Gambling exploit?

To start:
i used search and couldnt find anything about this
only threads saying its complete random and no1 will ever find out a good win method.

however,
today i was gambling and then a guy came directly putting up 30K in small or big every round.

almost all of them were right (a few wrong)
when he found out i was following him by placing on the same things (made pretty much money from it...)
the number of wrongs increased (he did that on purpose)

once a few people started to ask how he did it he just started calling the right bet out loud (big/small)

does anyone know how he did it or give me any tips?
i tried to find a pattern and thought i found it (repeated 3 times while placing 1K bets, didnt want to go 30K directly because i wasnt sure)
but when i started 30K i lost :S

please help and dont flame me. again: this wast posted anywhere. i searched!

FLAME!!

Nah, i'm kidding. lol. Yeah I once heard about someone almost figuring something out too but, in my opinion I think it's just all random. If there was an exploit, it would have been changed by now or there would be a crowd of noobs everyday at the gambler.

Then again, I could be wrong.. but I doubt it...

It's kinda like the socket thing.. it's a mathematical equation that produces random results. Most likely what you've experienced is coincidence. Perhaps the man was just a good gambler?

Count the dice like you count cards is all I can offer. Usually Big/Small are relatively close in the long run. (out of 1000 gambles, around 500 are big, 500 are small)
If you are monitoring it and there are a lot more big than small, put more into small and it should even out.

Well technically, it isn't random. Since, there is no such thing as random. There is some algorithm that defines what the outcome will be, which is as close to random as possible. If someone were to play the lottery over and over and over again, they could eventually find a "pattern" to the point that they could win 4/5 times.

<hr>Append on May 3 2007, 04:11<hr> CO Gambling Exploit Attempt
Information:



First 10 winning tickets:
1. 6 3 2, 11 Big
2. 4 1 6, 11 Big
3. 3 1 6, 10 Small
4. 2 4 6, 12 Big
5. 1 1 2, 4 Small
6. 1 5 3, 9 Small
7. 3 6 4, 13 Big
8. 1 3 6, 10 Small
9. 4 2 3, 9 Small
10. 5 3 2, 10 Small

Next 10 winning tickets:
1. 6 1 5, 12 Big
2. 2 6 5, 13 Big
3. 2 3 1, 6 Small
4. 4 6 2, 12 Big
5. 3 4 2, 9 Small
6. 1 3 5, 9 Small
7. 5 5 2, 12 Big
8. 1 4 5, 10 Small
9. 2 5 6, 13 Big
10. 3 1 6, 10 Small

Next 10 winning tickets:
1. 4 2 2, 8 Small
2. 6 4 5, 15 Big
3. 1 6 1, 8 Small
4. 6 2 6, 14 Big
5. 4 6 5, 15 Big
6. 6 6 3, 15 Big
7. 3 1 6, 10 Small
8. 6 6 6, 18 Big
9. 3 2 5, 10 Small
10. 2 1 5, 8 Small

This is a small scale test, but if you look at it the first and second are relatively the same.
You might not get 100%, but if i were to have followed through during the second test i could have won all but the second to last one.

so your basically saying that there's a 10 throw repeating pattern?

that could explain why he jumped away and back (too short time to go to whman) sometimes.

ty, im gonna check that and check if jumping away helps anything. :)

KatsuAkimoto - Your pattern thing, in my opinion, is a load of rubbish. I done the first 10 you suggested, one of them were right.

Quote:

Originally posted by jaketuricchi@May 3 2007, 10:53 KatsuAkimoto - Your pattern thing, in my opinion, is a load of rubbish. I done the first 10 you suggested, one of them were right.

I never once used the word pattern in my test.

"This is a small scale test, but if you look at it the first and second are relatively the same."

"You might not get 100%, but if i were to have followed through during the second test i could have won all but the second to last one."

I only said pattern at the beginning of the post, before and test was made. And I stated that if you were to take a giant test, and found a high probability of what it tends to pick, then you could get around 4/5 of them right each time. I never, and would have felt wrong to, have stated that my test was the pattern. Hell, I only took 3 sets of ten, that doesnt even breach the perimeter of what is needed to find a pattern. But, I must say, that I was "predicting" what the second set was going to be after I had done the first, and if I had actually bet money, I would have won each time except once.

Yea, a lot of people tend to misunderstand everything in these forums. You give an example, and they think that you're CLAIMING it is the real thing.

What you say is true Katsu. In programming, the "random" number generator is not really random. I've been looking for the algorithm that calculates it but i have never found it :/.

And yea, patterns happen because, well, patterns always happen.

Someone should apply to work as TQ's coder and find it out, then quit. That would be sweet lol:)