Hi All
Whilst playing Live on Dublinbet today, I witnessed a Dealer spin 27 Unique numbers on the trot without a repeat.......considering on average you see 24 uniques and 13 numbers hit more than once in any 37 spin cycle, this has to be up there with rare events :o
Below are the numbers that came out before number 29 stopped the run
1,35,16,21,23,3,29,25,14,22,27,19,28,30,2,31,33,4,11,6,5,10,36,18,17,32,12, then 29 !!!!
Kind Regards
Gordon :thumbsup:
Sure is! I guess this would qualify as a black swan event if you were actively playing at the time. Black swans can be both positive and negative of course - if you were betting for sleepers then you would be in the cream - but for repeaters - well, 'nuff said! Now I don't know if this relevant to your observation or not, but I have heard people say in the past that Dublinbet table number 2 is the weirdest they have ever seen and never play it because it keeps on tossing out these black swan events.
"but I have heard people say in the past that Dublinbet table number 2 is the weirdest they have ever seen and never play it because it keeps on tossing out these black swan events."
Why would that be Bryan, some sort of biased wheel, doubtful for Dublinbet..? Must admit I never play table 2, mainly as table 1 is usually quieter / faster...
Having said all that, here's Table 2 throwing out four 4's in a row...
[attachimg=1]
How about this event, apparently the odds were 3 billion to one...
http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/kats-report/2012/jun/19/rio-wheel-reportedly-hits-seven-straight-19s-and-y/ (http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/kats-report/2012/jun/19/rio-wheel-reportedly-hits-seven-straight-19s-and-y/)
It makes you wonder..! :o
Rare things do happen.
Quote from: topcat888 on January 08, 2013, 06:45:44 AM
"but I have heard people say in the past that Dublinbet table number 2 is the weirdest they have ever seen and never play it because it keeps on tossing out these black swan events."
Why would that be Bryan, some sort of biased wheel, doubtful for Dublinbet..? Must admit I never play table 2, mainly as table 1 is usually quieter / faster...
Having said all that, here's Table 2 throwing out four 4's in a row...
[attachimg=1]
How about this event, apparently the odds were 3 billion to one...
http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/kats-report/2012/jun/19/rio-wheel-reportedly-hits-seven-straight-19s-and-y/ (http://www.lasvegassun.com/blogs/kats-report/2012/jun/19/rio-wheel-reportedly-hits-seven-straight-19s-and-y/)
It makes you wonder..! :o
The odds of the above four numbers in a row is 1 to 50653, the reason it is the odds of 3 in a row is we have not before decide which number should repeate, so the first four has 100% probability, and the second 1/37 and so on.
Quote from: topcat888 on January 08, 2013, 07:18:32 AM
Really..? ::)
Usually players see rare events on RNG wheels like BV. They produce more spins and running into 4 numbers in a row can happen fairly quickly - its roughly as probable as seeing 16 EC's in a row.
Quote from: Robeenh, uut link=topic=726.msg6648#ms!! g6648 date=1357632174
Usually players see rare events on RNG wheels like BV. They produce more spins and running into 4 numbers in a row can happen fairly quickly - its roughly as probable as seeing 16 EC's in a row.
Sorry Robeenhuut, that was my attempt at sarcasm.. I wasn't really asking. !
Rare things do happen seemed a bit of an obvious thing to say..! ;-)
Its funny that when a rare event happens on a real wheel it gets highlighted, as RH says, it happens faster on an RNG that's also when people jump and cry foul.
Overt he last 3 or 4 months there have been may posts about rare happenings on real wheels, and those happenings are just as bad/strange as they happen on an RNG, which is highlighting the fact that there's no difference between RNG and real.
Ignatus 2 days ago stated his follow the last 9 numbers was unbreakable, to prove he was wrong I ran his method with 2 different progression methods, he discounted it and still said he would play that method still, he was playing live wheel, I think, and lost 1000 units to his unbeatable method, go figure
It seems that everyone is having one's own set of fallacies.
Topcat - I have no idea why it should be. All I can say is that this was pointed out to me 4 years ago. Superstition? Can't say. I just found it interesting that Gordon should raise it with that particular wheel. I suppose it is possible that that wheel is just old and well worn. Very strange to be sure.
Quote from: Superman on January 08, 2013, 10:52:27 AM
Ignatus 2 days ago stated his follow the last 9 numbers was unbreakable, to prove he was wrong I ran his method with 2 different progression methods, he discounted it and still said he would play that method still, he was playing live wheel, I think, and lost 1000 units to his unbeatable method, go figure
Same here Superman, I ran it through using both progressions and blew it out the water... But I'm very wary and reluctant to just keep posting graphs of systems that I have proved to fail... That would only serve to dishearten people, however one could argue that I would be saving people time trying to prove something that isn't ever going to work, difficult call...
Quotehowever one could argue that I would be saving people time trying to prove something that isn't ever going to work, difficult call
Yes it is a tough call but it's better to show than just say it won't work, I had the script already just blew the cobwebs off it and reran it as I don't keep old printouts. If we don't stop them we'll never go forward here lol
Most players need the hard lesson to start understand. Many new to the game think they have found something if they win 200 times using negative progressions, and it is hardly impossible to speak them out. I think I went throught the same stage.
Quote from: topcat888 on January 08, 2013, 06:45:44 AM
Having said all that, here's Table 2 throwing out four 4's in a row...
Mercy! If that had been an "air ball" machine, the resulting screaming about "rigged" wheels and electronic countermeasures would be filling up the forum by now.
Stuff happens. Deal with it, eh?
AD
Quote from: Gordonline on January 07, 2013, 08:57:12 PM
Hi All
Whilst playing Live on Dublinbet today, I witnessed a Dealer spin 27 Unique numbers on the trot without a repeat.......considering on average you see 24 uniques and 13 numbers hit more than once in any 37 spin cycle, this has to be up there with rare events :o
Below are the numbers that came out before number 29 stopped the run
1,35,16,21,23,3,29,25,14,22,27,19,28,30,2,31,33,4,11,6,5,10,36,18,17,32,12, then 29 !!!!
Kind Regards
Gordon :thumbsup:
That is unusual. But not rare Gordonline. I have witnessed 30 or more unique numbers consecutive on several occasions in my 20 years with this game. The most I've ever seen is 33.
They say you will die before random would ever show you 37 for 37. So even 30 is pretty amazing. That would be a nightmare for inside repeater bettors.
Straights can destroy a man. I've seen it on many occasions. The worst mistake is having a favourite number. And believing it will show inside 100 spins. And then one day it goes to sleep. And wakes up 300 plus spins later.
That one has destroyed more than a few gamblers. :forbidden:
Hi All
Interesting comments, it proves that if you're planning on playing crazy progressions with the hope that a repeater must come now, be warned that Madam Roulette can strike at any time and take you down lol
Its still very rare to see this happen like the other thread I posted with all 37 numbers spun in 65 spins and the last 2 uniques hitting back to back
Someone posted that it's a "Black Swan" "Nasim Nicholas Taleb" and the best way to handle them is to be on the winning side of them
Gordon :thumbsup:
Quote from: JohnLegend on January 08, 2013, 07:11:52 PM
That is unusual. But not rare Gordonline. I have witnessed 30 or more unique numbers consecutive on several occasions in my 20 years with this game. The most I've ever seen is 33.
They say you will die before random would ever show you 37 for 37. So even 30 is pretty amazing. That would be a nightmare for inside repeater bettors.
Straights can destroy a man. I've seen it on many occasions. The worst mistake is having a favourite number. And believing it will show inside 100 spins. And then one day it goes to sleep. And wakes up 300 plus spins later.
That one has destroyed more than a few gamblers. :forbidden:
There is no such a thing as a worst mistake. Some prefer only inside, some only outside bets. If you bet with 1,3,9,27,81 progression to win 1 some consider a very bad bet. And losing it happens much often than seeing a number sleep for 300 spins.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on January 09, 2013, 05:43:28 AM
There is no such a thing as a worst mistake. Some prefer only inside, some only outside bets. If you bet with 1,3,9,27,81 progression to win 1 some consider a very bad bet. And losing it happens much often than seeing a number sleep for 300 spins.
You think so Matt. LOSING IT WHERE. Im now 910/0 LIVE with that bet. Not even challenged once yet.
My confidence in that bet was born on a live wheel. And it thrives on a live wheel. If a straight went to sleep for even 150 spins. How much would you have to bet to win 1 unit?
Quote from: JohnLegend on January 09, 2013, 06:10:44 AM
You think so Matt. LOSING IT WHERE. Im now 910/0 LIVE with that bet. Not even challenged once yet.
My confidence in that bet was born on a live wheel. And it thrives on a live wheel. If a straight went to sleep for even 150 spins. How much would you have to bet to win 1 unit?
Your good run of 910/0 with 1,3,9,27,81 is as probable as 28/0 in PB if you believe my math. Declaring it HAR H.G is a bit premature don't you think? And i would not bet on a single number with hard progression.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on January 09, 2013, 06:37:28 AM
Your good run of 910/0 with 1,3,9,27,81 is as probable as 28/0 in PB if you believe my math. Declaring it HAR H.G is a bit premature don't you think? And i would not bet on a single number with hard progression.
No I don't Matt. I don't think FIVE is a H.A.R H.G its lost once and has been challenged 78 times.
7 ON 1 hasnt been challenged ONCE. We might have different definitions of a H.A.R H.G Matt. But when you have a 5 step prog that hasnt been tested once. And virtualy all the winners come in the first 2 steps. You know you have something a bit special
Quote from: JohnLegend on January 09, 2013, 03:30:47 PM
7 ON 1 hasnt been challenged ONCE.
John, is this a new system or have you posted it here somewhere?
Quote from: Bayes on January 09, 2013, 06:21:58 PM
John, is this a new system or have you posted it here somewhere?
Something about a tracker before he posts it or something something. :zzz:
I'm the something... something...
I'm so embedded in so many things (on and offline) I'm just not able to put up enough hours in this.
I dream about being able to make my life online one day. In the mean time, snail coding pace it is :-X
Quote from: VLS on January 09, 2013, 07:37:33 PM
I'm the something... something...
I'm so embedded in so many things (on and offline) I'm just not able to put up enough hours in this.
I dream about being able to make my life online one day. In the mean time, snail coding pace it is :-X
didn't mean it in a bad way. Just saying he should post the system and we can atleast all see it for now.
Quote from: VLS on January 09, 2013, 07:37:33 PM
I'm so embedded in so many things (on and offline) I'm just not able to put up enough hours in this.
Vic, if you and JL are agreeable, I could code the tracker, that way it will be done sooner. As long as it's only a tracker, not a bot or "clicker".
Just a suggestion. :whistle:
Quote from: Bayes on January 09, 2013, 08:10:16 PM
Vic, if you and JL are agreeable, I could code the tracker, that way it will be done sooner. As long as it's only a tracker, not a bot or "clicker".
Just a suggestion. :whistle:
Bayes I have an agreement with Victor. He will get payed for the tracker/tester however long it takes. I will tell you where you might be able to help.
You know the 1 million actuals you loaded on the forum? Well I have started testing 7 ON 1 against them. Starting with dozen 1. Obviously manually it will take a long time. Maybe you can speed this up?
7 ON 1 is the same as 8 ON 1 Bayes. The only difference is we go from a double trigger to up to 7 instead of a treble trigger up to 8.
The method is for live play in 7 ON 1. As it was born out of something I never saw in 3 years and several thousand results playing the ZONE.
Im 915/0 with it. A live wheel just works very well for this method.
Thank you John.
I'll actually use any monies to pay for hours for coding the framework. So yes, it's aiming to be a tester, clicker and bot :nod:
Vic
Don't kill yourself, man!
Jl So 7 on 1 is 8 on 1 with one missing?
Sam
Quote7 ON 1 is the same as 8 ON 1 Bayes. The only difference is we go from a double trigger to up to 7 instead of a treble trigger up to 8.
@ JL, I've just re-read the whole 8 on 1 thread as I did code it, you say it's now only 2 triggers, that's exactly how Twister was playing it on that thread
Quote(https://betselection.cc/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rouletteforum.cc%2FThemes%2Fdefault%2Fimages%2Fpost%2Fxx.gif&hash=fc29d783ef1eed8b5237f37307d7559e10081c85)
Re: ****8 on 1**** (http://www.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=10468.msg95109#msg95109) « Reply #104 on: October 22, 2012, 03:07:22 AM »
- Quote (http://www.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?action=post;quote=95109;topic=10468.90;last_msg=96916)from TwisterUK
I've found it so hard to get a Treble Trigger I just play with Two Triggers
So that's what you now have in 7on1? plus you only play what progression now on 7on1?
This is useful for testing 7 0N 1. It shows max number of 4 gaps in each dozen. It generates 500 RNG spins. You just hit F9 key.
In 500 spins you get on average 10 games so you can calculate approximate strike rate or do it manually. Tracker was done by Stef.
Quote from: Superman on January 09, 2013, 09:41:33 PM
@ JL, I've just re-read the whole 8 on 1 thread as I did code it, you say it's now only 2 triggers, that's exactly how Twister was playing it on that thread
So that's what you now have in 7on1? plus you only play what progression now on 7on1?
Yes Superman, but its only being played live. It works better live. H.A.R and live. Its very strong. If I go 2,000/1 it would be no surprise.
Quote from: JohnLegend on January 10, 2013, 05:39:20 AM
Yes Superman, but its only being played live. It works better live. H.A.R and live. Its very strong. If I go 2,000/1 it would be no surprise.
John, perhaps now is a good time for
7 on 1 to be introduced afresh to this forum..??
(with hard-n-fast codeable rules)
I agree.
John, perhaps you could post the rules for 7 on 1 in a separate thread? I don't remember the rules for 8 on 1 although I recall it was fairly simple. I can help out with the 1M spin file, but I will write a simulation of the system rather than test manually.
Quote from: Bayes on January 10, 2013, 07:32:34 AM
I agree.
John, perhaps you could post the rules for 7 on 1 in a separate thread? I don't remember the rules for 8 on 1 although I recall it was fairly simple. I can help out with the 1M spin file, but I will write a simulation of the system rather than test manually.
Im publishing 7 ON 1 on Saturday Bayes and Topcat.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on January 09, 2013, 09:39:57 PM
Vic
Don't kill yourself, man!
Jl So 7 on 1 is 8 on 1 with one missing?
Sam
Yes one less trigger Sam, its very strong live and H.A.R. The strongest method I've ever worked with. Okay the buy in is expensive. But as I keep saying its all relative.
If I go 2000/1 long term its well worth it.
John, that 1M spin file you're working through, are you just working through it playing all the triggers as you find them or are you skipping spins to simulate HAR like you would if you were playing for real?
Quote from: Bayes on January 10, 2013, 03:22:06 PM
John, that 1M spin file you're working through, are you just working through it playing all the triggers as you find them or are you skipping spins to simulate HAR like you would if you were playing for real?
I've been testing consecutively to see if I would catch a loss live. But as you know I will always play H.A.R. I just want to see how long it could go on a live wheel before losing.
I started with DOZEN 1 and have 58 consecutive wins with that so far. I haven't really put alot of time into this. Because everyone knows this method will lose consecutively on an RNG or BOT. But I've never seen more than a 6 live.
That's the curiousity.
QuoteOkay the buy in is expensive
What progression are you using JL
Quote from: Superman on January 10, 2013, 03:51:35 PM
What progression are you using JL
Im using a 5 step progression-1,3,9,27,81X2=242 Units risk.
Expensive. But if its the price of a H.A.R grail. You have to weigh it up.
The mistake some people made was they assumed I was pushing PB as a grail. That was/is not the case. You don't get close to a grail for 7 units.
But this 7 on 1 has me curious like nothing I've ever seen. The reason I think it works so well. Is it asks random to do something unusual.
No code or pattern to figure out. No spot on the layout or wheel to be hit in so many spins.
Its asking random to confine itself to a limit for an unsually long time.
Quote from: JohnLegend on January 10, 2013, 07:30:10 PM
Im using a 5 step progression-1,3,9,27,81X2=242 Units risk.
Expensive. But if its the price of a H.A.R grail. You have to weigh it up.
The mistake some people made was they assumed I was pushing PB as a grail. That was/is not the case. You don't get close to a grail for 7 units.
But this 7 on 1 has me curious like nothing I've ever seen. The reason I think it works so well. Is it asks random to do something unusual.
No code or pattern to figure out. No spot on the layout or wheel to be hit in so many spins.
Its asking random to confine itself to a limit for an unsually long time.
As I am careful I test what I got knowing from your play in fun mode BV. I found it as any method, you win if Lady Luck is in good mod, otherwise it is not working. You look like have a very good relation whith her.
Quote from: JohnLegend on January 10, 2013, 03:28:02 PM
I've been testing consecutively to see if I would catch a loss live. But as you know I will always play H.A.R. I just want to see how long it could go on a live wheel before losing.
I started with DOZEN 1 and have 58 consecutive wins with that so far. I haven't really put alot of time into this. Because everyone knows this method will lose consecutively on an RNG or BOT. But I've never seen more than a 6 live.
That's the curiousity.
So what's the purpose of testing it consecutively? To say that after you go as you predict 2000/1 playing HAR and 2000/10 in continuous testing that HAR makes it a grail ? ;) Just use Stef tracker and you will see how a strike rate fluctuates. I think that hitting F9 key to get 500 spins and a few games constitutes HAR.
Quote from: Robeenhuut on January 11, 2013, 07:11:18 AM
So what's the purpose of testing it consecutively? To say that after you go as you predict 2000/1 playing HAR and 2000/10 in continuous testing that HAR makes it a grail ? ;) Just use Stef tracker and you will see how a strike rate fluctuates. I think that hitting F9 key to get 500 spins and a few games constitutes HAR.
Matt its not the same. All my methods are born on a live wheel. Although I believe an RNG like BV is fair.
I still believe there's a difference in pattern formation. If there wasn't. Then surely I would have lost or at least been pushed a handful of times by now.
What im saying is it may be much harder for the physics of a live wheel to put 7 of these 4s together in a single run. Hence why I've never recorded anything more than a 6. And in 920 games I've never met more than a 5.
I knew this was strong live from my experience with the ZONE. There was rarely more than 40--50 spins without a five. And this occured when a dozen became hot.
And started producing several gaps of 1-4. So that in 40--50 spins its hit at least 12 times. Meanwhile the other two dozens are producing longer streaks from 5---30.