Author Topic: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)  (Read 11033 times)

Mike

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 557
  • Thanked: 23 times
Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« on: January 12, 2016, 04:06:51 PM »
Some of you might know TurboGenius from the old days at GG. As a prolific system designer and roulette enthusiast, I think this is better coming from him rather than a naysaying troll like me, LOL.

(his own words from a thread in another forum)

Basics - that no one wants to hear

I've been doing this now for over 3 decades - that said...

 There are some major problems lately with the mindset of people who work on systems/methods.
 From what I've been reading, this almost covers everyone as well - I'm not sure why.

 I'm just going to point some things out, probably no one will agree with me - but if you think about it, you'll understand - and if not, 30 years later you'll agree with me lol.

 Roulette - where the next spin has nothing to do with the last spin, the numbers aren't pulled from the list of numbers after they show up - not like balls in a lottery machine, each spin is independent from the last.

 1) "Trigger"
 Waiting for something to happen before betting is a waste of time.
 There is no even that somehow signals what the future event will be.

 2) "Virtual bets"
 "NOT" betting for whatever reason, and then trying to use that info on future
 spins is a waste of time. If you have a system/method that works - by "not" betting -
 you are losing out on winning spins. If your system/method doesn't work, then you
 are only prolonging the time that it loses. There's no value in "not betting", this falls into
 the same boat as triggers. So "not losing" because you didn't bet on a virtual spin isn't winning.
 And not winning because you were not betting on a spin where you would have won is
 also not winning, it's a waste of time.

 3) "Leaving the casino/table after 'x' happens"
 Stopping and leaving the casino when "X" happens - either in profit or loss, or some event happens
 doesn't change the long-term. A player who goes into a casino using this type of play can keep a total of their spins over a year, while player "B" can play the same number of spins nonstop and they will have equal results. The next spin after your 'rule' tells you to stop and leave could be the one that puts your loss back into a profit, or vice-versa. So nothing is accomplished.
 "If you're ahead - stop" is probably the best advice. or "If you've lost your bankroll, go home".
 But some "trigger" that happens and you feel it's time to stop or change tables - simply isn't logical.
 By stopping and leaving, you can prolong a loss or prevent a further win - both don't change because you stop and come back next week.

 These are just the first 3 obvious ones that recently seem to appear in every method, and I understand that those who believe in them won't just stop thinking that way but I'm telling you that you have to change how you look at the game.
 Roulette is a math game, it's as simple as that.
 Math - doesn't change in any way whatsoever - triggers, virtual play, stop loss/leaving doesn't change math - nor does anything else you can come up with when it comes to creative bet amounts or timing your play.

 I'm not anti-system, I'm just the opposite - but people should know that this is math, nothing more.
 The house edge is there regardless of 1, 2 or 3 above (and others) and that can't be avoided unless you understand math and how it can be used in your favor regardless of the edge the house has. None of the 3 above help with that.

 Thanks for reading.


 

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3025
  • Thanked: 812 times
Re: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2016, 04:23:40 PM »
The house edge is there regardless of 1, 2 or 3 above (and others) and that can't be avoided unless you understand math and how it can be used in your favor



Furthermore, I would define "math" as an understanding of how statistics actually work not just some theory.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2016, 04:26:41 PM by Reyth »
 

Harryj

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 342
  • Thanked: 128 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2016, 05:10:55 PM »


    Statistics is a mathematical science, and I would say that it is used far more  than "Probability"

          Harry
 

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3025
  • Thanked: 812 times
Re: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« Reply #3 on: January 13, 2016, 12:55:19 AM »
And while we are on the topic, even though I haven't proven this, I am pretty sure I can in that, triggers address the issue of short term variance in the field where we play roulette. 

Even though in the long term the advantage is cancelled out, in the "here and now", the best odds are achieved while we can be certain of it since we are not able to encapsulate the long run in our sessions.

What this means is that if we forgo trigger events we will face the short term results of increased losses and will not be able to recoup them in our normal play.  It is dire circumstances such as these that bring our speculative GF theory friends to despair and assume that all is hopeless and then try to foist it upon us.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2016, 12:56:59 AM by Reyth »
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1435
  • Thanked: 195 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« Reply #4 on: January 13, 2016, 01:24:53 AM »
By assuming that those statements are correct, suddenly becomes clear the void of bet selection and the only sensible option seems to be randomly.

If history is irrelevant then why we can confirm certain events again and again?

By responding to elementary matters distracts at best or misleads us at worst from more important issues.

I've tried Turbo's systems on the past and I've just decided to move on.

 

spins

  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 177
  • Thanked: 17 times
Re: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« Reply #5 on: January 13, 2016, 01:41:37 AM »
all possibilities on roulette are inevitable, roulette is not infinite,  so  waiting, triggers,  virtual spins   and   the x   become tools, that black will come, the dozen may be next, its a matter of waiting for roulette to be on the verge of the inevitable, wait for that little mouse to show his head and dive like a hawk, u may miss but knowing there are more mice to come, sit back and grin   
« Last Edit: January 13, 2016, 01:49:38 AM by spins »
 

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 553
  • Thanked: 288 times
Re: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« Reply #6 on: January 13, 2016, 02:52:38 AM »

 1) "Trigger"
  2) "Virtual bets"
 3) "Leaving the casino/table after 'x' happens"

 I'm not anti-system, I'm just the opposite - but people should know that this is math, nothing more.
 The house edge is there regardless of 1, 2 or 3 above (and others) and that can't be avoided unless you understand math and how it can be used in your favor regardless of the edge the house has. None of the 3 above help with that.

 Thanks for reading.
I am appalled witnessing non-sense taking such scientific importance. And its power to create doubt. For the na├»ve and  those lazy enough to renounce the importance of long term empirical testing.
I'm glad I wasn't born yesterday.
The three properties you mentioned above is the roulette bible of the classic perpetual winner.
The 4th and equally important that you forgot to add is the most frequent "winning range".
You guys are too entangled in a web of theories that assume constant betting with the same amount, and replacing probability theory with certainty theory.
In roulette one size doesn't fit all.
Winning in roulette, by taking advantage of these four golden rules  mentioned above, is the least of my problems. I am more concerned with traveling distance to  and boredom coming back from the casino than any other issue. Winning is the least of my worries. I don't even consider it an issue. Most likely a piece of cake.
Rather, it's a boring routine.
So boring, I prefer to share the profits with individuals ( to place the bets), willing to endure the same amount of discipline and patience that I am accustomed to. Unfortunately finding those highly motivated partners is easier said than done. I have considered to place an ad in the help for hire section, but then it becomes an issue of trust. Chips are money. You have to know who holds them.
Thanks for your concerned advice, but no thanks.
However you right on the mark if that advice is directed to those who are not willing to abide by the rules you just mentioned plus the winning range and precisely crafted progression steps.
it makes a mediocre system a good system. But it makes a very good system an infallible  system.
Your fail proof system is certainly the best way to land you in the casinos black list.
So unless a new method is found, I'll stick with what I know it works.

« Last Edit: January 13, 2016, 03:58:02 AM by palestis »
 

Real

  • Fighting the war on absurdity one foolish idea at a time.
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1203
  • Thanked: 120 times
  • Gender: Female
Re: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« Reply #7 on: January 13, 2016, 03:07:49 AM »
I feel like I'm watching the North Koreans attempt to build the hydrogen bomb.

You guys seem so lost.
 

spins

  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 177
  • Thanked: 17 times
Re: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« Reply #8 on: January 13, 2016, 03:38:40 AM »
I was lost but now Im found, the longer the road travelled, the more success at the end 
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1435
  • Thanked: 195 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« Reply #9 on: January 13, 2016, 03:53:29 AM »
I feel like I'm watching the North Koreans attempt to build the hydrogen bomb.

You guys seem so lost.

Give up, GF becoming an overwhelming issue which you cannot handle.

GF=GirlFriends
 

Mike

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 557
  • Thanked: 23 times
Re: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« Reply #10 on: January 13, 2016, 09:33:55 AM »
Even though in the long term the advantage is cancelled out, in the "here and now", the best odds are achieved while we can be certain of it since we are not able to encapsulate the long run in our sessions.

What this means is that if we forgo trigger events we will face the short term results of increased losses and will not be able to recoup them in our normal play.  It is dire circumstances such as these that bring our speculative GF theory friends to despair and assume that all is hopeless and then try to foist it upon us.

Reyth,

Come on man, you're a smart guy, but haven't thought this through (or just don't want to). If the triggers work in the short term -- CONSISTENTLY, then the results should show up in the long term. That is, if you agree that the long term is just a series of short terms. If you don't agree with that, well there's nothing more to be said, LOL.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2016, 09:37:05 AM by Mike »
 

Mike

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 557
  • Thanked: 23 times
Re: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« Reply #11 on: January 13, 2016, 09:38:51 AM »
@ palestis,

So are you disagreeing with Turbo then? You think that triggers, virtual bets and "hit and run" are the keys to roulette riches?
 

spins

  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 177
  • Thanked: 17 times
Re: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« Reply #12 on: January 13, 2016, 10:00:15 AM »
I was lost but now Im found, the longer the road travelled, the more success at the end 
this is fitting palestis, hay if it keeps working move, turbo genius  what an ego and sorry to dent youre's mike, but  honestly if can't see how to use these tools u are either by the book or haven't looked deep enough into how equal distribution can be exploited
 

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3025
  • Thanked: 812 times
Re: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« Reply #13 on: January 13, 2016, 12:47:06 PM »
Even though in the long term the advantage is cancelled out, in the "here and now", the best odds are achieved while we can be certain of it since we are not able to encapsulate the long run in our sessions.

What this means is that if we forgo trigger events we will face the short term results of increased losses and will not be able to recoup them in our normal play.  It is dire circumstances such as these that bring our speculative GF theory friends to despair and assume that all is hopeless and then try to foist it upon us.

Reyth,

Come on man, you're a smart guy, but haven't thought this through (or just don't want to). If the triggers work in the short term -- CONSISTENTLY, then the results should show up in the long term. That is, if you agree that the long term is just a series of short terms. If you don't agree with that, well there's nothing more to be said, LOL.

Right of course that's true but its also true that successive streaks diminish with each element.  There is a short term and a long term; how long does it take for a trigger system advantage to cancel itself out with the balancing misses?  We can clearly see how long it takes for not using those triggers to have its effect, its usually immediate.

I am only attempting to apply logic to a bizarre statistical reality.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2016, 05:17:24 PM by Reyth »
 

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 553
  • Thanked: 288 times
Re: Wot Turbo Said (and I agree)
« Reply #14 on: January 13, 2016, 04:52:00 PM »
@ palestis,

So are you disagreeing with Turbo then? You think that triggers, virtual bets and "hit and run" are the keys to roulette riches?
Sorry, I don't know who Turbo is. I only agree with research results and basic common sense.
In a game where a player can enter the game whenever he wants to, and abandon the game whenever he feels like, common sense dictates that he has an obvious advantage.
It's not  a lottery game where the odds are 1:millions.
Independence and randomness do not truly exist.
Everything happens for a reason. And everything has an obligation to a higher authority
The odds are almost identical against the enemy.
2.7% is too small to overcome the freedom of choice.
 If most players chose not to take advantage of it, is another issue that belongs in a psychology forum
« Last Edit: January 13, 2016, 05:05:08 PM by palestis »