ThodorisK
Most Annoying Forum Member of 2007
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2007
- Location
- Athens, Greece
(a counter-argument besides REASON No3, lol)
I expect P-RNGs used by most casino softwares are based on one of a few long tried and tested algorithms. For example, iTechLabs, which tests some casino softwares, recommends the 5 following algorithms on the page at Old / Expired Link :All major sofwares use these tests? if yes, how do you know this?
It's another thing to know that some PAST results of a real roulette have successfully passed some stat tests, and another thing TO KNOW WITH A 100% CERTAINTY that ALL THE FUTURE results of this real roulette will successfully pass these tests. Because in this case, the results of this real roulette are not random-independent, because if they were, the probability that the future results would pass the stat tests successfully, would not be 100%, but it would be e.g. 99%!
A RNG is tested with a long sequence of outputs. The result of the RNG test does not use past outcomes of the RNG, only the sequence under test. The outcomes of the RNG test is compared to the the expected outcome in a true random distribution. The confidence interval relates to the distance between the results and the expected results in a true random distribution. These expected results are determined using probability equations.So, these confidence levels are refering to the PAST outcomes of the RNG.
So ... I dont want to repeat what I said previously.
I guess the only one who can help me judging my arguments, is myself.
But I dont have enough knowledge on the exact procedure they use for the generation of the RNG outcomes. Do you completelly understand that Boss media chart? Will Moss Media give more more details on their procudure?
And explain the procedures of the
Picture 14: Flowchart
which is the page:
Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)
If I ask Boss Media to explain this chart to me, will they do it?
For example, if you are already winning much above the statistical average payoff, and you suddendly make a very big bet, this bet is bound to lose!!!"
Wizard of Odds said:You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
Please understand this: There is no such thing as an event being "due." An event is not more likely just because it has not happened for a long time. For example, many people mistakenly believe that if one color in roulette has won several times in a row then the other color is overdue and they should bet on it. While the ratio of reds to blacks will always approach 50/50 in the long term, it can not be concluded that this will happen in the short term. It does not matter what the history of past spins is; every trial in games of luck like roulette are independent, and each color is equally likely to come up every time. If you don't believe me, try guessing the toss of 1,000 coin flips using any method of prediction you like. I guarantee that 99% of the time you will get between 459 and 541 correct.
The idea that events can be "due" is known as the Gambler's Fallacy.
But instead of mathematical/scientific/geekspeak, which unfortunately I can't be bothered to decipher if it isn't important, would you mind stating your theory in plain English?
In my mind those two bold bits totally contradict each other.This is what is known as "gambler's fallacy".
Originally Posted by Wizard of Odds
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
Please understand this: There is no such thing as an event being "due." An event is not more likely just because it has not happened for a long time. For example, many people mistakenly believe that if one color in roulette has won several times in a row then the other color is overdue and they should bet on it. While the ratio of reds to blacks will always approach 50/50 in the long term, it can not be concluded that this will happen in the short term.
I am quite happy to carry on winning in my ignorance and using my gamblers fallacy...
You need to give me some hard numbers to have this taken this seriously. For example if you played 1000 hands you would expect the dealer to have a 10 or face card up about 308 times. The probability of the actual number being within 50 of 308 is 99.93%. If you were outside of 50 then we could raise our eyebrows and if you were outside even more we could really get serious. However I can't do much with "the majority." I indicate how to gather data a test for online cheating in my FAQ. Finally, I want to say that I strongly feel that Boss Media is playing a fair game.