Incorrect, although each individual value is calculated through random variance, patterns between numbers can still be identified. Also, an RNG is very different from a simple (0.99/odds) calculator, where the expected odds of each number has a percentage that has been set. For example, we know that the odds of hitting two 100+x's in a row are 0.00009801.
Irrelevant.
Imagine a 10-sided dice. The odds of throwing exactly 7 is 1/10 = 10%. If you throw a 5 first, the odds of throwing a 7 next is still 10%. If you throw a 7, the odds of throwing a 7 after that is still 10%. The throws are independent from each other. That seems pretty obvious, right?
Now, the odds of throwing two times 7 after each other are indeed 1/10*1/10 = 1%. But this still does not affect the probability of the throw after the first 7. This logic, where you think there are "patterns", is the classic
gambler's fallacy. Your strategy is clearly based on this fallacy, just like most strategies like martingale are based on that.
I'm selling the method mainly for altruistic purposes (I have already made quite a bit of profit for myself as well as investors; sharing the method not only helps others, but allows me to make some additional money without worrying about variance).
You are hoping to make
BTC34.65 in total with selling this losing strategy. Acting as if you are just helping others seems ridiculous.
PS, initially this reply was removed - which IMO warranted negative trust as warning for potential buyers. I believe potential buyers should have all information available and then they can decide for themselves if they want to buy this or not. OP and I agreed to keep it in this thread instead of on the trust page.
You are absolutely right. However, in my experience, there are sections of games that are clearly different from one another. Quoting myself...
"Based on preceding games, the script can indicate (to a mathematical extent) what kind of games are about to come consequently. It is naturally not foolproof; but it can purely indicate."
Being a pure indication, these are generally unreliable, but can prove to be helpful. It is true that each game is individual and its odds are calculated individually, but if you think of games as sets of games, you can definitely see some mathematical odds. For example, there are 1-2 games with a 1000+x multiplier, but there has
never been a game with two such games in a row. While the odds for a single game getting 1000x are (0.99/1000), the odds for two consecutive games hitting that are ((0.99/1000)^2). In the same way, let's think of a set of 10 games. The odds of all ten games busting above 1.1x are (0.9)^10 = ~35%. The odds of twenty games busting above 1.1x are (0.9)^20 = 12%. Thus, if 10 games bust above 1.1x, it can be reasonably assumed (as per the "gambler's fallacy") that the next ten games will probably have a bust below 1.1x. Naturally - this
is a mathematical fallacy, because the odds of the ten games are calculated in an isolated fashion and are not involved with each other. However, in my practice and experience (while playing and tweaking the script), it has worked near-flawlessly, and I continue to make profit this way. Try it out yourself, if you don't believe me.