I now accuse RTG/Bodog of cheating!

[Pinababy69]

On a genuinely random game, your system doesn't work (because it can't). It seems to be based in a belief that the spins are non-random in some quite obscure way.

The thing with progressive systems is that they usually work - for a while! I would suggest giving up your system while you are still ahead, but who knows how it will go in the future.

I've tried to follow all the posts in this thread...and am so glad we have some people here who can genuinely understand this stuff. While I still can't completely grasp the OP's system...it does seem to me that it is exactly that....a system of progressive betting....similar to what some use in BJ. I believe Westland Bowl used a similar type betting pattern for his win(s) at Heroes Casino, keeping track of his play using pen and paper, not a bot or anything. I'm also reminded of Cipher and his "can't lose" Blackjack system, which apparently some people did make a few bucks at.....until they lost. And which eventually ended up getting good old Cipher into a world of trouble, when he also lost using it (ironically, it came to light that it was actually Westland Bowl's money that he lost). Yeah, I believe in karma. WB got back what he originally lost to Cipher (and a bit more I think).

But ultimately, as Big_Mac stated....in the end, ALL systems are destined to fail at some point, if results are truly random. Big_Mac stated it very well, in what I quoted above.

So unless I am completely misunderstanding Ilove2win's posts (which is possible), my own personal conclusion would be that they had extremely bad luck, and suffered the "random" factor, while pushing their bets. Who can say for sure? It all comes back to the no proper regulation, no definitive answers thing.

 

[4 of a kind]

Respect is all I have for players who work so hard trying to beat a system that can't be beat. (other then cheating from the inside)

From what I remember trying to beat roulette at casinos, was hanging around for hours watching different wheels trying to find a biased wheel usually caused from a table not being perfectly level. Also trying to find a dealer with signatures that would tip off a small section of numbers the ball might land in.

Of course casinos are aware of this now with perfectly level tables, dealers being taught to mix it up, and made shallower pockets causing irregular bouncing.

Your theory sounds somewhat like the bible decoders that found text written about future events that happened. The problem is they can't find any about unknown future events, cause obviously they don't know what to look for.

I also don't think you have legitimate grounds to accuse RTG for cheating. This means, i should get a Min total of 4 hits, in the next 27 spins. 3 hits on the numbers that hit 4 times, and 1 hit on the numbers that hit 5 times. We should all become millionaires with this information.

P.S. Good luck, and if you find a way to beat them, I would keep the golden egg locked up in your safe.

 

[love2winalot]

Hiya: To Big_Mac. What i meant with the BJ topic, is that you know how to play, and when to split, and x2 down, and early surrender, and so on. You HAVE to do this, even though the last several timesyou did this, you Lost but you would have Won the Hand if you broke basic strategy instead of Losing it. Losing causes doupt.

If you have a method of play. And you have pre determined to use this method, then when it fails, it can also cause doupt. I am suppose to try to Win 4 more bets in the next 27 spins, as my method of play, and bet selection tell me to.

However, When Doupt enters the picture, it can, and usually does, affect not just this session, but others to follow, and even other games. Losing can promote more Losing, and break the most disiplined player, and pretty soon you are just betting anything, in any game, and standing on your 14 against the dealer 10, because every time you hit, you busted out.

This is not about if my method works or not. It is ONLY ABOUT making bets between $1 per #, and maybe $3 per #, and $1 flat bets, and Nichol and Diming them to death in 185 sets. And in 5 sets, betting between $5 - $40 per #, and losing all 5 betting sequences, and this was the only 5 times you bet this high, is either really bad luck, or something else.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Try this. Go to the Wizard of Odds site. Go to Roulette section, go to bottom to 100,000 roulette spins. Pick any 7 numbers. 1-7 as example. Pick "5" random starting points. Spins 123, 1045, 4567, 5432, 8712. See if you can get all 5 starting points to go more than 10 times in a row without any of your 7 numbers hitting. Post results here.

 

[hippo925]

i've read the thread a few times and it's still a little over my head, but i think i get the general idea of it.

I think if you want to think about it in terms of slots, just to simplify, just imagine keeping records of your sessions for xxxxx spins and just for the sake of argument, you get a bonus at least once every 100 spins at $1 a spin EXCEPT for 5 instances AND those 5 instances happen to be when you RAISED your bet to $5 causing you to bust out each time. In essence, you have predicted the ONLY five instances of not getting a bonus (within a hundred spins) in thousands of spins and it just happens you predicted it by raising your bet or using a progression of bets.

I think the point that the OP is trying to make is that his results were such a remote possibility that it leads him to believe the software is not random.

It's like getting thousands of bonuses on a slot and the only five times you got less than 1X your bet happened to be when you raised your wager.... that would be a strange coincidence, wouldn't it?

 

[zap987]

Unless I misunderstand you, the chance of hitting the other 30 numbers 50 times would be 1 in 35811. Unlikely, but still more likely than hitting a Royal Flush on video poker. If it was a double zero roulette it's 1/26369.

 

[big_mac]

It's like getting thousands of bonuses on a slot and the only five times you got less than 1X your bet happened to be when you raised your wager.... that would be a strange coincidence, wouldn't it?

From the sessions that he did post, he had between 8 and 12 opportunities to bet large (depending on whether he started betting at 55 or 60 spins). He only bet large on 4 of them; those 4 lost, all of the others would have won.

(I don't know when the first of the 5 was, but that was reasonably likely to lose anyway). There has been no mention of what the thousands of sessions, or even 190 sessions, actually means - it seems to have nothing to do with the results.

So...

It's like getting 8-12 bonuses on a slot and the only four times you got less than 1X your bet happened to be when you raised your wager.

I make that somwhere between 1 in 70 and 1 in 500; roughly the same as a straight or a 4-of-a-kind in VP.

 

[nerv]

Hiya: Try this. Go to the Wizard of Odds site. Go to Roulette section, go to bottom to 100,000 roulette spins. Pick any 7 numbers. 1-7 as example. Pick "5" random starting points. Spins 123, 1045, 4567, 5432, 8712. See if you can get all 5 starting points to go more than 10 times in a row without any of your 7 numbers hitting. Post results here.

OMG I wrote a long elaboration and lost it all (probably some kind of punishment being to long).

Lets try again with short version.

Your example:
hxxp://wizardofodds.com/roulette/10000spins-singlezero.html

Sets: pick 5 sets (greater that 10 numbers in a row) from first 68 numbers drawn. Lets say sets: 1-12, 13-24, 25-36,37-48, 49-60
I pick following numbers: 8, 14, 25, 28, 31, 32, 33.
You see. It was too easy to find it. I was starting from beginning. Imagine how many of these combinations of sets and number not drawn exist.


Your statement that "111 numbers out of 37 possible values should produce every value comes up 3 times", like big_mac mentioned before, simply isn't true.
Yes, there is a greatest chance for it to happen (but still to small percentage) because most of the combinations of those 37^111 permutations will produce this results. I don't want to go deeper in combinatoric calculating how many permutations will produce result of any number drawn 6 times while any other 3 numbers drawn 5 times..etc.


Your BJ example is wrong as int situation you mentioned there is exact statistical calculation saying that you have much better chances to win this hand over the house. And your system simply can't provide this proof.
I know you tried to use this example to show you are pretty much certain the outcome will be in your favour but still IMO it is not good example. Hunch is much more closer example that BJ 6 vs double 5.


So, u use 111 numbers drawn as only parameter. No matter is you change the casino, or disconnect.
Let me use one example. Little extreme but rather simple one. I played 110 spins an one RTG casino and managed to have no numbers drawn 6 times but four of them drawn 5 times. Then I went to vacation about 15 days and when I come back home, connected to some MGS casino and played those four numbers. Are you really certain one of those number will be drawn first spin I make??
Except I have a knowledge of that there is some universal greater being or machine taking into account what every human being have got in his/her life and taking care this system will be preserved, I wouldn't be so sure.
On the contrary I will except 4 out of 37 chances that my one of my numbers will be drawn.

That was about your system.
Now about your results. Getting 5 out of 5 fails while using progressive while at the same time you success using flat betting (how many times you said?) is a bit fishy. But it looks to me, too far away of some serious ground proof for accusations.

Sorry mate, don't take my words to harsh (I am not native english speaker - obviously, so I can't find exact wordings which would slightly changed tone of those "hard facts" ones) . This is just my opinion.

 

[DaveG39]

Try this. Go to the Wizard of Odds site. Go to Roulette section, go to bottom to 100,000 roulette spins. Pick any 7 numbers. 1-7 as example. Pick "5" random starting points. Spins 123, 1045, 4567, 5432, 8712. See if you can get all 5 starting points to go more than 10 times in a row without any of your 7 numbers hitting. Post results here.

my numbers: 5,16,20,21,22,34,35

my starting points: 71,108,173,194,303

numbers hit on 10 consecutive spins:

3,13,31,15,3,18,27,32,25,19 (71)
30,19,13,6,33,3,4,11,6,25 (108)
15,19,36,19,23,17,25,29,0,8 (173)
11,14,36,23,29,15,3,25,32,32 (194)
7,2,1,25,4,13,13,13,13,33 (303)

You'll notice I didn't have to go very far, and this was only in the first set fo 10,000 spins (not 100,000..typo, I know) on Wizard of Odds. Now either i misunderstood the challenge or...???

 

[catcat941]

has anyone seen the inside script of roulette in Rtg ?

i studied once jvascript , so when u put the random function , i knew numbers r random
on a simple page . so unless the script of roulette or any other table game ,especially in
that superfun21 , is uncovered to the public , were is the proof that the numbers come

random ? for example , in jks or better in a certain rtg casino , which is "certified "by the way

i never had 3 times in a row wins on doubling up ,and in mcgamming i can honestly say
i got the feeling that jks or better doubling is more random .

 

[KasinoKing]

i studied once jvascript , so when u put the random function , i knew numbers r random
on a simple page . so unless the script of roulette or any other table game ,especially in
that superfun21 , is uncovered to the public , were is the proof that the numbers come

random ? for example , in jks or better in a certain rtg casino , which is "certified "by the way

i never had 3 times in a row wins on doubling up ,and in mcgamming i can honestly say
i got the feeling that jks or better doubling is more random .

Why bump a SEVEN YEAR OLD thread to post something not even related to the casino in question...

KK

 

[benmooe]

Why bump a SEVEN YEAR OLD thread to post something not even related to the casino in question...

KK

Also such a wrong statement, anyone with at least a basic understanding of computer sciences knows that computers have no way of randomly selecting numbers without eventually showing patterns. RNG are far more complicated than just asking a computer to randomly generate a number.

 

[theslotsking]

To be honest there is not much point trying to hypothesize about formulae or probability when the reality is we have no idea whats in the algorithms for these games.

As a table game player I have made observations over the years and something that bothered me was if I increased my wagers then there were more losses than wins suddenly.. ie I could win 70% at lower amounts and if I increase my bets I suddenly drop wins.. case in point last night.

Betting $20 hand Blackjack. 6 out of 8 wins
Increased to $100 hand. Won 2 out of 9
Decreased to $10 hand won 14 out of 18.

Obviously these are low numbers and you cant base conclusions on this but it happens regularly where if bets are increased to max bet the regularity of wins drops suddenly. I am sure a lot of players have experienced this.

Anyone have any experience with bet changing and wins/losses?