mr jjjjjjjjjj is ahead for life......
Poll
 | 10 votes (18.51%) | ||
| | 23 votes (42.59%) | ||
| | 21 votes (38.88%) |
54 members have voted
Quote: mrjjjSo to be CONSISTENT, if Ron has played a method for less than a year and is doing well (you did not attack him) and I have played a method for under a year, I should NOT get attacked, correct? Same rules for all?
Who's ron? I'm sorry, I'm being honest, I must've missed something? I don't think you should be attacked at all, I said this from the beginning. I'm just curious on what your method actually is.....I still don't know what it is.
Quote: YoDiceRoll11If this is one of the questions. The answer is one word: Variance. What are the other two?
Quote: s2dbaker
You loser noob, I'll be the one dancing on you casket!
Lets look for the consistency again. It was brought to my attention, I was a jerk for saying such-n-such to a GG2 member here. How many members will respond to what you just said? I have it at zero.
Quote: mrjjjQuote: s2dbaker
You loser noob, I'll be the one dancing on you casket!
Lets look for the consistency again. It was brought to my attention, I was a jerk for saying such-n-such to a GG2 member here. How many members will respond to what you just said? I have it at zero.
First of all this isn't GG2, nobody understands this analogy but you. Second, no one should be joking about dancing on your casket, that is without taste.
I think I answered two of your questions, what is the third?
Variance, random probability, and no it doesn't matter for the future
Quote: WongBoAll three questions answered.
Variance, random probability, and no it doesn't matter for the future
Oh. Well, there you go Ken, all of your questions are answered. What do we talk about next?
Quote: YoDiceRoll11Who's ron? I'm sorry, I'm being honest, I must've missed something? I don't think you should be attacked at all, I said this from the beginning. I'm just curious on what your method actually is.....I still don't know what it is.
(its on this thread) The point was, he is ahead playing on a 00 wheel and nothing was said to him, why not? Its 5.26% for everyone, correct?
Ken
Quote: YoDiceRoll11Oh. Well, there you go Ken, all of your questions are answered. What do we talk about next?
I respect your opinion on part of it. So the #21 the #34 the #5 have hit 12 times in 266 spins and YOU cant use that information? (lol) Yep, less than 9 hours.
Ken
Quote: YoDiceRoll11Oh, Sorry I missed it. Yes. It is 5.26% for him too. You are correct. I must've missed this. I would've been the first to jump on it. You can't change the probabilities of a non-biased wheel.
When I post, nobody misses it, others post they are winning for over a year and it slips by them. WTF?
Ken
Quote: mrjjjI respect your opinion on part of it. So the #21 the #34 the #5 have hit 12 times in 266 spins and YOU cant use that information? (lol) Yep, less than 9 hours.
Drop the 9 hours thing, it's old.
No you cannot use the fact that #21, #34, and #5 have hit 12 times in the last 266. This cannot predict future spins. Please show a math formula that disproves this.
Quote: TheWizard
The biggest gambling myth is that an event that has not happened recently becomes overdue and more likely to occur. This is known as the “gambler’s fallacy.” Thousands of gamblers have devised betting systems that attempt to exploit the gambler’s fallacy by betting the opposite way of recent outcomes. For example, waiting for three reds in roulette and then betting on black. Hucksters sell “guaranteed” get-rich-quick betting systems that are ultimately based on the gambler’s fallacy. None of them work. If you don’t believe me here is what some other sources say on the topic:
A common gamblers’ fallacy called “the doctrine of the maturity of the chances” (or “Monte Carlo fallacy”) falsely assumes that each play in a game of chance is not independent of the others and that a series of outcomes of one sort should be balanced in the short run by other possibilities. A number of “systems” have been invented by gamblers based largely on this fallacy; casino operators are happy to encourage the use of such systems and to exploit any gambler’s neglect of the strict rules of probability and independent plays. — Encyclopedia Britannica (look under “gambling”)
Please read at least once, in it's entirety.
Quote: YoDiceRoll11First of all this isn't GG2, nobody understands this analogy but you. Second, no one should be joking about dancing on your casket, that is without taste.
I think I answered two of your questions, what is the third?
Actually quite a few know what I'm talking about (GG), they just won't chime in. It stands....GG2. If you act like a GG board, you have earned that title.
Ken
Quote: YoDiceRoll11From our host.
Please read at least once, in it's entirety.
"that an event that has not happened recently becomes overdue" >>> Thats not me, could careless about that and yes, I read it all.
Ken
Quote: YoDiceRoll11Drop the 9 hours thing, it's old.
No you cannot use the fact that #21, #34, and #5 have hit 12 times in the last 266. This cannot predict future spins. Please show a math formula that disproves this.
I'll continue with the 9 hours thing because its true. If you dont like it that I do 'well' with roulette, tough, I dont care. I won't apologize.
Ken
This cannot predict future spins. Please show a math formula that disproves this.
Otherwise, give it up. You keep dodging the question. I have respectably answered your questions. Your turn.
Quote: mrjjjOhhhhh, I see (lol)
Ken posts regarding roulette = ATTACK
A different guy posts regarding roulette = Nothing, I'm not just picking on you, there are 8 other goofs that are also inconsistent. I'll be WAITING for their answers as well.
Ken
I don't use a system or rules when I respond to people on the internet, I just use my own methods. It allows me to be more creative.
Its as pointless as arguing parallels not meeting, when one person is using Euclidean Geometry and the other one Hyperbolic Geometry.
Quote: YoDiceRoll11Than how is what you are saying is different. You are saying that the fact that if certain numbers haven't hit a certain time, you "use" this information for near future betting. You haven't defined what that means. You haven't defined your method. We have nothing more to talk about unless you either A: Define what you mean by "use for near future betting" or you post a math formula that shows that you can use the fact that #21, #34, and #5 have hit 12 times in the last 266.
This cannot predict future spins. Please show a math formula that disproves this.
Otherwise, give it up. You keep dodging the question. I have respectably answered your questions. Your turn.
Predict the next spin? Of course not but to use the information as a GUIDE (method) to betting? Sure, why not? If the #3 has not hit in the last 150 spins and the #6 has hit 18 times in the same 150 spins, who says the two numbers are an equal? I mean presently, not 800 spins later.
Ken
Quote: thecesspitI warned you all elsewhere that you can not debate this using a math's based approach where random means separate an independent trials. The "methods guys" clearly don't believe that each trial is separate and independent.
Its as pointless as arguing parallels not meeting, when one person is using Euclidean Geometry and the other one Hyperbolic Geometry.
From spin 1 to 2, its separate....from spin 2 to 3, its separate, from spin 3 to 4, its separate etc. but ALL the information combined? Is priceless, IMO.
Ken
Quote: mrjjjPredict the next spin? Of course not but to use the information as a GUIDE (method) to betting? Sure, why not? If the #3 has not hit in the last 150 spins and the #6 has hit 18 times in the same 150 spins, who says the two numbers are an equal? I mean presently, not 800 spins later.
Ken
Standard probability theory says they are. That's what random means.
YoDiceRoll11 said spinS though to be fair to him.
Quote: mrjjjIf the #3 has not hit in the last 150 spins and the #6 has hit 18 times in the same 150 spins, who says the two numbers are an equal?
Direct question: True or False?
On the next spin, the #3 has the EXACT same chance as the #6?
Quote: thecesspitStandard probability theory says they are. That's what random means.
YoDiceRoll11 said spinS though to be fair to him.
Ok, this will sound goofy but try not to ATTACK me, just answer honestly. This is for anyone who has the balls to answer, so maybe two people? (lol)
Your life depends on this, you'll get shot in the head if you lose. (joking, just play a long) You have to choose one number for 10 spins.
A) the #6 has hit 27 times in 450 spins.
B) the #32 has no hits in 450 spins.
C) throw your chip up in the air, whatever it lands on, thats your bet (10 spins)
Your choice is what and why? You can only choose A B or C.
Ken
It is as if it is the first spin of the day.
It does not matter if you notice certain numbers repeating or not.
The fact that you think the past matters is making it very difficult for me
to respect you as a serious, intelligent person.
Because it's my birthday and my favorite color.
And it has the same chance of coming up.
1/38 on each and every spin.
Quote: mrjjj
Ok, this will sound goofy but try not to ATTACK me, just answer honestly. This is for anyone who has the balls to answer, so maybe two people? (lol)
Your life depends on this, you'll get shot in the head if you lose. (joking, just play a long) You have to choose one number for 10 spins.
A) the #6 has hit 27 times in 450 spins.
B) the # 32 has no hits in 450 spins.
C) throw your chip up in the air, whatever it lands on, thats your bet (10 spins)
Your choice is what and why? You can only choose A B or C.
Ok, I'll play. I play C. The fact that a number hasn't hit means nothing. Each number has EXACTLY the same chance as the other.
What's your answer?
Quote: WongBoEvery spin of the roulette wheel exists as it's own entity.
It is as if it is the first spin of the day.
It does not matter if you notice certain numbers repeating or not.
The fact that you think the past matters is making it very difficult for me
to respect you as a serious, intelligent person.
Could careless what you respect. How many times I wipe my a** is more important than you, dont ever forget that.
Ken
Quote: YoDiceRoll11Drop the 9 hours thing, it's old.
No you cannot use the fact that #21, #34, and #5 have hit 12 times in the last 266. This cannot predict future spins. Please show a math formula that disproves this.
The admission that the probability of every number on every spin is 1/38 is already an admission that frequency of past numbers doesn't change the future. That's why I asked the question.
As far as the distribution of numbers over 266 spins (7*38), actually, seeing every possible number exactly 7 times is the most likely outcome. That doesn't mean it's particularly likely at all, though -- the probability is very low. The probability of a given frequency of each number 00, 0, 1...36 is given by the multinomial distribution. According to Wolfram Alpha, the probability of every roulette number appearing exactly 7 times in 266 spins is about 1.56 × 10^-30. Of course, the probability of any other distribution of outcomes is even lower.
Quote: YoDiceRoll11Ok, I'll play. I play C. The fact that a number hasn't hit means nothing. Each number has EXACTLY the same chance as the other.
What's your answer?
You mean B? C is a chip randomly landing anywhere. I choose A and you know that already, is this the big set-up for ATTACKING again?
Ken
Most everyone here thinks you are a buffoon, you've proven as much with your stupidity.
Quote: mrjjjPredict the next spin? Of course not but to use the information as a GUIDE (method) to betting? Sure, why not? If the #3 has not hit in the last 150 spins and the #6 has hit 18 times in the same 150 spins, who says the two numbers are an equal? I mean presently, not 800 spins later.
You did. You said that the probability of every number on every spin is 1/38. This means the two numbers are equally likely on every spin, regardless of past results.
Quote: mrjjjQuote: YoDiceRoll11Ok, I'll play. I play C. The fact that a number hasn't hit means nothing. Each number has EXACTLY the same chance as the other.
What's your answer?
You mean B? C is a chip randomly landing anywhere. I choose A and you know that already, is this the big set-up for ATTACKING again?
No, I just wanted you to answer your own question. I'm actually surprised.
No. I mean C. C is random, because the wheel landing on a specific number is random.
Quote: WongBoTake a course in fourth grade math and stop trolling this forum.
Most everyone here thinks you are a buffoon, you've proven as much with your stupidity.
Hey 9 hour guy >> You never answered...trolling means what?
Ken
I'm the guy who thinks you might possibly be the stupidest person I have ever encountered on this forum.
Google trolling.
Do you know how to use google?
Quote: MathExtremistYou did. You said that the probability of every number on every spin is 1/38. This means the two numbers are equally likely on every spin, regardless of past results.
In my example, I said within 10 spins. Geez
Ken
But I really expect all 3 options to be as equally likely to do well over the next 10 spins.
1. At some point, you said it would be impossible in 266 spins for all numbers to hit an equal number of times. The truth is, this is not impossible, as impossible means 0%. It is possible that each number could hit evenly, however it is very unlikely, but still greater then 0%.
2. Each spin of the roulette wheel is an individual event. You can not state both of the following: The odds of any specific number is 1/38 AND the previous outcome of a spin can change the events of future spins.
The previous outcomes will never effect the future spins, however information could be gathered from previous outcomes to prove the wheel contains a bias, this however changes the fact that the odds of a specific number are 1/38, as the probabilities of each outcome must add up to one, and introducing the information of a biased wheel would add to the probability of the biased number and take away from every other number.
3. You imply that this information gathered can affect spins in the *NEAR* future, when in reality, if the information was of any use, it would continue to be valuable until the biased was removed (whether that bias is introduced through the dealer, the wheel, etc.).
4. Even with a biased that could be caused by either a specific dealer or a specific wheel, it is very unlikely that this bias would be enough to overcome the 5.26% house edge.
5. You are not being attacked for being ahead. It is very possible that you could be ahead, depending on how much you have exposed and your average bet. Thanks to variance, you could be a roulette winner. You are being attacked because you are opening yourself up to being attacked, not only by attacking other members, but by posting information that you refuse to explain.
You hint at the fact that tracking the previous spins is beneficial, and then when someone asks you why you think that, you simply call them a noob/rookie/idiot and tell them to get back to studying the roulette wheel. This sir, is why you are being "attacked"
Quote: WongBoI'm not the nine hour guy.
I'm the guy who thinks you might possibly be the stupidest person I have ever encountered on this forum.
Google trolling.
Do you know how to use google?
The 9 hour thing stands. You've put less than 9 hours into roulette, own up to it, man up.
Ken
Except that most dogs exhibit much more intelligence than this clown.
Quote: mrjjjIn my example, I said within 10 spins. Geez
Examples are irrelevant. If you agree that the probability of every number on every spin is 1/38, then why do you insist that previous numbers can be useful in helping you determine where to bet in the future? It is a logical inconsistency to hold both positions. That doesn't have to stop you from holding them, mind you. Humans can do that.
Quote: TriplellYou hint at the fact that tracking the previous spins is beneficial, and then when someone asks you why you think that, you simply call them a noob/rookie/idiot and tell them to get back to studying the roulette wheel. This sir, is why you are being "attacked"
As I used to say while playing first person shooters "BOOM! Head shot!".
Do you not see this as a form of trolling?
I sure do.
Textbook.
If you think past numbers influence future ones. That is gambler's fallacy, defined to a point. You can play like that, that's fine. But you must accept what you are doing as Gambler's Fallacy. Is it bad? No. But is that what you're doing, yes.
Good night. Good luck trying to explain yourself out of this. You cannot predict future numbers with past results.
For you to read.
Gambler's Fallacy Exposed
If you don't read the above, at least read this
Again, good night. And thank you for answering questions, I have a little more respect for you now. You have finally owned up to what you are doing. And to do that, takes courage.
Ken
Quote: mrjjjOff to bed now guys. I'll pick up EXACTLY where I left off tomorrow (or Wednesday). The 'plan' won't work, you will not overwhelm me with gang like tactics, I'm not going anywhere and if I'm banned (to be consistent), four others should follow along. I win and you dont, sweet dreams.
Ken
It isn't gang tactics Ken. You are fighting against math. You are saying that you can use past numbers, and for that to happen the chances for a single number ARE NOT 1/38.
Again, post a math formula that proves you can use the past numbers....We are waiting.
Quote: mrjjjI win and you dont
What does this even mean?
Quote: TriplellThere has been some incorrect information posted here:
1. At some point, you said it would be impossible in 266 spins for all numbers to hit an equal number of times. The truth is, this is not impossible, as impossible means 0%. It is possible that each number could hit evenly, however it is very unlikely, but still greater then 0%.
2. Each spin of the roulette wheel is an individual event. You can not state both of the following: The odds of any specific number is 1/38 AND the previous outcome of a spin can change the events of future spins.
re: 1, yes, I posted the actual odds a few items back. It's 1 in 1.56E+30, which is very small but decidedly not zero.
re: 2, he can and has stated it. It's a logically inconsistent position to hold, but he nevertheless holds it. A classic paradox.
