter whether you use a software RNG/PRNG, a roulette wheel, a deck of 38 cards, a set of 38 keno balls, or anything else -- if the odds of each number are 1 in 38 then the game math is the same.
So if you have a method/system/technique/strategy for playing roulette that does not require a bias in the distribution of roulette numbers, it will be equally successful regardless of how those numbers are generated. On the other hand, if your system does require a bias to be present, and you can only detect that bias with a physical roulette wheel, then playing online won't have the same results. Or if you can identify a bias in the implementation of the software RNG, that obviously doesn't translate to the physical world, so playing in a physical casino won't have the same results.
"it will be equally successful regardless of how those numbers are generated" >>> With a 100% fair on-line casino, I agree with you. Again, you would TRUST RNG for your betting? WOW!!!
Ken
Quote: mrjjjWith a 100% fair on-line casino, I agree with you. Again, you would TRUST RNG for your betting? WOW!!!
Of course I would. I used to write them for a living and they were regulated by the most trustworthy of authorities -- like the Nevada Gaming Control Board. Did you know that the vast majority of gambling outcomes in all land-based casinos are generated by software RNGs? Did you know that there are more electronic RNG-based blackjack games in Nevada than physical ones with felt and playing cards?
Quote: MathExtremistOf course I would. I used to write them for a living and they were regulated by the most trustworthy of authorities -- like the Nevada Gaming Control Board. Did you know that the vast majority of gambling outcomes in all land-based casinos are generated by software RNGs? Did you know that there are more electronic RNG-based blackjack games in Nevada than physical ones with felt and playing cards?
Are we on the same page? I'm talking about the on-line casinos (RNG) from those goofy chain islands....OFF SHORE etc.
Ken
Quote: mrjjj
I DID SAY.....if it was 5 minutes away and one spin every two minutes.
Five minutes is more than zero minutes. You can make 100 bets online in 10 minutes it takes you to get to and from the casino.
Quote:know what RNG is.....
Good for you. You don't sound like it though when you are opposing a roulette wheel to it.
Quote:You would TRUST your hard earned money on...."its probably fair.
No, I would not.
But we are talking about a hypothetical situation, as stated by rdw4potus:
. If you think your method is actually going to make you money (cough) (lol), then playing at a faster pace at a fair online casino will make you more money.
The casino offering a fair game is part of the condition.
Quote:I love the coastal islands this time of year". (If you dont understand that comment, you should not be playing on-line).
Well ... I rarely understand what you are saying (your style is not particularly clear), and I never play online.
It sounds like we just found one thing you and I agree on :)
Quote: mrjjjAre we on the same page? I'm talking about the on-line casinos (RNG) from those goofy chain islands....OFF SHORE etc.
Ken
I trust Nevada; it is well regulated. I don't trust off shore gaming.
Quote: CrystalMathI trust Nevada; it is well regulated. I don't trust off shore gaming.
BINGO...thats what I am talking about, off shore. What person would gamble (RNG) through on off shore account? DublinBet is off shore but its LIVE.
RNG (similar to Intercasino), you would have to be on crack, sorry.
Ken
Pure s**t, dont trust RNG.
Ken
Quote: mrjjjAre we on the same page? I'm talking about the on-line casinos (RNG) from those goofy chain islands....OFF SHORE etc.
That's fine, but in that case what you really don't trust is the online operators, not the generic concept of wagering against an RNG. Every video poker and slot machine game manufactured since the mid-1980s uses an RNG.
Quote: MathExtremistThat's fine, but in that case what you really don't trust is the online operators, not the generic concept of wagering against an RNG. Every video poker and slot machine game manufactured since the mid-1980s uses an RNG.
Ok, so we were not talking about the same thing, no biggie. So then, what on-line roulette game are you talking about as opposed to a real casino?
Ken
Quote: mrjjjI wouldn't play it but I guess if thats the only choice, okay.
QUESTION: If you lived 5 minutes from a REAL casino (0 wheel) would you STILL play on-line and for God sakes why? I'll even add this.....at the B&M casino, the spins are every two minutes with a low min. bet. I think some are addicted to on-line betting, just my opinion.
Ken
Probably. I'd definitely still play Hoyle Casino and other fun-money-only games, but I'm guessing that you're talking about is playing for money. If I'm playing online, I can play in bed, and there's such a thing as $1 min. baccarat, which is bizarre and fun. Online casinos almost always have sic bo; quite a few brick and morar casinos that I've been in didn't seem to. The gimmick that 3Dice has where you can play in 3D is fun (although red/blue lenses make it harder to tell what colour your chips are, especially if they're in a stack). Oh, and I can smoke. If this is supposed to be one of those Illinois casinos where I can't smoke, the online casino will win out any day of the week.
But I guess at a brick and mortar casino you can just walk over to the cage to cash out your winnings, while online casinos make you wait for a check or wire transfer.
1. He says that wheel bias does not exist.
2. Then he says that his method/system requires tracking hot numbers.
Where's the logic behind statment number two if there are no biased wheels? What makes a hot number any better than a cold number if there's no bias?
If there are no biased wheels, then why would it matter one bit as to whether or not he played a roulette machine, online wheels, or a live wheel?
All of them should produce the same results for Mr. Jjj's little system.
To date, he hasn't been able to provide any kind of logic or explanation as to why his system should work. He has only demonstrated the mania and arrogance that appears to be all too common among system inventors.
Quote: mrjjj
Pure s**t, dont trust RNG.
Ken
Anybody who's ever had any kind of consistent success
on a real wheel, knows immediately that RNG's are not
the same. At all. But like Ken says, its your money, knock
yourself out.
Quote: KeyserMr. Jjj needs to explain why he feels that his system works better in a real casino than it would online via an RNG.
Simple. A real wheel produces 'true random' results. A computer RNG produces 'pseudo random' (fake) results. They look the same in the long run, but in the very short term, where we place our bets, the results are very different indeed.
I remember when they came out with those big screen virtual roulette setups in Vegas. You know, they have a giant virtual dealer spinning a virtual wheel. The old timer roulette players in Vegas, the 'I've been playing roulette for decades' guys, tried these new contraptions, and proclaimed them to be unplayable. They couldn't say why, but the results were just not the same as real wheels. To know this, you have to have been playing very specific routines for a long long time, and know what the results look like. When the same routines are played on an RNG, they look and feel totally different.
What would be your opinion of a RNG using a external source of entropy be?
I can't make it worth your time and effort, though. It's just interesting.
Quote: thecesspitI'd like to see a test if EvenBob could tell the difference between a series of results from a real wheel and from a Random Number generator
Never gonna happen, and here's why. I don't care if anybody believes it,
it doesn't profit me in the slightest to prove it. If you care enough, prove
it to yourself like I did, or Ken did. Or the old timers in Vegas did.
Quote: EvenBobSimple. A real wheel produces 'true random' results. A computer RNG produces 'pseudo random' (fake) results. They look the same in the long run, but in the very short term, where we place our bets, the results are very different indeed.
To echo thecesspit's sentiments, it would be trivial to produce a computerized series of roulette numbers based on radioactive decay which is "truly random". See HotBits for an example. That is unarguably random over any period of time, short or long.
And having done that, I could just as easily substitute a PRNG like the Mersenne Twister for HotBits and you would never be able to tell the difference. Neither would anyone else, including your old timer roulette playing friends.
If you dispute this assertion, I'd be happy to set up a WoV challenge to put my hypothesis to the test. My claim is this:
Neither you, nor anyone you choose to invite, will be able to tell the difference between a number produced by a computerized PRNG, a computerized true RNG, and a physical roulette wheel.
I propose a roulette version of the Turing Test. The procedure would be:
1) Hidden from you, roll a single die.
2) Hidden from you but based on the result of the die, generate a roulette number using one of the three methods above. If the die shows 1 or 2, use the PRNG. If the die shows 3 or 4, use the true RNG. If the die shows 5 or 6, use the roulette wheel.
3) Hidden from you, enter the number into a computer database.
4) Repeat steps 1-3 300 times.
5) When completed, show you the contents of the database. For each roulette number in the database, you are to determine which of the three methods was used to generate the number.
I postulate that your results will not be statistically different than if you had merely guessed. If you believe otherwise, let's put it to the test.
Edit: well, this is disappointing. EvenBob apparently declined to examine the issue while I was writing this up.
Quote: EvenBobNever gonna happen, and here's why. I don't care if anybody believes it,
it doesn't profit me in the slightest to prove it. If you care enough, prove
it to yourself like I did, or Ken did. Or the old timers in Vegas did.
Indeed, as I said "I can't make it worth your while". I don't expect you to rise to any such challenge. I don't expect you to give the slightest bit of proof or give three bits for whether the collected anonymous masses on the internet think your full of it or not. I'm well aware of your attitude to that. No reason to change what's working for you.
I don't care enough to do all the work to prove it either way. I just find the claim interesting and would like to see someone put it to the test. There's lots of things I'd "like" to happen, but not enough to put the serious effort into them happening.
Quote: MathExtremist
I propose a roulette version of the Turing Test. The procedure would be:
1) Hidden from you, roll a single die.
2) Hidden from you but based on the result of the die, generate a roulette number using one of the three methods above. If the die shows 1 or 2, use the PRNG. If the die shows 3 or 4, use the true RNG. If the die shows 5 or 6, use the roulette wheel.
3) Hidden from you, enter the number into a computer database.
4) Repeat steps 1-3 300 times.
5) When completed, show you the contents of the database. For each roulette number in the database, you are to determine which of the three methods was used to generate the number.
You'd have to create multiple streams of X numbers, from each method. Randomize them. Then get the subject to identify which stream is from which method, without knowing how many of each stream-type is in the total set of streams.
It's not the individual numbers. It's the streams of numbers coming from a roulette wheel that have a different "texture" from a RNG. Or at least that's the claim as I understand it.
Quote: thecesspit
I don't care enough to do all the work to prove it either way. I just find the claim interesting and would like to see someone put it to the test.
Its like this. Once you've gone thru all the work and all the trouble to prove it
to yourself, you find you could care less if anybody else believes it. If they want
to believe RNG's and real wheels are the same, thats fine. Because, again, its
their money they're wasting and not yours.
Quote: EvenBobIts like this. Once you've gone thru all the work and all the trouble to prove it
to yourself, you find you could care less if anybody else believes it. If they want
to believe RNG's and real wheels are the same, thats fine. Because, again, its
their money they're wasting and not yours.
Nobody's saying they're the same. But they are mathematically equivalent insofar as anyone is able to discern with intuition or qualitative observation. The only way you or anyone else could possibly tell that a sequence of numbers in the range 0, 00, 1 .. 36 comes from a different distribution than another is via statistical analysis of a sufficiently large sample size. Not just by guessing and unfounded suppositions that the results "look and feel totally different". How does "36, 2, 19, 7" coming from an electronic roulette game "look and feel totally different" than "36, 2, 19, 7" coming from a physical wheel game anyway? Or are you suggesting that one of those sequences is less likely on one platform than another?
Quote: MathExtremist
And having done that, I could just as easily substitute a PRNG like the Mersenne Twister for HotBits and you would never be able to tell the difference. Neither would anyone else, including your old timer roulette playing friends.
.
All I can report is this. The RNG's that are used to play roulette online and in virtual casino games, produce different short term results than real wheels do. I used to say the RNG's are less chaotic, and I guess I still tend to believe that. Real wheels produce dependable results, RNG's do not. The thing you heard over and over from the non math, old time players was, I've seen THAT before, I've just never seen it happen 3 times in 1 hour on one wheel. And things along those lines. They saw what they considered rare sequences and rare coincidences, turning up on RNG's on a very regular basis and from that they declared them unplayable and avoided them like the plague.
Quote: EvenBobReal wheels produce dependable results, RNG's do not.
Are you suggesting that there is some pattern you can dependably detect on a physical roulette wheel that you cannot in an RNG game? If that's true, then it's the wheels that are non-random, not the RNGs.
Ken
Quote: MathExtremistAre you suggesting that there is some pattern you can dependably detect on a physical roulette wheel that you cannot in an RNG game? If that's true, then it's the wheels that are non-random, not the RNGs.
What I mean by 'dependable' is there are no big surprises on a real wheel, and RNG's are full of them. The only way you'll ever know or see this is to have a method that you've played in practice and for real thousands of times on a real wheel, and then try to play it on an RNG. You'll end up laughing out loud at the glaring differences. Especially with the RNG's the online casinos use, those are a laugh a minute.
Quote: KeyserMr. Jjj needs to explain why he feels that his system works better in a real casino than it would online via an RNG.
1. He says that wheel bias does not exist.
2. Then he says that his method/system requires tracking hot numbers.
Where's the logic behind statment number two if there are no biased wheels? What makes a hot number any better than a cold number if there's no bias?
If there are no biased wheels, then why would it matter one bit as to whether or not he played a roulette machine, online wheels, or a live wheel?
All of them should produce the same results for Mr. Jjj's little system.
To date, he hasn't been able to provide any kind of logic or explanation as to why his system should work. He has only demonstrated the mania and arrogance that appears to be all too common among system inventors.
At least I have the NUTS to post how I play. I dont HIDE like you do cupcake. I cant slam you because there is nothing to test, thats exactly how you WANT YOUR posts to be, well done. Also, re-read the thread goofball. I said......a real wheel (B&M casino) and an RNG from OFF SHORE betting sites, HUGE DIFFERENCE. You know that but as usual, you need to stir up trouble. I have no problem with random.org but they are not in the business of CHEATING people. (lol) BTW, how is Kyla Shooter doing these days? Any challenges coming up soon?
Ken
I do some light testing from those numbers. My point of bringing it up is that it has NOTHING to do with betting/gambling, no cheating. Some free numbers so I know what the f**k I'm doing for REAL money at a REAL casino.
Ken
Quote: EvenBobWhat I mean by 'dependable' is there are no big surprises on a real wheel, and RNG's are full of them.
Isn't seeing 24 appear as the next number equally surprising on both kinds of games? If not, please describe how/why the number 24 is less or more surprising on a physical wheel than an RNG game.
Quote: EvenBobNever gonna happen, and here's why. I don't care if anybody believes it,
it doesn't profit me in the slightest to prove it. If you care enough, prove
it to yourself like I did, or Ken did. Or the old timers in Vegas did.
Damn, jealous posters I guess? I do 'well' with roulette and I'm not answering to anybody. Everyday is jam packed for me. The fact that Billy Bob on forum xxxx has a gripe with me, not a big deal.
Ken
Quote: MathExtremistIsn't seeing 24 appear as the next number equally surprising on both kinds of games? .
Its sequences of numbers, appearing far more often than they should in that sequence. But you can't see it by looking at it, its only noticeable if you have a specific method that you're familiar with. I've never known anybody who has a specific win rate on a real wheel, claim they have same win rate on an RNG. They always come to the same conclusion that something is wrong with the RNG. I never tell people not to play them, all I know is I can't win on them worth a damn. Ever. If you can, more power to to you.
Quote: EvenBobSimple. A real wheel produces 'true random' results. A computer RNG produces 'pseudo random' (fake) results. They look the same in the long run, but in the very short term, where we place our bets, the results are very different indeed.
This is double BS. First, the wheel does not produce "true random" results. The results it produces are in fact entirely deterministic, there is nothing random about them beyond our (completely technical) inability to predict the outcome. Second, to the contrary from what you are saying, the non-randomness of RNG can manifests itself over a very long series of trials. In the short term, there is no way to tell "pseudo-random" results apart from a truly random sequence.
Quote:The old timer roulette players in Vegas, the 'I've been playing roulette for decades' guys, tried these new contraptions, and proclaimed them to be unplayable.
Of course, they did :)
Quote:I've never known anybody who has a specific win rate on a real wheel, claim they have same win rate on an RNG.
I know plenty of people like that. In fact, 100% of (honest) people, that play American roulette, regardless of its particular implementation, have the same win rate - it is 94.74%
Quote:They always come to the same conclusion that something is wrong with the RNG.
Of course they do :)
And the reason for that is very simple - their results against a computer are easily verifiable.
Quote: weaselmanFirst, the wheel does not produce "true random" results. In the short term, there is no way to tell "pseudo-random" results apart from a truly random sequence.
A wheel produces results far closer to true random than an RNG does. The
only way to judge short term results accurately is to use a method you've
used in practice and in the casino thousands of times on a real wheel. When
you try the same method on an RNG it never works the same. But almost
nobody wants to take the time to do this, oh well.
As far as the old timers go, you can see the phenom in a local casino, if they
offer both real and virtual roulette. After awhile you get to know the regulars
who play the real wheels. If you notice, most of them never play the virtual
wheel, even though its easier to use and produces twice as many spins per
hour. When you ask them why they never use it, they always give the same
answers. 'It won't let me win.' 'I can never win on it.' 'Its rigged.' 'Its not the
same as a real wheel.' Always.
Quote: EvenBobA wheel produces results far closer to true random than an RNG does.
How do you measure "closure to randomness"? Gut feeling?
Quote:The only way to judge short term results accurately is to use a method you've
used in practice and in the casino thousands of times on a real wheel.
It is ... but only for a confused individual convinced that "methods" actually make any difference.
You see "randomness" is a mathematical term. By insisting on your "method", you are effectively denying the math, and insisting the world is ruled by some Unkowable Superpower rather than the laws known to the mankind. That's fine.
But doing that AND talking about "the true randomness" in the same time is bordering on insanity.
Unless, of course, by "random" you mean something entirely different than the rest of us do. Perhaps, you mean something like "following the laws of unknowable superpower that rules the world" rather than "exhibiting certain mathematical properties"? Do you?
If so, I will have to retract my earlier statement - you are the sole master of your imagination, and are free to assign any meaning you want to any term. It just would be less confusing if you chose less common terms in the future. For example, if you said that the RNG is less scomperlastic then the real wheel, rather than "not ttrue random", you would probably not meet any objection, but would still convey just as much useful and sensible info.
Quote: weaselman
It is ... but only for a confused individual convinced that "methods" actually make any difference.
Count me among the permanently confused, then. I thought I
was wasting your time? I'm getting bored, this subject has been
discussed to death on other forums, I have over 20,000 posts on it
floating around in the ether. You're a flat earther and I'm not, I
can live with that.
Quote: EvenBobI'm a flat earther and you're not, I can live with that.
Quote: EvenBobCount me among the permanently confused, then. I thought I
was wasting your time? I'm getting bored, this subject has been
discussed to death on other forums, I have over 20,000 posts on it
floating around in the ether. You're a flat earther and I'm not, I
can live with that.
Good point. We all dont agree with each other, no a huge deal. I'll play the SAME regardless of how many negative posts.
At the end of your casino day.....what's EXTRA in your WALLET is the ONLY important thing!!
Ken
Quote: EvenBobIts sequences of numbers, appearing far more often than they should in that sequence.
You're referring to what's called "serial correlation". Good RNGs are tested for serial correlation bias by checking 2- or 3-length sequences of numbers. Each sequence should be as likely as any other. If you're observing serial correlation in physical roulette wheels, then the number generation process is biased (either the wheel, the croupier, or some combination). Serial correlation does not exist in properly-tested RNG games because that's part of what the labs test for -- and they reject games if they find it.
Quote:But you can't see it by looking at it, its only noticeable if you have a specific method that you're familiar with. I've never known anybody who has a specific win rate on a real wheel, claim they have same win rate on an RNG. They always come to the same conclusion that something is wrong with the RNG. I never tell people not to play them, all I know is I can't win on them worth a damn. Ever. If you can, more power to to you.
That doesn't make any sense. If there's a bias, you can detect it regardless of what, where, or how much you bet, or even if you bet at all. Only the numbers matter, not your bets, unless you subscribe to the absurd notion that how much you bet is somehow related to the numbers that appear in the future. That said, coming to the conclusion that "something is wrong with the RNG" is unfounded. The RNG in any regulated wagering game, including video roulette, is the subject of rigorous statistical tests. The most likely scenario is that you're mis-perceiving a difference where none exists. Tracking the numbers should clear that up. In the absence of that test, or in the event that there truly is a distinction in the distribution of numbers, it's most likely a bias in the physical wheel, not the RNG.
Quote: MathExtremistIf there's a bias, you can detect it
Really? How do they test for short term bias in an RNG? They don't
because they don't know how. They can't force an RNG to consistently
act like a real wheel in the short term, its not possible. If they could,
I'd be playing them from my house.
Quote: EvenBobReally? How do they test for short term bias in an RNG? They don't
because they don't know how. They can't force an RNG to consistently
act like a real wheel in the short term, its not possible.
If you can describe how a real wheel acts in the short term, I can force an RNG to consistently act like one. If you can describe what "short term bias" means, I can test for it.
Can you describe those things, or are you just inventing them as an artifact of flawed perception?
Quote: MathExtremistIf you can describe how a real wheel acts in the short term,
You're the one that wants to be convinced, I already am. I went over this hurdle in 2007 and haven't looked back. Most people here don't know it, but Ken and I were once mortal enemies, we didn't get along at all. Now we're best friends, funny how that works. What we do in roulette is not even remotely the same, but we do agree on many more things than disagree. One thing we agree on is proving your conclusions is pointless. People are going to believe what they believe no matter what you say, so why bother. We also agree that the only people we have to convince of anything all, work at the casino. And they're super easy to convince and pay in cash..
Quote: EvenBobYou're the one that wants to be convinced,
You misunderstand me, then. I don't seek persuasion. I seek understanding. What do you mean by "how a real wheel acts in the short term" that is different from "the chances of each number is 1/38 on every spin"?
