From this argument we can presume that Tuner's cup is half empty, and Rolex Watch's cup is half full.

Ah, the joys of the gambler's philosophy.

Slacker..  Im loving the new roulette wheel analogy....and on his 37th test....he would notice around 24 numbers had shown and 13 hadnt

Quote from: Leapyfrog on August 20, 2014, 11:09:44 PMIn other words larger the sample size lesser the variance of the final result from the expected value.

I have been saying this for years in relation to the game of Baccarat.  The more bets you place within a shoe the closer you will be to a 50-50 resolve.  The fewer bets you make, the wilder the swing (variance).

Nice answers from Slacker 

This is a very interesting subject and has been very clearly viewed and explained by several gifted experienced players here.


I would like to tip in a few extra thoughts, because this is an empirical philosophy question and has big implications for more effective, efficient and profitable play. The discussion to my mind is just a little too comfortable at present. Thus my input is not intended to be negative but instead perhaps further thought provoking, a little edgy, and hopefully may lead to further clarifications. I also want to illustrate some bigger context implications of flawed application of probability theory.


Probability is a theory, not law. Certainly there are tendencies which extrapolated in life experience which can be useful, but which can also be dangerous when over simplified or taken too literally.


One of my favourite examples is the 1 in 500 year flood probability which is used by Engineers intended to assist, but often deludes the innocent. I designed a house at great cost to be located close to a bubbling brook of a stream high up on the hills to the south of Auckland NZ. It was close to a summit and the landscape had weathered old volcanic hills ( Auckland is in the midst of a very much alive volcanic field) and occasional large boulders ( exploded from craters) and vents/ chambers permitting springs to emerge. These springs can produce the goods at times.


I spent $5000 of my client's money to have a multi discipline engineering report for both water and subsoil ( geotech) prepared. We were assured the gentle stream flooded only once in 500 years ( on average) and thus I could locate a romantic bedroom balcony only 2m from the water and thus provide a soothing and healing environment.


To be very conservative we added a further 500mm to the 'worst case scenario' flood plain level and built the million dollar home accordingly with bright eyes and bushy tails.


Just prior to finishing, a winter rainstorm came and the flooding river ( no longer a brook) reached within a few mm ( too close for comfort) to the finished floor level ( concrete and not timber thankfully). The 1 in 500 happened beyond its supposed parameters and happened within one year. In fact such events clustered in three events over ten years.


Likewise the Christchurch earthquake events ( thousands of tremors over an extended three year term) are supposed to be 1 in 2000 year events. Yet Engineers acknowledge we could experience a new set any day as the fault lines under the city resemble 'spaghetti junction in LA motorway terminology). There is disagreement as to whether some shifts can trigger other shifts.


Such guides are mere sops to enable a false sense of security rebuilding a house of cards. This time we use superglue on the cards but really life events are much more complex and unreliable than simplified mathematical illustrations.


Whilst on the subject of inter-connectedness and misleading possibly sinister over simplifications. Consider the case of 'fracking' - proving to be the biggest fraud for loose money/ quantitative easing opportunists ( they are not all bad) and the irresponsibility and pre-meditated destruction of our above surface and below surface environments ( they are inter- connected -lol).

What has been learned in parts of the US , has not yet been borne out in the UK but is well on its way with gross deception being foisted upon the public ( documents accessed with huge blanked out passages that relate to health consequence research) by compliant engineers without morality and government officials keen to encourage 'investment', However it will come to naught and will have peaked by 2017 and in a recent series of articles by the Guardian, the Telegraph, and Economist in the UK it is shown that the pollution of our subterranean water courses will have exponential negative consequences and that fracking companies have over stated the potential of their search ( ie entire California and entire South UK).

Earthquakes are a proven side effect as are flammable water sources that are spring fed. Blackpool and the good folk of Lancashire do not want this.

NZ follows like a lost sheep with BP actually 'educating' children in Taranaki schools over 'the benefits' of fracking that await us. Distorted and conveniently skewed statistics that call upon probability theory are put into the spin.

What does this have to do with roulette?

Everything. Because all is connected and inter-connected despite appearances, so that events happen that can sometimes be contradictory in behaviour. Just as there can be prolonged conformity to a theory, it does not necessarily mean that this will happen all the time at the tables. Many times I have stated Roulette is a Microcosm of Life.

It depends on your viewpoint also, and context.

The analogy of the tester in the roulette wheel factory is persuasive but of course change your perspective and it is not so clear. What if the memory that is referred to is not one of independent individual trial outcome wheels ( tested once and then dispatched) but instead is the rolling cumulative cloud consciousness experience of the Tester. Life operates on many levels as you well know, and it is wise to consider several levels rather than just one, in order to gain some further understanding. On another level, what if an other level of consciousness is observing and not necessarily self consciously but instead 'sub-consciously ( the Mind of God argument). Hard to refute - how could you prove you were not being observed?

I like the concept of 'infinity' or 'zero' ( but cannot even commence to comprehend such), and I also have no trouble in considering and allowing that 'some things' are just unknowable and should be respected as such. Our human intellect operates like a microscope with a limited range, and it just keeps our perspective a little more modest and with humility if we acknowledge we just do not and will never know answers to everything. This may upset the rationalists and materialists but in many life experiences a more open ended attitude can help rather than limit. That way 'solutions' may not just be either/ or - black an white- but perhaps a process over time toward as yet unknown settlements/ solutions ( I am thinking of 'Diplomacy' here).

Back to roulette.

Consider spin by spin and short cycles of say 3 to 20 ( arbitrary end) spins. In that flow there are sometimes numerous overlapping sets of pattern data that can be observed and utilised for observation of 'same' or 'change' characteristics. That is the result of cluster analysis. Threads and strings on huge potential sets matrices are enabled.

Look at the number of permutations ( sets) available for four corner bets trapping 16 numbers applied to a European roulette table. The answer is over 1200.

My empirical analysis shows application of the apparent memory traces of clusters transcending dealer change and of course overnight stoppage and cleaning of a wheel.

But it is not black and white and sometimes the dealers have a minor influence, sometimes negligible. Most influence here is in the emotions and interpretations by the player in response to a dealer change. In other words, self fulfilling prophecies sometimes in terms of fears or hopes- it works both ways.

Please consider the notion of overlays of influences as well as the applied mathematics, which itself is a clever but still, a construct, not always reliable.

Much happens 'below the surface' of appearances.

Apparent limitations and barriers can be smashed. The silly rationalisation by 'math' believers is naive and outdated when it is stated the game cannot be beaten. As I have said elsewhere though it is true that at one level spins are independent, but at another level it is equally true that spins are connected. We need a bigger overview to understand such apparent contradictions in the world and black and white divisive thinking simply cannot cope.


There is clear evidence ( on massive samples) that the negative expectation of roulette can be easily overcome by application of  simple, consistent and proven methodology. I have seen the compelling results of the work of a colleague based on 12 months continuous live application of a method derived through comparative testing of methods using 30 samples of 100,000 spins. Results are applicable to both live, live internet and to RNG with suitable anti cheat applications overlaid.


Looking forward to some responses and comments here.

[edit: I originally tried to post this in albalaha's thread, but it was locked]

I briefly scanned XXVV's post and was going to reply but it seems to have disappeared.

Perhaps albalaha took a dislike to it, for some reason. Anyway, I noticed that XXVV said "probability is a theory, not a law". This is something I've come across quite often, but it's a misconception. The "theory" in "Probability Theory" does not mean some kind of hypothesis or tentative explanation; the meaning of "theory" in the scientific sense is something other than what is meant by it in everyday life, namely:

QuoteA scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method, and repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation.[1][2] As with most (if not all) forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive in nature and aim for predictive power and explanatory force.

(Source: Wikipedia).

There are different interpretations of what probability is, but the laws (or rules) of probability are the same in all these interpretations. Furthermore, it can be shown that if you violate any of the laws of probability you are violating the laws of logic (being inconsistent), so the purpose of the laws is to keep our thinking straight.That's not to say there isn't such a thing as "empirical" probability, but that just means that your probability distribution is derived from the data, not from mathematical analysis.

The well-known Binomial distribution which I used above to get the percentages of wins in 5 outcomes can be proved mathematically, and there is a formula for it, but you could come up with the same percentages by simply counting the numbers of sequences with 0,1,2... reds and dividing by the 32 possible sequences. In the case of a theoretical distribution, however, there are always assumptions associated with them.

For example, the binomial distribution assumes that all outcomes are independent and that the probability of individual outcomes don't change between trials. Note that if we take an empirical approach and just count the outcomes (with a computer) rather than use the mathematical formula, and the results match the data predicted by the theoretical distribution, then that is a confirmation of the model's applicability to the empirical data, and hence the assumptions which underlie the model.

If there is any discrepancy between results found by theory and empirical data, it means one or more of the assumptions don't hold, and that is in fact the basis of many statistical tests used to confirm or refute a hypothesis (e.g., "This roulette wheel is biased").

Also, it's not true that "variance makes a mockery of maths", because variance can be quantified in the same way that the average or mean can. Variance is just another aspect of probability, and is one of the parameters in every probability distribution.

So, in summary, we can speculate about all kinds of possible connections in nature, and of course "everything is connected", but only in the rather trivial sense that the universe is a unity, and it's hard to see how something like our state of mind can affect the simple mechanical system which is roulette. I'm not convinced by any appeal to "personal permanence" notions, either, and besides, a similar thought experiment could be applied.

Slacker..... variance makes a Monkey out of Maths was an attempt at sarcasm.....a failed attempt it would seem.

Turner, Ok.
I should have known better. 

Hi Slacker and Turner, Rolex and Green Guy. Let us just brush ourselves down in wonder  here ( our Unlikely Happy Band) and gather our wits - been through some sort of time tunnel. I think Mr Albalaha was wearing his Big Editorial Hat and pushed the button for various reasons. This is further demonstration of the inter-connectedness of all all things ( it is a philosophical section is it not) - what I term instant karma -lol. I did not intend my piece to be offensive. I had actually wondered of course that some might doubt my ( temporary) sanity -lol. However I did question a few comfortable assumptions and doubtless that either was deemed out of bounds or threatening to some attitudes, ot comfort zone. Not good enough for the enquiring mind however. I just did what Artists do to as a technique to see afresh. I changed scale and context.

Having done some editing myself Turner over the years I did smile between the thunder clouds and lightning bolts.

Thank you 'powers that be' for restoring our wee few posters to the light of print out of the darkness of the inky recycle bin.

Yes Slacker  I do appreciate your comment, only please know that my commentator/ mentor is indeed a skilled scientist and it was his observations both empirical and theoretical on the term 'Theory of Probability' that has continued to fan my interest here for the past 18 months.


My view on the professional aspect of any work is that 'state of mind', attitude,  confidence, preparedness, focus, collective experience and wisdom, tactical and strategic application, is everything, and makes the difference between an average result and higher levels of attainment, an outstanding result.

More soon, when the dust settles.

Quote from: XXVV on August 22, 2014, 04:49:09 PM
I think Mr Albalaha was wearing his Big Editorial Hat and pushed the button for various reasons.

Didn't realize that was possible, was it some kind of sub-forum, it was a bit anal in my opinion.

Where is the excellent thread from Slacker with all those figures gone?

 

Rolex...if its offensive, then delete...agreed?...but I see stuff (like slacker wrote) , I will refer to it at a later date....so I don't agree in deleting good content.


Shame the one I posted where I offered to BACS £200 into everyones account was lost....never mind.

T3 wiesbaden 02/09/2014 (extract)
1
20
28
20
1
13
21
34
1
26
1
26
2
26
1
31
31
9
0
3
10
19
18
25
30
14
27
28
14
31 ...........30 spins  18 different numbers
This corresponds to a séries of 30 red
I did not look long.
To make 6 more is a breeze for roulette!

[/quote]

Quote from: plolp on September 03, 2014, 11:27:14 AM
T3 wiesbaden 02/09/2014 (extract)
1
20
28
20
1
13
21
34
1
26
1
26
2
26
1
31
31
9
0
3
10
19
18
25
30
14
27
28
14
31 ...........30 spins  18 different numbers
This corresponds to a séries of 30 red
I did not look long.
To make 6 more is a breeze for roulette!

I am sorry but I think that you ought to look longer!
I don´t have a degree in math,
but I am sure that there are MANY possible combinations with 18 different numbers.

I am sorry but I think that you ought to look longer!
I don´t have a degree in math,
but I am sure that there are MANY possible combinations with 18 different numbers.

______________________________________________________________________________________________

Yes  ...
I say something else ?

1         6                 
2         6              
3         26         
4          29         
   
5          24         
6          24         
7         19
8          19
9            1
10          8         
11        24            
12         16
13        24         
14        30
15        30
16        16
17         10         
18          8         
19          6         
20          4         
21           6         
22           6         
23           2         
24         33         
   
--    --    --
25         16
26        5
27        1
28           36
29           8         
30            8         
31         5
32           14
--    --    --
33           33         
34           15         
35             4      ......18 numbers different .This corresponds to a séries of 35 red

Tisch 4" vom 02.09.2014 (extract)
     
        

I must be cutting my hair too short, the last few posts have gone straight over my head.  What are you lot on about here?