Question for the roulette on-line guys

Almost everybody who plays roulette plays for years plays a method or system they're comfortable with. After thousands of practice sessions at home, and hundreds of real sessions in a casino, you've seen just about everything that can happen, 10 times over. So when you start playing an RNG and find yourself constantly saying "I never saw that before" or "Thats weird", you begin to scratch your head. When it happens in session after session after session, and you keep trying it and trying it, over a long period of time, and the results are a joke, you eventually come to the conclusion RNG's are different. You constantly hear such complaints on the roulette forums, its nothing new. None of this is anything new. Its like shooting two guns that look identical, except you can hit the target with one, and not the other. Eventually you'll just use the one that works.

Theoretically, an RNG should be the same as a wheel. Anecdotal evidence is just that.

A gun can be taken apart and analyzed to show why you can hit a target with one and not another.

Personally, I'm not trying to get an understanding of this. Quite simply, if you believe that previous results are pertinent to current observations, knock yourself out.

RNGs by their very nature produce random numbers and do not look at previous results for their next number. If you believe that previous results are pertinent to current observations, you will not trust RNGs.

However, I am waiting for the mathematical proof that previous results ARE pertinent to current observations on an biased roulette wheel. I would love to see a mathematical formula that even will give the probability of future numbers based on a bias.

What I hear is anecdotal. Do "this system", and it's always based on previous results. If this system does indeed work, it is ONLY because the wheel is flawed and is therefore non-random.

Show us the math. Show us a chart with a pile of real results from a roulette wheel so that the math folk can look for a pattern. Otherwise, I'll go with the standard "you can't show us the math, and therefore you have proven nothing" argument.

"See a Yo, bet a Yo".

Quote: boymimbo

Theoretically, an RNG should be the same as a wheel. Anecdotal evidence is just that.

.

What it all comes down to is, if it doesn't work for me,
I don't use it. If you prefer RNG's and think they work
as well as a real wheel, knock yourself out. Its your money,
spend it as you see fit, and I'll do the same.

My view is that 5.26 percent can't be overcome and move on to better things (blackjack or blackjack switch). I don't prefer either - I don't play.

Quote: EvenBob

Almost everybody who plays roulette plays for years plays a method or system they're comfortable with. After thousands of practice sessions at home, and hundreds of real sessions in a casino, you've seen just about everything that can happen, 10 times over. So when you start playing an RNG and find yourself constantly saying "I never saw that before" or "Thats weird", you begin to scratch your head. When it happens in session after session after session, and you keep trying it and trying it, over a long period of time, and the results are a joke, you eventually come to the conclusion RNG's are different. You constantly hear such complaints on the roulette forums, its nothing new. None of this is anything new. Its like shooting two guns that look identical, except you can hit the target with one, and not the other. Eventually you'll just use the one that works.

VERY well said and correct.

Ken

Quote: mrjjj

VERY well said and correct.

Ken

The problem is, if all you have is losing systems and methods,
you'll see no difference between an RNG and a real wheel, they
both take your money. Thats why nobody notices the difference,
why would they.

Quote: EvenBob

The problem is, if all you have is losing systems and methods,
you'll see no difference between an RNG and a real wheel, they
both take your money. Thats why nobody notices the difference,
why would they.

I have posted this before but I'll say it again.......Sometimes I'll test using random.org

If a method of mine does POOR with those numbers, I usually get fair results at the casino.

If a method of mine does FAIR with those numbers, I get a little bit better results at the casino.

If the results are GOOD with those numbers, I usually (not always) have a damn good day at the casino with THAT method.

Point being, its funny how the RNG results are a hair under what my results are with ACTUALS. Coincidence? I say no.

Ken