http://www.freewebs.com/turbogenius/raindropscomments.htm << I don't understand our bets? I understand the analogy of raindrops, I get that. Can someone RE-WORD this? I'm sure it might be easier than I give it credit for.

THANKS, Ken

Hi Ken

I think what Ed is saying is if we overlap each dozen so that location one from dozen 1 equals location 13 and 25 from the other two dozen that would give us 12 unique locations instead of 36.

Now what are the odds that each dozens locations would fill in the same manner. So if dozen1 location 1 is due to hit ( sleeper ) what are the odds that dozen 2 location 1 and dozen 3 location 1 will also be sleepers.

So chart the sleepers for 37 spins. Which dozen has the most sleepers. Let's say dozen 1 has the most sleepers.

For the next 37 spins play the sleepers from dozen 1 and also play the opposite locations from dozen 2 and dozen 3 at the same time.

Example... sleepers are 1,6,7,9,10 ..... play these numbers and play the opposite locations from the other two dozens ... not the mirror locations. ... so play  14,15,16,17,20,23,24 from dozen 2 and play 26,27,28,29,32,35,36 from dozen 3.

Clear as mud if I do say so myself.

Hope this helps

B

Just an observation.................

Every graph I've ever seen than man post goes down and then way, way up.  Why do none just go up?

It is interesting and food for thought.   Hmmmmmmmmmm

Could food for thought be why I'm getting so fat??

Sam

Nah, it's probably the new SatisFries from Burger King .....

I am the Turbo tester. Simple to inventive to darn complex.
Sams right. He says $1500 in 37 spins...wnat about th minus 500?

When i was learning....he seemed cool. He now seems naive..
Im sure he bankrupt before he got better.
If you trust my word....this doesn't work.

I thought about this............

Say the most numbers in 37 spins came in the first dozen.  Assume there were 6.  Using the pattern that six produced, you would bet all 12 numbers in the first dozen, six in the second and six in the third.  That's 24 numbers. 

Is that the bet?  If not, would someone 'splain it?

Sam

Sam


You would bet the six numbers in dozen 1 that are sleepers.


Also bet the six opposite numbers in dozen 2 and also dozen 3.


For sake of clarity...don't look at your dozens as 1 to 36 look at each dozen as 1 to 12.


These 12 numbers are the positions.


Position 1 in the first dozen is #1 this would equate to #13 and also #25.




Now say your sleepers were in dozen 1 postions 1,2,3,4,5,6


You would bet these 6 positions in dozen 1


You would also bet positions 7,8,9,10,11,12, in the other 2 dozens.




Again ... clear as mud




B

B

Thanks for that explanation.  Now I will take Turner's word for it and leave it be..

Sam

Turbo, what a cat !

Some years  ago  he was to meet me  at a  roulette  table    ( for him nearby) at an  Atlantic City casino. He was a no show.

Discussion about his no show  might still be  in the old GG archives.



El Braggado . Big Windbag.Big EGO .


Nathan Detroit

After 37 spins,
we have D2 with the most sleepers with 6.


14,17,19,20,22,23
D1, D3 opposite positions on the carpet to this are


1,3,4,6,9,12   and 25,27,28,30,33,36


5u on each. add 5 on a win


Play for 37 spins.


duisberg20130101_0209

7
13
16
13
5
10
32
24
25
2
27
29
27
3
30
35
0
12
34
21
16
12
31
18
33
10
26
36
24
25
2
27
27
1
13
15
5
18
35
35
8
2
26
23
9
33
28
32
16
29
8
20
26
12
35
18
22
6
1
32
20
1
20
32
3
21
19
12
4
25
27
12
18
9

Quote from: NathanDetroit on October 26, 2013, 07:44:50 PM
Turbo, what a cat !

Some years  ago  he was to meet me  at a  roulette  table    ( for him nearby) at an  Atlantic City casino. He was a no show.

Discussion about his no show  might still be  in the old GG archives.



El Braggado . Big Windbag.Big EGO .


Nathan Detroit

of course...your personal experience is unfortunate, and formulated your said view.


Personally, as a rookie, I have Turbo to thank for my introduction and interest in Roulette.


He made me fascinated in the aspects of roulette I had never imagined.


As i have pointed out thought...it seems very misguided now as I re-read years later.


Reminds me of Aaron Nimzowitsch


he wrote "THE" iconic chess book "My System" written in the 30's


It inspired Kasparov, Karpov and many other GMs.


The book, mostly, is now is theoretically redundant 

and the same numbers, played on RX with total honesty, using an EC idea I developed.


This is my difference in playing Turbo style and playing what i have learned.


You can't bang away with a set of the same numbers for 37 spins. You have to look at NOW

What a neat and clean graph !   


Tell us more... Come on, that looks as refreshing as a cold    on a summer day !!

I will share in a separate post....let me test some more...but its plain to see from the graph its D'Alembert progression


This is MrJs post on Turbo

Sorry guys....I read my post again..and I looks like Im kinda bragging That I have some wonderful system.
That graph is genuine and played as if live.
My point was that there are methods here that are technically better and make more sense than the Turbo era.
Theories that he was unaware of