#1 Roulette Forum & Message Board | www.RouletteForum.cc

Good Day To All forumers!



To anticipate the false hope that the reader can possibly construct in his mind, I feel obligated to put a disclaimer and the explanation for the disclaimer :twisted:

Disclaimer:

I've put a lot of work and sacrificed a lot of life moments during my roulette journey based on inputs made by Priyanka and RRBB, as a lot of us.
But, unfortunately I couldn't achieve the main target, finding the Holly Grail.
Maybe, because I don't deserve it or maybe due to misconceptions and false hopes given by those who I believed were talking truth.





This is a brief introduction to the first and last edition of my book entirely dedicated to Priyanka and RRBB.

The release date is programmed for tomorrow (or not), exactly at "whenever I want" o'clock.

The reason for this creature is enormous respect for ALL fellas I worked with in the endless years of my journey, most of them deserve the HG grail more than whoever in this world.
As i anticipated earlier, there were a lot of contradictions in P and R letters to the world, that are there just to confuse those who in their (P and R's) undisputable opinion dont deserve the opportunity equal to what they got from Dyk.

So now we have an Indian young computer science engineer and programmer.

And,

not so young Spanish fella, who studied chemistry and ended as EU patent attorney.

Both have a good life, acchived by hard work and none of them need "roulette money" to travel the world, do charity or help their families.

Unfortunately not all have equal possibilities and opportunities, and even if you are smart you will end in the trash bin just because you are honest.

I tried to contact both of them directly in the real life with zero degree of success, maybe because i wasn't too sceptical when they posted on forum and I didn't used social engineering techniques to get their attention,
I hoped that my hard work will be noticed and rewarded...yeah I didnt knew at that time that the world works differently :wink:  and nobody gives a Duck if you are good and honest person :girl_to:

RRBB told me that he isn't rrbb and he will call the cops if I will write him again. So no more Amsterdam coffee-shops for me, I guess >:D

Priyanka completely ignored my messages. Don't know if there are some restrictions in California on writing people through Instagram O0


So I'm kinda feel used... It's true that they don't owe me nothing, and it was my choice to follow their writings.
On the other hand I never demanded the solution, but asked for directions or at least to look at what I'm doing and save me a couple of years of my not infinite life.


What do you think guys?
What will be the most reasonable pass to follow?
Should I collect and post all FREELY AVAILABLE information on R and P?

Thanks for reading, and for your future inputs.

Just thinking out loud, as someone would say...

Instagram: paartygoat

Could just theoretically Priyanka be

Pinky Varambally?

Could she possibly have 2 dogs, 2 daughters and 1 husband (jonbwell, Instagram)?
Don't know, but from what Priyanka wrote and posted on this and bet selection forum, it just might be her...

I think it can be proven by those who read and made "a lot of interactions" between Priyanka's posts, if not, my proof is about to come.
And after, we can freely discuss about posts from rrbb/reddwarf and his life achievements, of course based only on what they have posted on the internet and not more.

why do you want know Pryanka contact? The problem are the puzzle strategies where is hard decipher it.RRBB and reddwarf too gave us some good tips but ever with enigms.Maybe there are no users at forum can have found a profitable way. :twisted:

I don't want to know it, I already know it. Including names of her dogs.

There was a post from Priyanka about 9% edge, using quads cycles and betting only for cl 2 and cl 3, betting the one that closes "cycle length cycle".
I decoded it completely, programmed it in Rx. And it failed.
Btw there is no vdw in that strategy. Unless you consider Priyanka's post saying that : " if you carefully noticed, vdw is nothing, but betting the dominant".

The question I want the answer to is the following:

Did I spent ~ 8 years of my life on nothing, or it's just me that is plain stupid?

And another quote from Priyanka, as I remember it:

"I contacted several members here on this forum, explaining full mechanical system, unfortunately no-one could understand it.."

I'm not sure if this is referred to the chat with roulette ghost, tomla and bigez about stats on defining element, but if it does, she definitely choosed the wrong people to share.
In the end they spread the copy of that chat around the forum, cutting out things that could help others decipher the system, just because they couldn't.

We can go further and see if

 Preethi Varambally

can give us more inputs in our roulette journey...

I understand that working in California for VMware, might be frustrating, but hey, roulette is also frustrating, isn't it?

You will be amazed on how many attempts to hack into my internet accounts where made, after I contacted Preethi and her husband. Btw her husband makes money by borrowing €€$$$ to African people!

Ate those roulette dollars?? :twisted:  :twisted:

As David would say:

"You never know where all this sharing can lead..."

Interesting Praline. Trying revive dying forum like in the good old days.

Keep posting.  :thumbsup:

Dyslexic was other user at forum that too said have a system where guaranntee have least one repetition at 37 spins and it is profitable at each 37 spins cycle.Him too gave some tips but too hard deciprhe. ;D

Rrbb, told that he made it with help of dyksexlic

Continue your roulette journey, what have you got to lose at this stage?

Some of us spent years reading all the 'gurus' of roulette. My saving grace was that I always had a healthy dose of skepticism for the likes of Pryanka and Turbogenius etc... and didn't invest in their ideas 100% at the expense of my own thoughts.

Something to consider is that people who have beaten the games in one shape or another are well documented in books, papers and T.V. movies etc... Then we have the internet where there are shadowy characters who claim they never lose a session or as you say above possess a 9% edge on roulette. If someone wasn't so engrossed in it all, they might take a step back and ask how can a lot of these claims be credible.

My 100% honest opinion and I am not afraid to include myself in this is that most of us were lead up the garden path and we were gullible and naive enough to believe a lot of what was spouted. But that's a learning experience and you can use that to your advantage because you can then see what can't really work and why it can't work. You can then also see what might work and where you should be looking. What I mean by that is you have to simplify things. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to beat roulette, you just need to be practical and think about what is going to be the easiest way to beat the game and then you can slightly expand on it if you want to.

My advice to you (Praline) is sincere. I think we have exchanged messages in the past. I was Bally6354 on Vic's betselection forum. I learned to beat Baccarat (took me a few years) then this year I converted that to the dozens in roulette. The 2/1 payout really gives some scope. But that's it! I know I can't go any further than that and so I am at peace now and content with all my years of toil. I would wish it for you as well and all the other long-time researchers but I know it's difficult because I still read the different forums and all the long time posters and a lot of them could never just scrap everything they ever believed in and start from scratch again. Their ego wouldn't allow for it.

Anyway, peace and out.

Believe in your self, only math can beat the math.

It appears the only dependence we have created is on Redd and Priyanka.

↑ LOL.

@praline you should definitely expose whatever info you have == even if the info posted by any of them is conducive to to winning, better than in mist is to sort with clarity

Alright 🍿🥤🤗

I'm ready lol

Hey guys - I've always been a sucker for all the puzzles and clues and keep coming back even though it hasn't led me to anything near a Holy grail. As it's gone a bit quiet in here I will get the ball rolling on sharing (it IS caring after all). I have kept hold of most of the readily available info so would be good to put it here for prosperity / brainstorming. At the very least maybe it will inspire some new thoughts or methods and keep this info front and centre for a bit.

Cheers!

Akiraa

First up - Priyankas Random thoughts concise reference (originally posted by Falkor)

RANDOM THOUGHTS BY PRIYANKA - A CONCISE REFERENCE (VERSION 1)


Priyanka’s current position on the multiplayer roulette leaders board

1.1 EDGE / GENERAL OVERVIEW
EDGE â€" Four letters that every gambler looks for. Whether it is roulette or baccarat or blackjack. Whether it is real life or casino life. Whether it is advantage play or system play. Every gambler looks for an edge. Unfortunately it is Casino who has kept it locked in a safe and every gambler plots to break that safe. There are some who has the access to the key to this safe, but prefers to keep it a secret so that you don’t kill the golden goose. There are some who doesn’t even know how a key looks like but quite good in theoretical plots around designing it. There are some who takes pleasure in weaving stories just like the captain flight in Planes, where in actually doesn’t have a clue. In between all these are a confused set of individuals who has the majority to win an election if there was a vote. What a strange world.

So where is the key. How do we locate this thing called edge. Let us restrict our discussion only to roulette, apt to the title of this forum. To start with let us assume that there is no edge. Is that a right assumption? Can we prove this assumption with an evidence.

If someone assumes that I am going to explain that I have an edge that everyone can play, read back what is stated in bold.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.0 (page 1)

The edge that I called out is the edge for the player.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.15 (page 2)

How can we prove either way that edge exists for the player or there is no edge (only for the house)?

Tackling house edge becomes better once we have found an edge that will overcome the expectation. If am talking about edge in even chances am talking about getting more than 50% wins always(YES, always 100% guaranteed, but am not promising I have the solution) and every time over a finite number of spins. Once we establish this edge it is easier to attack the house edge equation.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.15 (page 2)

Roulette is a game that can give you endless possibilities to play. And there lies the beauty of the game and the beast. It is easy to get oneself lost into the complexities of the game. But if you are able to breakdown those complexities into simple principles, then you will be able to effectively play it with a better understanding of what to expect at the end of every session. Sure one or two odd session may turn out to be exceptional, but you will figure out that a 98-99% of the games will fall within your expectation (win or loss!).

There will come a day when you will be able to see past whats happening on the surface and free from the wheel, felt and the statistics that the pit bosses want you to keep your attention to.

My favourites are double street/lines/6 numbers. But I agree with you, that the more you push your boundaries and come out of your comfort zone, you will be able to take the learnings back to your favourite playing position and play a completely different game.


QuoteIt seems to me that way you analyze or dissect this game is kind general, and can be applied to any part or odds in the game? One just needs to understand it right.
You are so right there. Unless you dissect the game into simple parts irrespective of bet placement and odd, you are not going to understand game.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.60 (page 5)


QuoteYes Drazen there are 27 combinations possible (Dozens in 3 spins) and you cannot use 18 and leave the other 9 around. Simply because that is the reality. You cannot play a waiting game waiting for your favourable event to occur.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.75 (page 6)

2.1 RANDOM â€" OVERVIEW
There are two main ways to think about roulette and its outcomes.

1. Conditional probability, Odds and random â€" This is the common if not traditional way to approach the game. There is nothing wrong with any of these methods unless you are fighting to beat the random. Repeaters, variance, 3SD, playing the last, playing the opposite, playing for streaks and chops -  whichever method you use to deliver your bet selection, what you will finally select is a random selection. You are just trying to see whether you can align the random to the laws of probability and you will not get a 100% correct selection. Knowingly or unknowingly, you are trying to fit things within a distribution pattern.

2. Not everything is random â€" This is the most uncommon way of looking at roulette outcomes. Again there are two interesting sections here.

2A. Physics â€" This is a way to approach the game where the physics of roulette play a major role. The speed of the rotor, the position in which the ball is released, the speed in which the ball is released, the abnormalities with the ball and the wheel a lot of physical aspects of the game come into play here. This is not random. The accuracy of prediction is greatly improved with the random variables coming into play being very limited like the air pressure in the room, sweat from the dealer hands impacting the speed in which the ball rolls, dirt falling in the roulette table impacting the wheel friction â€" it goes on and on. But in summary, this is another way to play the game.

2B. Maths â€" It is a little bit more complex to explain (especially as it is not the common way to play). Of three spins that yielded red or black numbers, there will be at least two red or two black. Hmm! This is not random right. This is an absolute result. The difficulty in this is the practical applicability. And hence very uncommon way to play.

It is very very important to know when your selection is random and when it is not.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.0 (page 1)

Random: Now you are left to the mercy of deviations, variations and statistic reality to either fail or win. This is the reason I was pointing back to find out finite, non-random methods within the bet selection process.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.60 (page 5)

Now you can think about (after formulating a Non-Random game) statistics and progression in that sequence. Not before and not in a different sequence of progression and then statistics. Typically we tend to focus on these two subjects first, leaving ourselves buried deep into the big hole.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.75 (page 6)

Statistical relationship will come in handy first followed by progressions. I am not trying to steer towards all 27 sets will look the same or on average we will have similar sets. All I was pointing to was there are imbalances here which could be utilized for your selections and progressions. Seems to be hinting that we should opt for one bet selection over another and also vary our progressions based on the scenario (see section below on combining Non-Random…)
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.75 (page 6)

Regarding your question around other principles, yes I do use others. But using only the concepts so far I have mentioned you can play with an edge.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.75 (page 6)

3.1 NON-RANDOM / LIMITS OF RANDOM
People always say Roulette is a random game. But they do forget that it has its limits. They do forget that non-randomness is part and parcel of this game and embedded in it. There are numerous situations which are really finite in roulette.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.60 (page 5)

The first and foremost thought process should be how can I make it finite rather than making it a game of chance. In other words, how can i reduce the non-predictability aspect of the game and move closer to predictability. (appears to be a reference to Non-Random)
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.75 (page 6)

The direction I am trying to steer you is towards thinking away from statistics based selection as the primary selection. Thinking towards selection that focus on events that definitely happen. There is no variance involved in here. In this case such an event happen every 12 spins.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.75 (page 6)

The point am trying to prove is unless you remove the randomness from the game there is no way to beat the monster. This might not be the only thing that we need to do to overcome, but this is the basic.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.90 (page 7)

Mathematically, there is only one way to beat the roulette and that is through seeing the game with a non-random lens.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.255 (page 18 )

All am saying is there are more non-random ways rather than  just exploit the wheel. The basic assumption people have taken is everything is random in the game of roulette. I am just saying that, that assumption doesn't hold good in certain aspects of roulette outcomes. When that assumption is shaken, all the proof we had so far doesn't hold good. Law of large numbers gets shaken when that assumption is shaken. Proof based on randomness and convergence gets shaken when you shake that assumption. It is always possible to obtain certain non-random events withing any random stream.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.525 (page 36)

Lets play the game using a template and let the casino catch us rather than we going after predicting the casino. It is paradoxical to note that even though we are playing based on what we see as previous spins, we are not making any guesses here, but playing to a fixed template. The casino is trying to predict and win over us rather than we predicting what the next spin is. We are just playing to prove the (VdW/AP) theorem right

QuoteA Random System is what we all have played, such as, FTL (Follow The Last), Bet Black after 4 consecutive Reds, bet that a Pattern will form, etc.
A Non Random System is one based on Math or Statistics, ie, the Van de Waerden theorem, the Pigeon Hole Principle which the 12 spin Dozen cycle is based on.
I (Nick) have tested a Random System (FTL) verses a Non Random System (12 spin Dozens cycle).
Both were tested with identical 3,170 spins from BVNZ table.
Both were tested Flat Betting of 1 unit each bet.
Both bet every spin until a Profit Target of 1.
See the results below.

Random System


Non-Random System
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.405 (page 28 )

3.2 VdW (Van der Waerden) / AP (Arithmetic Progression)
“in 9 spins of roulette yielding black and red, there will be one arithmetic progression of 3 integers holding the same colour�
“in 27 spins of roulette yielding 3 dozens or columns, there will be one arithmetic progression of 3 integers holding the same dozen/column�

The term is “arithmetic progression�. It is nothing but a sequence of numbers where the difference between consecutive terms is constant.
1,2,3,… is an arithmetic progression
1,3,5,7… is an arithmetic progression
1,4,7,10.. is an arithmetic progression
2,6,10, 14… is an arithmetic progression

Now coming back, lets take a set of 9 spins.
RBR BRR RBB
123  456  789

See the arithmetic sequence of spins 1,3 and 5 â€" I get RRR. There are 512 combinations that can happen, but none of them will fail to have an arithmetic progression of 3 integers holding same colour.

Now look at the following 8 spins.

BRRBBRRB

There are two choices:
1. B - because you have 1,5,9 as a possibility.
2. R - because you have 3,6,9 as a possibility.
We cannot play the ninth spin. Of all the 512 combinations, this is an example of a combination where you will be left with a loss if you choose to play based on this theorem.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.0 (page 1)

no instincts that will come into play here. Instincts will appear in random selection. Here it is a strict mechanical rule. When in dilemma we don't bet
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.15 (page 2)

No, it won’t give you any advantage on its own. It will give you a loss, if you play it ditto as I have explained in a step by step manner. The examples that I depict are for explaining the principles for better understanding. This is only a part of the puzzle. Let me explain why.

Without 0(yes even if there is no house edge), just consider only R and B as an example. There are 512 combinations of 9 spin sets possible. Out of this 512 combinations, 406 combinations will give you a win and the rest will give you a loss. Sure a high win ratio inching towards 80%. But, the risk of losses will outweigh the impact of wins. See the following possibilities out of 512 combinations.

W â€" 256 times
L â€" 48 times
LW â€" 104 times
LL â€" 32 times
LLW â€" 36 times
LLL â€" 16 times
LLLW â€" 10 times
LLLL â€" 10 times
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.15 (page 2)

This equates to:

50.00%
9.38%
20.31%
6.25%
7.03%
3.13%
1.95%
1.95%
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.30 (page 3)

If we play all 512 combinations the way the example suggests, in terms of individual outcomes, we will get 406 wins and 406 losses. 50-50, nothing more nothing less. Not any different from the 50-50 chance of next spin being red or black. Unless you can find a way to make this 50-50 tilt towards one side for a set of all the possible combinations, this doesn’t have an edge on its own and it’s a failure. Some runs will give you profit, some will give you loss and if you add Zero to the mix you will get -2.7% equating to a single zero house edge.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.15 (page 2)

QuoteCan someone please explain how the VdW theorem can be used on double dozens?
I understand it on EC's and single dozens, but can it be applied to double dozens, when a double dozen bet can be 12, 23, or 13?
E.g. if the last number was 14, you cannot say it was the dz 12, it also could be dz 23.
Ati - there are many ways.  I will explain one possible way.

12 - outcome A
23 - outcome B
31 - outcome c

For ease of explanation (only for ease of explanation!!!) wait for two independent dozen to form. Let's say they are dozen 1 and 2.

Consider the following spins.

3,15, 23, 2, 31, 21, 16, 34, 32, 23, 1, 15, 19.

3- dozen one
15 - dozen 2

Th double dozen is 12. So anything different from this we will mark it as different.  Anything same as this we will mark as same.

23 - Same
2 - same. Possibility of ap in next spin. Play dd 12
31- different
21 - different. Possibility of ap in next spin.
16 - same
34 - same. Ap in next
32 - same.

Remember this is just one way.

Now the comment that ati you highlighted is different from playing double dozens. It is for an AP for 2 dozens in 3 spins.  This will typically have one single dozen bet and one double dozen bet.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.270 (page 19)

VdW/AP: Just by looking R and B as R and B, will not help the cause. You could play, four or five games here. If you refer to my earlier posts, i was pointing to play multiple games before a session is complete. As an example, you could play every alternating spin to be part of the 9 spins and hence 18 spin as one game instead of just 9 spins. You could play single and series formations to complete an AP. You could play three sets of alternating spins with one set for completing AP and two sets for not forming an AP. The possibilities are endless, but the key is finding that set of games where 1+1 <> 2. Let me take another example of a game, to illustrate a different game you can play. You can play the fastest colour to reach 3 to complete an AP. Take a set of spins that we saw earlier.

Spin  R/B  Fastest to 3
18  R 
19  R     
19  R      Red wins. Outcome 1
9  R     
31  B     
21  R     
17  B     
25  R      Red wins. outcome 1. Now play for AP to complete on red to become fastest to achieve 3.
26  B     
27  R     
36  R      Bet red.                   
31  B      Black appears. Loss. Bet red.             
17  B      Loss. Outcome 2. Our outcomes read 112           
34  R     
13  B     
0  0     
12  R     
26  B       
12  R      Red is fastest. Our outcomes read 1121
12  R     
10  B     
36  R     
12  R      Red fastest. Outcomes read 11211. Outcome 1 on next set will complete the AP
18  R     
23  R     
0  0      Loss.
1  R      Win. End of set. It read LLLW for this set.
10  B       
6  B           
30  R

Am not suggesting you play the ways i have played here as is. All am trying to get at is look at non-random possibilities that has a limit, as opposed to random variables (AP is just one example), create multiple games that can be played at a frequency can lead to a potential edge you could look at. 
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.60 (page 5)

Couple of things, if you go back to my post. Playing just R and B will always result in that 50% scenario. If we need to get ahead of that scenario, we need to figure of ways of staying ahead and play multiple games within a game. An example of playing multiple games here could be
1. Instead of 9 spins, take 27 spins. You could play 3 alternating games. Play 1st, 4th.....25th spins as one game, 2nd, 5th...26th spin as one game and so on.
2. One game is a straight RB game. Other could be a series and singles game on RB (single is one outcome and series is another outcome, these two we can look for AP). Play these games alternatively.
Personal communication, September 24, 2015

3.3 DOZEN TRIPLETS OVER 12 SPINS â€" ONE TYPE HAS TO REPEAT
111
112
113
121
122
123
131
132
133
211
212
213
221
222
223
231
232
233
311
312
313
321
322
323
331
332
333

Three possible outcomes. Three dozens in three spins, two dozens in 3 spins and 1 dozen in 3 spins. So If you take a set of 12 spins, you will have one of these combinations to definitely repeat. Limited. This has to happen. It is not random. It will happen always. That is the key. Identifying events that will always happen.

A sample 12 spins. 133 323 123 323
133 â€" There is one dozen that is repeating here. Our basic premise is in 4 sets of 3 numbers one combination has to repeat. So we will play for the second set to have 1 repeat.
323 â€" You start playing after 32 has spun. For one repeat to happen you have to have either 2 or 3. So you play the double dozen (2,3) and you win.

Second sample 111 131 111 122
111 â€" All dozens are same. Again based on our basic premise. We will play for this to repeat.
131 â€" You start playing after the first spin here. You will be playing for all dozens to be the same. Second spin is 3. Loss. Now you have two outcomes. Three dozens in a row or one dozen to repeat.
111 â€" You start playing after the first spin. You will be playing for either three dozen in a row or one repeat to happen. So you play for dozen 1. Win.

Third sample 321 311 223 312
321 â€" All dozens different. We will play for this to repeat.
311 â€" Start playing after the first spin. For a repeat of first combination to happen, the second spin can be either 2 or 1. So we play double dozen. Win. Now here I pause. One can play every session until a win happens or until the combinations repeat. For those who want a win to happen can stop playing here this set and start fresh with a new set. For those who will want a combination to repeat will go for the next spin. For the combination to repeat the next dozen has to be 2. Play 2 and lose. Two combinations are available for us to replicate. All dozens to be different and only one dozen to repeat.
223 â€" We cannot play after the first spin here. We will not be able to make a decision after the first spin as for one combination to repeat the second spin can be any of 1,2 or 3. So we play only on the third spin. As we have seen 2 and 2, we know that this is not all dozens different. So we play for two dozens in three spins. So our choice for next spin is 1 and 3 and we win.

Fourth sample  132 112 123 111
132 â€" All dozens different
112 â€" Start playing after the first spin. We play double dozen 2 and 3. Loss.
123 â€" We cannot play after the first spin. We cannot play after the 2nd spin. This is a deadlock and we exit out of this sequence and look for the next 12.

So what did we do. We did not leave our destiny to the hands of chance. We are playing for something that we know will definitely happen. You are building a game based on limits to the randomness of roulette or the non-random aspect of it.

3.4 GUT (Great Universal Theory)
Regarding the question of whether “Crossing� is a non-random event or not, it is difficult for me to answer as am not able to make up my mind on either side. For an event to be non-random there has to be a limit that need to be defined and the event has to happen within that limit. In a single zero table, if you say “there will be at least one crossing between 0-1 in 37 spins�, this is definitely a non-random event. But the way Professor explains crossings and plays, am not 100% sure.

3.5 CYCLES / WHEN A SECTION HAS TO REPEAT / PIGEON HOLE PRINCIPLE
Does Cycles and the Pigeon Hole Principle all refer to the same thing: the Non-Random event of when a section has to repeat?   

How many of us have wondered why a few systems always work well at the start and then the graphs grow towards the south? If you are not one of those who has experienced this, then you have not played enough roulette. The law of large numbers always catches up. This is why when some one tests thousands of spins, you always get a southward graph. So what is the issue? Your playing sessions are not short enough to stay ahead of the curve for forseeable future. Unfortunately, playing the game as is will always lead to the session being long enough to catch up on the game edge. For some it could happen in a minutes. For some it could happen after building a solid bankroll over a year or two. However, if you see roulette as a game made up of a number of finite non-random events, it can help you constructing your sessions short. Short not in its literal sense of minutes or seconds or few spins, but short enough to avoid the game edge catching you forever. This appears to be a reference to the advantage of Cycles based on the Non-Random event WHEN A SECTION HAS TO REPEAT?
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.60 (page 5)

Also how can you make your sessions short enough (not in number of spins, but in terms of elements of play) so that house edge doesn’t catch you and you are able to ride on those imbalances or variances. This appears to be a reference to cycles as well as possibly combining Non-Random with Random (see next section)

I don’t think the example (VdW/AP) need a simulation (on it’s own it’s 50/50) , unless you are planning to study the simulation and observe the principles and cycles. If you are using it for latter, I will be very happy to answer any questions as always.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.15 (page 2)

Of three spins that yielded red or black numbers, there will be at least two red or two black.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.0 (page 1)

As usual, we will ignore the zeroes throughout until we get to a place where we have managed to explore an edge. Let us consider that we are playing dozens. Can you predict the next dozen? If I bet on the negative, the odds will be better than what i will get from playing roulette. However, what we can say for sure is there will be at least 1 repeat of a dozen in 4 spins. Hmm! Is that random? Or is it a finite characteristic and hence non-random?

See the following spins. Construct them into sets of 4.

21 - Dozen 2
17 - Dozen 2. At least one repeat of a dozen
24
12
36 - Dozen 3
18 - Dozen 2
29 - Dozen 3. At least one repeat of a dozen
2
17 - Dozen 2.
17 - Dozen 2. At least one repeat of a dozen
19
10
16 - Dozen 2
7 - Dozen 1
11 - Dozen 1. At least one repeat of a dozen
20

How can we take advantage of this non-randomness. Now here is where Probabilistic and non-probabilistic approach has to go hand in hand (see next section on “Combining� Non-Random).
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.60 (page 5)

Everythign that happens in roulette happens in a cycle. A cycle starts and ends when a number repeats.

For the dozens, lets see that it will be like this.

19
25
18 â€" This is a dozen cycle of length 2

19
20 â€" This is a dozen cycle of length 1

18
31
1
30 â€" This si a dozen cycle of length 3.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.210 (page 15)


QuoteCan someone please confirm that the spin to end/define a cycle is included as the first spin of the next cycle ( A ) or is a fresh new/next spin the first for the next cycle ( B ) as the stats for both are totally different.
(A) is the right approach
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.285 (page 20)


QuoteI (Nick) have coded a system that uses a 4 spin cycle.  Excel Tracker attached.
1st Spin you bet the last Dozen(FTL).  If it wins, then No Bet the next 3 spins.
2nd Spin you bet the last 2 Dozens, win or lose No Bet the next 2 spins.

link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.60 (page 5)


QuoteYou have said you used cycles. Isnt that patterns?
Other way to look at it is they are repeaters.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.540 (page 37)

making the sessions short enough to capture the variations. How on the earth do we do that?

As usual let us take a simple example. Going back to the dozens.

If you see the attached picture, let say you are tracking for 1 repeat of a dozen to happen. Quite often you will find that you will have to track all 3 dozens before a repeat can happen.

Now look at the same thing for 2 repeats of dozen to happen. You will find that you are starting to track lesser number of unique dozen for the second repeat can happen. The bigger the number of repeats you are tracking you will find that the number of unique dozens that you will track on an average will reduce. Translate this to a betting position that offers more options like double street, street or numbers. What do you see? Does this ring any bells? It reminds me personally that 1 number should repeat before spin 25, so perhaps 2 numbers should repeat way before spin 50. Also see how stitched bets can be “translated� to different betting positions in the “stitching bets� section below.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.105 (page 8 )

How about 4th repeat? Is there an optimal number that you can think about, which can help you elongate the session? Is this somehow related to the number of positions (3 in case of dozens, 6 in lines) that you are tracking? What is the relation? Can the relation be utilized to your advantage? After all the ultimate aim is to make the playing session short. How are you able to achieve it?
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.105 (page 8 )

This is just one way of making your sessions short enough to capture variations. However, I hope this gives a fantastic view of how you can make your playing sessions shorter and take advantage of variance.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.105 (page 8 )

4.1 COMBINING NON-RANDOM (WITH RANDOM/NON-RANDOM)
While non-random is good, we often get into a dead-run. An example of a dead-run is below where you are trying to play for a dozen to repeat in 4 spins, you get sequences like 1231, 2311, 3121 etc. As Drazen and Turner rightly pointed out, there is still an opportunity to get these sequences over and over and over again that you can get into a deep hole. The key is how can overcome these dead-runs with a parallel bet or a parallel selection, which is the alternate game played on its own will give you a negative result, but played together will  make this dead-heats into winning combination. Possibly a reference also to Parrondo’s Paradox (see later section; also about wen to enter and exit Non-Random games)
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.90 (page 7)

Also how can you make your sessions short enough (not in number of spins, but in terms of elements of play) so that house edge doesn’t catch you and you are able to ride on those imbalances or variances. This appears to be a reference to cycles (see previous section) as well as possibly combining Non-Random with Random

Before getting further into the world of random and non-random and how we can combine these two worlds, another question. As I touched upon dozens, “A dozen on the carpet, a dozen on the wheel, a selection of 12 numbers that changes constantly. Are they different? Do these bet selections result in changes to your predictions or the distribution?�

You can device a way to play even chances or dozens using these. The lower the number (sic: the higher the number?) , the higher the complexity and difficulty to track and play. Try playing this for sets of 27 spins with both dozens and ECs and you will figure out a whole new way to play roulette.

Without getting into the complexities of money management lets adapt a simple 1-1-2 approach for EC which will suit our finite 9 spin cycles and a finite up 1 for 2 losses for dozens which will suit out 27 spin cycle.

link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.0 (page 1)

link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.15 (page 2)

The more the number of outcomes you are trying to fit the arithmetic progression, the higher this phenomenon of confusion will occur. I have taken the approach of absorbing the loss if there is more than one possibility. Another way to play this is absorb the loss only if all the possible outcomes are possible. In case of ECs, it will be both the outcomes becoming possible. In case of dozens, it will be all three outcomes becoming possible. If one takes this approach then the game swings between playing single dozen and double dozens.  Remember, there is no right or wrong way of doing things here. It is just to understand the concept that roulette can be played without getting lost into random.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.0 (page 1)


QuoteSo might we gain some advantage by keeping a tally of each outcome based on the set (1 cycle?) - and change our bet selection based on whatever outcome(s) are trailing behind the above percentages?
Falkor - I like the way you are thinking.
I would encourage you to think a bit harder. You are again getting into distribution and probability area where things are left to chance. Unless you are able to increase the Win% (in VdW/AP on Red/Black) which is currently standing at 50% in the above set (406 wins and 406 losses), whatever variance based methodology or progression that you use will drive you down.

QuoteOK, I reckon we might gain EDGE if we bet on the opposite colour for first bet (if the Ws are greater than 50%)?
Why only first bet? You are getting there mate.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.30 (page 3)

One way of using this statistic is to bias towards one set when a conflict occurs for your bet selection. Other way of using this is application of VW theory as I explained earlier for the AP to form on 2 dozens in 3 spins. It is left to your imagination, your mood of the day or a mechanical way that you prefer.  Could this be referring to the following scenario:

For the next spin, considering we are presented with multiple sequences for both R/B and Dozens, should we bet only on R/B since a single win game (W) has higher statistics compared to a LW game?
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.75 (page 6)

What if instead of colours and dozens, you have lows and highs and dozens. Are we able to derive any relation?
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.105 (page 8 )

Three small modifications I would suggest.

1.  Play only thrice in a set.  Don't place the fourth bet ever.
2. Play always opposite.  Don't play for AP to complete.
Play a progression 1-2-4.  But only within a set.  Once the set is finished irrespective of where u r start from 1.

You might find a slight edge.
Personal communication, September 20, 2015


QuoteNow look at the following 8 spins.
BRRBBRRB
If we play based on the theorem, what will we play for the 9th spin? Black or Red? Leaving you with these thoughts.
Does the clash here appears because we have a possibility of betting both black and red. What if we tie our hands that we cannot bet black and we can bet only red. Does this clash happen. Does this handicap situation of betting only one colour makes this theorem more workable from a VdW perspective. Does this handicap really a handicap or is it a boon in some form making us lose less? Sounds like a contradiction to VdW?
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.255 (page 18 )

However it is good that you brought GUT for the discussion. The most important learning that I have learnt from Winkel is an  adoption of Parrondo’s paradox. In GUT, if you keep betting on the same crossing you will ultimately lead to a -2.7% expectation. However switching between crossings, and betting different crossings is a different beast altogether.  The answer to your question around dozens and ECs lie there (optimum combined play) .
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.15 (page 2)

I don’t think the example (VdW/AP) need a simulation (on it’s own it’s 50/50) , unless you are planning to study the simulation and observe the principles and cycles. If you are using it for latter, I will be very happy to answer any questions as always.

It’s possible to beat roulette using a mod of VdW/AP on Red/Black/ECs alone according to Priyanka (using a positive progression)! And the mod might possibly involve Parrondo’s Paradox (covered in a later section).
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.15 (page 2), link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.30 (page 3), link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.45 (page 4), link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.90 (page 7)

i normally play a number of parallel games in a session.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.180 (page 13)

My typical betting method is ECs with usage of straights to complement them. I see fun in using quads and lines.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.300 (page 21)

5.1 CREATING YOUR OWN PLAYING POSITIONS, STITCHING BETS AND PLAYING IN CYLES FOR INCREASED ODDS
But stringing together ECs we can create an odd placement that we like like quads, dozens, so on and so forth. We don’t even have to look at the numbers or wheels. How is this possible. See this example below on Red and Black.
Instead of playing one position of just R and B, what if we play RR, RB, BR and BB. Instead of giving odds of 1/1 we have converted ECs to give odds of 3/1. An example play is below. For simplicity, what we will be looking to play is for getting the outcome RB.

25  - 1 unit on red. Win.
27 â€" Place both units on blck. Loss.

7 â€" 1 unit on red. Win.
29 â€" 2 units on black. Win. We got the win at odds of 3/1

4 â€" 1 unit on red. Loss
18

27 â€" 1 unit on red. win
10 â€" 2units on blck. Win. We got 3/1 odds

14
28 â€" Won this sequence

34
27 â€" lost this one

6
16 - lost

12
20  - won

This is not a progression. This is not letting it ride. This is an example of stitching together simple EC components to create an odd that is better than even return. Now the possibilities are endless and everyone can create opportunities based on their comfort and style of play. You can create dozens, quads, splits, all possible odds through stitching together these components.

Now when it comes to the topic of stitching together bets, it is also important to understand which combinations are profitable and which ones are not. The combinations which might seemingly give better odds at first sight may not be the ones that will be profitable and vice versa. Taking a simple example. Red and Odd. If we need to stitch together these two, will you place one bet on red and one on odd or one bet on red and 8 bets on the black odd numbers? Any creative ideas and view points?
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.60 (page 5)


QuoteI think 1 bet on red and 8 bets on black odd numbers is better.
Ati - You are right and perfect. Now the follow up question that one should ask is we can clearly see there are imperfections here. Is there a potential for us to modify the bet sizes across these positions instead of 1 unit bet uniform to create an edge? I will let you ponder on that. Could be a reference to progressions otherwise sounds like a new concept of converting/�translating� a stitched bet into different sections/�positions� of the board (EC > Numbers) and then placing different unit sizes across those numbers.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.105 (page 8 )

Thinking about statistics now. Out of the 27 combinations that is possible (3 dozens in 3 spins) , 3 will be one dozen in 3 spins, 6 will be 3 dozens in 3 spins and 18 will be 2 dozens in 3 spins. It is like drawing a ball from a bag of 3 red balls, 6 green balls and 18 blue balls, then putting it back in and repeating this whole process. Your chances of drawing a blue ball is higher. There is an irregularity and the statistically speaking the 12 spins (4 sets of 3 spins), there is a higher probability of 2 dozens in 3 spins to come through.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.80 (page 6)

my favourite betting position the double streets, in three spins what is the probability of getting 3 unique double streets or the double streets not being the same? It is a over 55%. Surprising, but that is the truth. So chances of getting 134, 156, etc where all double streets are different are better than chances of getting 121, 555, 556, 322 etc. Can that be used to our advantage during the play where some steps are random and some steps are non-random. Yes definitely.

It is definitely possible to take advantage of birthday paradox (refer instead to the Double Streets example above). Using it in conjunction with Pigeonhole principle and stopping when you are winning in an attacking session while you are progressing towards a non-random set will definitely give you the edge.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.120 (page 9)

While we talked about non-randomness, it is key that you dont forget statistics and what is a fact. We talked about cycles. Lets take the following dozen cycle as an example. Following is the statistics across various number of cycles for a set of few thousands of spins. The fact is the percentages defined there say something about the edge and they remain the constant irrespective of the set you will use.

500 cycles 
Dozen that defined the previous cycle same as the dozen defined the next cycle - 306 ~ 61%
Dozen that defined the previous cycle different from the dozen defined the next cycle - 194 ~ 39%

1000 cycles
Dozen that defined the previous cycle same as the dozen defined the next cycle - 618 ~ 62%
Dozen that defined the previous cycle different from the dozen defined the next cycle - 382 ~ 38%

2000 cycles 
Dozen that defined the previous cycle same as the dozen defined the next cycle - 1241 ~ 62%
Dozen that defined the previous cycle different from the dozen defined the next cycle - 759 ~ 38%
No law of large numbers to curve the percentages?
"Defined" - The dozen which caused the cycle or the dozen that repeated.

20
31
20 - the cycle was defined by the dozen 2
1
31
22 - The cycle was defined by dozen 2 again.

1
8 - cycle was defined by dozen 1
22
18 - cycle was defined by a different dozen - dozen 2.

Spreadsheet giveaway for showing Dozen, Line and Quad (9 Number) cycles based on above percentages when comparing one cycle to the next: link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=15938.0;attach=23017

The fact is things do clutter. When they do clutter, repeaters do happen. When repeaters do happen the statistical relation between these finite cycles tend to lean towards and form a magical relation between two finite cycles.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.225 (page 16)

Whichever part of the table I analyzed, I am seeing certain strong ratios between cycles. And they are pretty much constant.
Apart from the ratio that I have highlighted, are there any other ratios that you are able to see. Do you think we will be able to use VdW theorem with which I started the thread in some form or other to bring a statistical concept and a non-random concept together. Refers also to combining Non-Random with Random (see previous section)
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.255 (page 18 )

There is an important thing here around statistical advantage of same element defining the next spin. What if we remove cycles of length 1, do we see any difference in ratios. Can cycles of length 1 be exploited?  Can cycles greater than length 1 be exploited? In her video it has been shown that Priyanka avoided cycles of length 1.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.255 (page 18 )

2. Second is the constant explained by Drazen and the ratios of lengths. If you have 1000 spins, are you able to say with certainity that Red will be more or Black will be more? Are you able to say that number 36 will be more than any other number? No. But can you say that the number of repeating cycles of dozens will be more than number of different cycles of dozens. Yes, you can with absolute certainity. Leave aside winning every session for a moment. But lets say you keep a count of red and black. When red goes to 10, can you keep on betting black to balance that count, no. Keep a count of repeating cycles and different cycles. When there are 10 different cycles, can you use this count to get back the same cycles up? May be!

3. Can you bring 2 or 3 such constants together to create a biased game, just like biased wheel readers who is constantly keeping on the look out for bias and look for the entry point. May be!

4. Can you increase the span of that biased game, by making the limit of that cycle larger that you will always find a bias and the law of large numbers will never come into picture. May be!

5. Can you increase that edge further by not using a hook to catch fish but using a net as Turner would put it by stringing together your bets. May be!

These are all things you can do and this is all things you need to know (including 1. finding out Non-Random events). There is nothing else.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.300 (page 21)

I mentioned you can bring in 2 or 3 constants together. What those constants that has to be brought together is your work. May be these two will work, but i dont know. You dont need to bring in more constants to gain edge. Even one constant is sufficient. To get a playeable method in a casino environment you might need to look at more opportunities. It’s not clear what “constants� are but they may refer to the stitching of bets or playing for the same cycle where the odds are better, i.e. the Random game; it would then follow that “more opportunities� refers to the combining of Non-Random and any other principles/concepts.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.315 (page 22)

Why do house edge catch up with you. Because of the law of large numbers. Simply put, lets say you constantly bet on red. If it is 10 spins, you might win, you might lose. If it 10,000 spins, then most of the times you will be losing. 100,000 spins, you will definitely be in negative as the variance decreases with a larger sample size. This is because the cycle limits of even chances is only 3 spins excluding zero. However imagine you have defined a cycle with a very large limit. Then you can play such that the law of large numbers will take longer to catch you, and hence you will always have variance to take advantage on. It’s not clear what a “biased gameâ€� is but it sounds like playing a game per cycle â€" the longer the cycle length the better.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.315 (page 22)

Lets say you are tracking a biased wheel which is biased towards the 0 pocket. Odds of the game do not change. But the number of times you hit a winner will increase if you are not just targeting zero but pockets around 0 as well. Thats increasing the accuracy. If you follow a betting plan such that this increased hit rate is giving you a higher edge, why not. Difficult to understand in context of cycles and bet selection providing that the�biased game� is indeed a reference to cycles?
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.315 (page 22)

6.1 PARRONDO’S PARADOX
“There exist pairs of games, each with a higher probability of losing than winning, for which it is possible to construct a winning strategy by playing the games alternately.�
link:s://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parrondo%27s_paradox

Leaving that aside, lets take the two views here. First one states that PP cant work because the outcomes are independent. Second one states that no casino games change rules based on players bank roll (I wish they did, then things would have been easier for us to win  ).

PP can't work because the outcomes are independent
The proof against this one is a little difficult to grasp.

First of all lets clearly understand the definition of independence. Two events are independent, statistically independent, or stochastically independent if the occurrence of one does not affect the probability of the other. Keeping this definition in mind, lets take the event of getting the spins.

First event - Spin 1 gets me 20.
Second event - Spin 2 gets me 24.

Both the above events are independent. Very much independent. Getting 24 in spin 2 is totally independent of getting 20 in spin 1. (Remove all physical factors that might cause dependence).

Now see the following two events.
First event - spin 1 gets me 20.
Second event - Sum of spin 1 and spin 2 gets me 44.

Are these two events independent? No. A big NO.

Actually, a better explanation of why PP can't work with casino games is because outcomes are independent, but PP requires some interaction between the current game and the previous one. In the above example, have we not created an interaction and made dependent events in roulette outcomes? As we have managed to create dependent events then the argument of why PP cannot work in roulette doesn't hold good. Carefully creating those events to make them dependent is in our hands. We cannot achieve that just with spin outcomes, you have to find a way of stitching them together. (see section on Stiching bets to increase odds)

VdW and other non-random examples are ways and means to induce those dependencies and create and locate events that are dependent.

Casino doesnt change rules based on players bank roll
There is no flaw or nothing to prove here.

PP never says that you play based on your bank roll. That is just one example to explain it in a simple manner. WoV is true that constructing a PP based on your bankroll will not work. But what is PP? Is PP based on your bank roll. No. PP is exactly what you copied and pasted from wikipedia. It is creating a dependence between two of your playing streams so that you are more likely to enter one of the playing streams at the point where it will yield positive expectation. The dependency or the deciding factor of games doesn't have to be based on bank roll.

Let me explain one crude example which you might be able to relate to. One stream of play (Game A) is observing spins. Second stream of play is starting to bet(Game B). You are deciding to alternate between these two streams of play or games with a simple rule. Start playing Game A. Enter Game B if there are ten of an even chance. Exit Game B and start playing Game A on a win in Game B or after 3 spins on Game B. Repeat the process. (This concept may be observable in one of Priyanka’s videos based on a follow up parlay bet or waiting for a virtual win or loss)

What are we trying to do here. We are trying to enter Game B at a point where we believe it will most likely give a positive expectation. There is no dependency of bank roll. So as I said, nothing to prove against what has been said in WoV. It is the just that the basic premise of PP games has to be chosen based on bank roll is wrong. It can be created without bank roll coming into question. You will have to find out that tipping point that is most likely to give positive expectation.

If you remember the example of dozens we discussed the point where statistics comes in/progression comes in. There was an imbalance. One outcome was more likely than other. How we can enter the dozen game when that imbalance is in our favour and most likely to result in a positive expectation is the riddle that you need to crack. (Priyanka always waits for virtual spins and has never shown a system where bets are placed every spin)
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.90 (page 7)

I dont switch bets and there is no need to. The key is taking advantage of certain things which are non-random. However, yes, as Drazen rightly said, there has to be a when/where/what that can be defined for every entry point and exit point and that will be based on these non-random concepts.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.300 (page 21)

However it is good that you brought GUT for the discussion. The most important learning that I have learnt from Winkel is an  adoption of Parrondo’s paradox. In GUT, if you keep betting on the same crossing you will ultimately lead to a -2.7% expectation. However switching between crossings, and betting different crossings is a different beast altogether.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.15 (page 2)

7.1 PROGRESSIONS / MONEY MANAGEMENT
Thinking about progression now. Depending on how you chose to play, you can see the irregularities here and you can focus on tuning your progression to maximize your wins. Key is low drawdowns and achieving those low drawdowns using elements that are fixed and finite.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.75 (page 6)


QuoteHow about we change to the following units after each kind of set has finished?
This again goes into the equation of waiting for LLLL to increase your units so on and so forth. I havnt tried it, but my expectation is you will get into LLLL 3 times or 4 times in a row to wipe your bankroll or gains.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.30 (page 3)

8.1 VIDEOS
Video 1: link:://youtu.be/AIvAeaHzKVY - related to VdW/AP? What concepts are identifiable in this?
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.0 (page 1)

Bet  Amount  Result 
Red  0.05  2 Black  lose (107.95)
Red  0.05  4 Black  lose
Red  0.05  17 Black  lose
Red  0.05  7 Red  win
Red  0.05  12 Red  win
Red  0.05  14 Red  win
Red  0.05  15 Black  lose
Red  0.05  31 Black  lose
High  9  29 Black  win
1,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,30,32,33,34,35,36  0.5 each (8.5 in total)  21 Red  win
       
Red  0.05  17 Black  lose
Red  0.05  17 Black  lose
Red  0.05  18 Red  win
Red  0.05  11 Black  lose
Red  0.05  35 Black  lose
1,3,5,19,20,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,30,32,33,34,36  0.5 each (8.5 in total)  19 Red  win
1,3,5,6,20,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,30,32,33,34,36  0.5 each (8.5 in total)  27 Red  win
       
Red  0.05  35 Black  lose
Red  0.05  16 Red  win
Red  0.05  5 Red  win
Red  0.05  19 Red  win
Red  0.05  13 Black  lose
Red  0.05  33 Black  lose
20,22,23,24,25,26,28,30,32,34,36  0.5 each (5.5 in total)  36 Black  win
       
Red  0.05  4 Black  lose
Red  0.05  22 Black  lose
Red  0.05  19 Red  win
Red  0.05  30 Red  win
20,23,24,25,26,28,32,34  0.5 each (4 in total)  35 Black  lose
Same as above but 1.0 units on 20  20 = 1; rest are 0.5 (4.5 in total)  32 Red  win
       
Red  0.05  34 Red  win
Red  0.05  24 Black  lose
Red  0.05  5 Red  win
Red  0.05  28 Black  lose
Red  0.05  22 Black  lose
Red  0.05  23 Red  win
Red  0.05  19 Red  win
Red  0.05  17 Black  lose
Red  0.05  36 Red  win
Red  0.05  33 Black  lose
Red  0.05  9 Red  win
1,2,3,6,7,8,10,12,14,15,18,20,21,24,25,26,29,31  1,2,3,6,7,8,10,20,25,26 = 1; rest are 0.5 (14 in total)  9 Red  lose
1,2,3,6,7,8,10,12,14,15,18,20,21,24,25,26,29,31  1 = 1.5; rest = same as before (14.5 in total)  18 Red  win
? (cut)  6.5 in total  12 Red  lose
? (cut)  7 in total  5 Red  lose
? (cut)  7.5 in total  3 Red  win
1, 20, 24, 25, 26  0.5 each (2.5 in total)  2 Black  lose
1, 20, 24, 25, 26  1 = 1; rest = 0.5 (3 in total)  27 Red  lose
1, 20, 24, 25, 26  1 = 1, 20 = 1; rest = 0.5 (3.5 in total)  26 Black  win (180.80)

Can you figure out what Priyanka is doing in the above games? Which principles discussed herein are being applied - if any?

Some analysis by Still, including for one of Priyanka’s earlier videos just prior to the Random Thoughts topic:
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.165 (page 12)

The video is to explain different ways of play and playing multiple games within a single game. The game I depict in the video is not necessarily the game am playing.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.30 (page 3)

Video 2: link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=g1RWS1Ar_YM (Parrondo’s Paradox) 
Bet  Amount  Result 
virtual      11 Black 
virtual      7 Red 
Low  5  24 Black  lose
Dozen 1-12  5  16 Red  lose
Double Street 7-12  5  9 Red  win
       
Red  0.05  29 Black  lose
Red  0.05  26 Black  lose
High  5  19 Red  win
High  5  11 Black  lose
Dozen 25-36  5  14 Red  lose
Double Street 25-30  5  5 Red  lose
Double Street 25-30  5  28 Black  win
       
Red  0.05  19 Red  win
Red  0.05  35 Black  lose
Red  0.05  19 Red  win
High  5  21 Red  win
       
Dozen 13-24  0.05  35 Black  lose
Dozen 13-24  0.05  22 Black  lose
Dozen 13-24  0.05  26 Black  lose
Dozen 13-24  0.05  35 Black  lose
High  5  18 Red  lose
Dozen 25-36  5  12 Red  lose
Double Street 31-36  5  13 Black  lose
Double Street 31-36  5  19 Red  lose
Double Street 31-36, Dozen 13-24, High  5 each (15 in total)  15 Black  win
Low  5  9 Red  win
Low  10  13 Black  win
Low  5  7 Red  win
Low  5  20 Black  lose
Dozen 13-24  5  18 Red  win
       
Red  0.05  8 Black  lose
Red  0.05  6 Black  lose
Red  0.05  19 Red  win
Red  0.05  14 Red  win
Red  0.05  33 Black  lose
Red  0.05  26 Black  lose
Red  0.05  17 Black  lose
Low  5  17 Black  lose
       
Red  0.05  3 Red  win
Red  0.05  4 Black  lose
Low  5  6 Black  win
       
Red  0.05  33 Black  lose
Red  0.05  26 Black  lose
Red  0.05  7 Red  win
Red  0.05  18 Red  win
Red  0.05  27 Red  win
High  5  23 Red  win
High  5  17 Black  lose
Dozen 25-36, Low  5 each (10 in total  15 Black  broke even
Low  5  3 Red  win
Low  10  13 Black  win
       
Red  0.05  20 Black  lose
Red  0.05  19 Red  win
Red (accidentally missed a spin!? - but no spin was virtual)  0.05  17 Black  lose
Dozen 13-24  5  36 Red  lose
Double Street 19-24  5  30 Red  lose
Double Street 19-24  5  24 Black  win
       
Red  0.05  24 Black  lose
Red  0.05  18 Red  win
Red  0.05  14 Red  win
Low  5  5 Red  win
Low? (cut)  5  27 Red  lose
Dozen 13-24  5  5 Low  lose
Double Street 13-18, Low  5 each (10 in total)  16 Red  win


Video 3: link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=dy_hSK4z-yI
Video 4: link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=3J4Lf7zxk4I

Video 5: link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=4dVbiXMIipI
Number  Quad  Cycle quad  W/L  Bet  Why?
29  4                   
3  1                   
9  1  1      Bet 2 - 3 - 4  End of cycle: Bet all the other quads       
26  3      W  Bet 1 - 3  We won our first bet. Now we bet the last two quads       
27  3  3  W  Bet 1 - 2 - 4  End of cycle: Bet all the other quads       
4  1      W  Bet 1 - 3  We won our first bet. Now we bet the last two quads       
27  3  3  W  Bet 1 - 2 - 4  End of cycle: Bet all the other quads       
32  4      W  Bet 3 - 4  We won our first bet. Now we bet the last two quads       
18  2      L  No bet  We lost. Wait for a virtual win.       
1  1        No bet           
7  1  1      Bet 2 - 3 - 4  End of cycle: Bet all the other quads       
28  4      W  No bet  No bet. We wait for the virual win.       
27  3      VL  No bet  Virtual loss.       
24  3  3      Bet 1 - 2 - 4  End of cycle: Bet all the other quads       
5  1      W  No bet  No bet. We wait for the virual win.       
7  1  1  VW  Bet 2 - 3 - 4  Virtual Win. End of cycle: Bet all the other quads       
28  4      W  Bet 1 - 4  We had our virtual win. Now we bet again the last two quads.       
2  1  1  W  Bet 2 - 3 - 4  End of cycle: Bet all the other quads       
15  2      W  Bet 1 - 2  We won our first bet. Now we bet the last two quads       
31  4      L  No bet  We lost. Wait for a virtual win.       
30  4  4      No bet    No ideal why we dont make a bet here…       
14  2      VW  No bet  Virtual win.       
29  4  4  VW  Bet 1 - 2 - 3  End of cycle: Bet all the other quads       
31  4  4  L  No bet  Here we lost our bet. Now we wait for a virtual win.       
36  4  4      No bet           
35  4  4      No bet           
5  1        No bet           
11  2        No bet           
20  3        No bet           
23  3  3      No bet           
23  3  3      No bet           
1  1        No bet           
9  1  1      No bet  No bet. We wait for the virual win.       
27  3        Bet 1 - 3  Virtual win. Bet all the other quads. This bet is still active.       
19  3  3  W  Bet 1 - 2 - 4  End of cycle: Bet all the other quads       
7  1      W  Bet 1 - 3  We won our first bet. Now we bet the last two quads       
15  2      L  No bet  Lost       
10  2  2      Bet 1 - 3 - 4  End of cycle: Bet all the other quads       
16  2  2  L  No bet  Lost       
12  2  2      No bet           
10  2  2      No bet           
4  1        No bet           
26  3        No bet           
16  2  2      No bet           
15  2  2      No bet           
22  3        No bet           
31  4        No bet           
25  3  3      No bet           
9  1        Bet 2 - 4  Virtual win. Bet all the other quads. This bet is still active.       
11  2      W  Bet 1 - 2 - 3  Here we see a new trend. Our previous cycle was lenght of 3. Now we bet it will also be 3. Bet the 3 previous quads.       
23  3  3  W  Bet 1 - 2 - 4  End of cycle: Bet all the other quads       
25  3  3  L  No bet           
14  2        Bet 1 - 4  Here we switch bet. We now bet the two missing quads because we bet for a cycle of 3.       
2  1      W  Bet 1 - 2 - 3  Our previous cycle was lenght of 3. Now we bet it will also be 3. Bet the 3 previous quads.       
5  1  1  W  Bet 2 - 3 - 4    Why bet? We did not have a virtual win here.       
29  4      W  Bet 2 - 3  We now bet the two missing quads because we bet for a cycle of 3.       
20  3      W  Bet 1 - 3 - 4  Our previous cycle was lenght of 3. Now we bet it will also be 3. Bet the 3 previous quads.       
2  1  1  W  Bet 2 - 3 - 4  End of cycle: Bet all the other quads       
24  3      W  Bet 2 - 3  We now bet the two missing quads because we bet for a cycle of 3.       
16  2      W  Bet 1 - 2 - 3  Our previous cycle was lenght of 3. Now we bet it will also be 3. Bet the 3 previous quads.       
12  2  2  W  END 

Video 6: link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=LKjvj4FQVuU
It is based on Iron steel and Turner's quads, but taking non-random into consideration.
To make things clear, firstly as there was lot of discussion about 0.05 bet, the 0.05 bet is used to place a bet to complete the non-random sequence when we cannot play. Secondly, as i mentioned already, the only position used are quads(group of 9 numbers). You can reverse engineer to figure out the method as it puts together all the concepts i have explained. However, this one game in itself gives an edge over the game slightly higher than 9% which should defeat the house edge of american roulette.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.180 (page 13)

Video 7: link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=5VUUfwkFilI
Video 8: link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=T4KgiscwgRU Todo with cycles â€" designed to lose.

9.1 PARALLEL UNIVERSES
Before I move my thought process into an interesting concept of Parallel universes, I would like to explore another aspect of non-randomness. Was this covered in any more depth or was it a reference to Cycles or stitching bets?
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.60 (page 5)

Now coming back to parallel universes, as drazen has asked about it, the whole thing of birthday paradox(problem) works because of these parallel universes. A person on its own will have a lesser probability of finding a birthday match as opposed to a group finding its match as there are more number of pairs involved.
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.120 (page 9)

Next up - all of Dyksexlics system clues/posts.


1* There are 37 separate numbers, in a run of 38 consecutive numbers, at LEAST one of the 37 numbers MUST repeat a minimum of one time.

2* If you base a roulette strategy on this guaranteed principle, you'll have a system which cannot be beaten.

3* You don't win every spin, but in a win you are in profit

4* My system doesn't wait for an event. It is a PRINCIPLED idea. No sequence of possible spins can change this principle.

5* I use FLAT BETS. (Progressions pave the road to Hell).
I SOMETIMES cover ALL numbers.
I ALWAYS cover SOME numbers. .
I treat all numbers the same (including the zero).
No individual roulette number has greater or lesser significance

6* It's NOT a DUMBA$$ progression that bets $1000's to make just 0.10 cents profit.
It's NOT AUTOMATED "magic" software.
It's NOT so called "luck". lol
It's NOT utilising some cheat / loophole / idiosyncracy in RNG casino software
It's NOT waiting 2 hours for a "trigger" event.
It's NOT some lame probability theory.
It's NOT essential to have a ma$$ive bankroll to play
It's NOT based on casino "BONUS" money - (go tell the casino to shove it up they a$$).
It's NOT awaiting 6 months of rigorous system "testing". lol
It's NOT going to fall apart if the casino RNG CHEATS... !!!
It's NOT concerned with "the house edge". Who CARES ?
It's NOT recording the patterns of red / black / high /low / odd / even etc.
It's NOT doubling up if you win / lose etc.
It's NOT waiting for "HOT" numbers or any other 'essential' event.
It's NOT restricted to casinos using Playtech software
It's NOT based on pseudo-random number sequences for success
It's NOT to do with calculating wheel bias. (Give me a $%#@ing break!)
It's NOT about calculating the velocity / wind direction / density of the ball / varnish on the wood etc.
It's NOT BS, or a figment of my imagination.
It's NOT for sale, but it IS REAL. I swear.

7* when I win a cycle, I start again with the previous winning bet now
becoming the 1st bet in the new cycle etc.

8* I can't predict the outcome of the roulette, but I dont need to

9* It's just a solution to the problem of how do you secure a win regardless of sequence of numbers.

10* Roulette has NOTHING to do with numbers if you replaced the numbers with pictures of bunny rabbits, this mathematical principle would STILL hold true.

11* "What's NOT an EVENT, but can still HAPPEN ?"

12* After 3 consecutive dozens 1-2-3 the next spin COULD also be a zero

13* Fixed progression, that has regular betting amounts I.e 1,2,4,8,16,32---->My system doesn't work on that basis, it isn't a STATIC thing that doesn't change. It's a DYNAMIC system. (another clue)
So one example wouldn't hold for every sequence of numbers.

14* "PROGRESSIVE BET"-->progressively INCREASING the stake amount on any given bet (or group of bets) to recoup all monies lost thus far and either achieve a profit OR break even.

15* "FLAT BET" --> betting in such a manner that the stake amount on any given bet (or group of bets) DOESN'T INCREASE regardless of monies lost thus far.

16* "HELD BET" ---> betting in such a manner that EITHER a PROGRESSIVE BET, GROUP of PROGRESSIVE BETS, FLAT BET, or GROUP of FLAT BETS is repeated just as the PREVIOUS bet/bets.

17* A roulette table can contain any COMBINATION of Progressive / Flat / Held Bets.

18* A FLAT BET can be a HELD BET...
19* A HELD BET is NOT 'neccessarily' a FLAT BET !!!!!!!!
20* A HELD BET is NOT 'neccessarily' a PROGRESSIVE BET !!!!!!!!
21* FLAT BETS can ACCUMULATE without becoming PROGRESSIVE BETS !!!!!!!!
22* FLAT BETS added to HELD BETS dont 'neccessarily' become PROGRESSIVE BETS !!!!!!!!!!
23* A 'PROCESS' is NOT an 'EVENT', but CONTINUALLY happens.
24* All apparently UNCONNECTED continuum 'EVENTS' are CONNECTED both spatially and temporeally by space and by TIME
25* Out of DISORDER ('random' CHAOS) comes ORDER ('pattern')... "Ordo Ab Chao", RNG ---------------->CONTINUAL WINNING BETS

26* Did I ever say the "event" is a number repeating ? NO,(so number repeating is NOT an event) I said the system is based on a PRINCIPLE. Not an EVENT

27* On the roulette table are several OPPOSITES. For example LOW/HIGH, EVEN/ODD, BLACK/RED.

28* Every morning, the SUN rises. We call this 'EVENT' -------> SUNRISE
29* Every evening, the SUN sets. We call this 'EVENT' --------> SUNSET
30* Sunrise and sunset are ALSO two OPPOSITES.
31* In the course of a day, at some places on our planet it is SUNRISE, and at the same time in ANOTHER place it is SUNSET
32* the sun is both, sunset and sunrise at the same time to two observers in two different places, but time is independent..
33* The two observers are still looking at the same 'EVENT'
34* sunset and sunrise are essentially the SAME 'EVENT' being simultaneously viewed from two different perspectives. "No man is an island..."

35* Two twin brothers were sat playing roulette in a Las Vegas casino. One twin was having incredibly good 'luck'. He'd won BIG money, the other twin was having an 'unlucky' time of it, losing continuously.

36* The Loser brother said: "Please brother, tell me the secret of how you always KNOW which number the roulette ball will land on.

37* The winner brother said: "I will answer your question if YOU answer me just ONE question first..".."how you 'KNOW' where to bet to ALWAYS lose.. ? "

38* I couldn't care less 'WHICH' number is spun after 37th spins as long as one gets spun...

39* Imagine I have a big bag of 37 numbered balls (each ball has a different number from 0 to 36 printed on it). I cant see the balls in the bag. They are 'randomly' mixed up.

40* I place my hand in the bag to pick a ball, then write the number down on a sheet of paper. I then place the ball back in the bag, then shake the bag up and mix up the 37 numbers, then place my hand back in the bag and pick another ball, again write the number down on the paper and place the ball back in the bag, and so on...

41* I keep on picking numbers in this way until I have a list of 38 numbers on my sheet of paper..

42* When I look at the list of 38 numbers on the paper, I find to my surprise that they are all different numbers EXCEPT one which is written down TWICE.

43* No matter how many times I repeat the experiment, I always end up with a list of 38 numbers on my sheet of paper with (at least) one number written down TWICE. ALWAYS the same, 36 numbers written down once, and one number written down twice..
(consecutively or not)

44*I discovered that ALL roulette RNGs (Random Number Generators) MUST follow this repeating number principle. This suddenly took away any UNCERTAINTY associated with placing a bet on roulette.I had done it ! I had BEATEN roulette..

45* quote: "somethimes playing on all numbers--- why losing 1 unit? for no reson?"
Even the cheating RNG doesn't win EVERY spin (it has losses too !)--- losing 1 unit to make 2 ? sounds good to me !

46* Every spin of the roulette wheel is an 'EVENT'. None of these 'EVENTS' are connected. Meaning if number 13 comes up, the next spin could be 13 too, as the last spin has no connection to this new 'EVENT'

47*So if we cant 'PREDICT' the 'EVENT', based on past spins ('EVENTS'). What can we do to win ?
48* We can look closer at the 'PROCESS' of 'EVENT' selection. This 'PROCESS' follows RULES. It isn't 'random'. It produces apparently random 'EVENTS', but it itself isn't 'random'.

49* the minimum bankroll to secure a win in 38 spins is around 2736 UNITS, that's mathematically sound

50*ASK YOUR SELF:

How do the 'MATHS' experts apply the principle ?
Are there any further ideas regarding this principle on Google ?
Does the principle (which IS a given) hold true for all number sets ?
What number sets exist on a roulette table ?
Could a reduced / increased number set assist you ?
What other maths principles might apply to a roulette table ?
Who created roulette ? To serve what purpose ?
Is there more to betting roulette than a stepped progression ?
Were the creators of roulette 'AWARE' of the pigeonhole principle ? Why ?
What is the point of roulette ? Does it achieve this ? How ?
Why is the number "0" seperated from the other numbers ?
Is Dyksexlic really 'full of it' ? ..or is there 'something' out there ?

51* Question "Why can't we MOVE the 100% Winning "future" EVENT back in time, to NOW ?" --> answer: No cant do, We're not

waiting for any Winning future "EVENT". So there's nothing to move. You want me to use 100% coverage for something that
DOESN'T even exist ? Why ? There are too many POSSIBILITIES
to give you any profit at 35:1. There has to be another way..

52* The game of roulette is an ancient one which hides a mathematical secret which is not at first apparent to the casual eye.

It is hidden in plane sight.

53* HIS LAST RESUME:

The system is a 38 spin repeating cycle betting routine. 38 spins is the maximum allowable length of one cycle. The minimum estimated bankroll required is 2736 units and bets are placed on every spin of the roulette wheel. The number of bets and coverage varies over the course of the cycle. The betting style is a form of flat betting which returns a 100% guaranteed profit over the course of any spin cycle. The system relies on the 'pigeonhole' principle of repeating number distribution. The object of the system is to return a single repeat of a roulette number within the spin cycle. Once a repeating number is achieved, the 38 spin cycle starts again. While it is extremely rare to run the entire 38 cycle from beginning to end, the system ALLOWS for this possibility, ensuring no loss of bankroll could possibly occur at the end of any given cycle. The system DOES return losing spins during the course of the 38 spin cycle, but it is MATHEMATICALLY impossible to produce an overall loss of bankroll at the end of any cycle. The system itself cannot be broken by ANY sequence of pseudo random numbers. The system is, to the best of my knowledge, the ONLY way to consistently win the game of roulette 100%. The system doesn't use a fixed progressive betting plan nor is it waiting for any particular event (high/low/odd/even etc.).

54*
Thanks for the constructive input. Your system has a lot going for - its flat betting, seems to be low bankroll, is logically constructed, and is simple to explain (the best ideas usually are), it sounds like an ideal system for some kind of bot.

But, (ok here it comes) on the downside, its like redhot pointed out, once you take away the fancy numbers, what you're basically left with is another system waiting for an EVENT (which might or might not happen).

Your system is treating numbers as individual entities that have some sort of 'obligation' to repeat themselves in a timely manner.

You might get 'lucky', but you're still relying on a favourable sequence of numbers that  contain enough of those pesky EVENTS. You're playing a waiting game, but the RNG doesn't have to play YOUR game. The RNG could make individual numbers not hit for a looooooong time, but I think wins would even out in the long run, with the 'hitters' balancing out the 'non hitters'. But, as you pointed out, the house edge would soon kick in, then the RNG would spin numbers straight out of "Ripley's Believe It Or Not".

Maybe if you had more details about the frequency of the EVENT you were waiting for, you could have a more dynamic system that adjusted the stake amounts relative to the predicted likelyhood of the EVENT as it went (sort of a 'self correcting system'). Any sub routines you could add to reduce losses might also delay the inevitable.

55*
dyksexlic would I be on the right path thinking that it is some form of differential betting so that you will have different "held bets" on different numbers or groups of numbers?? I.e different amounts of units on different numbers

I have also been thinking about muliple 38 spin sessions overlapping each other sort of like:

If this is one 38 spins session
|_______|

then another session could overlap it like so:
|_______|
    |_______|

So that when the first session ends and we have our garaunteed repeater, we will be in the middle of our second session.

Not sure where I'm going with this just a thought

hopefully you can shed some light on it
56*

@ redhot
The Force is strong within you, redhot..
Well spotted mate, but these knuckleheads aren't listening to you. You're more intelligent than the herd.
If I were you, I would keep some of your 'discoveries' to yourself. Go back slowly over your posts..
Work in private mate. Keep going !

redhot by NAME, redhot by NATURE.

here's some 'LIGHT' reading to point you in the RIGHT direction my friend..

+++++++++++++

Two twin brothers were sat playing roulette in a Las Vegas casino.
One twin was having incredibly good 'luck'. He'd won BIG money on
every spin of the roulette wheel. He was ecstatic.

The other twin was having an 'unlucky' time of it, losing continuously
all night, he was down to his last $10 chip. He looked up at his much
luckier twin brother and asked him tearfully, "Please brother,
help me, this is my last chance to win anything. Tell me the secret
of how you always KNOW which number the roulette ball will land on.
How the hell do you do it ? That's IMPOSSIBLE !

His rich twin brother looked him in the eye and said, "Certainly, I will
answer your question, and give you the Secret of Winning Roulette 100%,
if YOU answer me just ONE question first.."

"What do you wish to know ? ", cried his poorer twin. "I will tell you
anything you ask. Just give me the secret.."

The richer twin continued, "Well, if I tell YOU how I 'KNOW' where to bet to
ALWAYS win at roulette, will you kindly tell ME how you 'KNOW' where to bet to
ALWAYS lose.. ? "

"That's IMPOSSIBLE !", weeped the poorer twin.

"I know ", replied his brother, "But, how the hell do you do it ?"

Username  Subject/Message
dyksexlic (dyksexlic) 

REVEALED !! - Dyksexlic's 100% Winning RNG Roulette System..


Fellow Roulette Players,

After careful consideration, I have made the unprecedented decision to REVEAL my 100% Winning RNG Roulette System to YOU for FREE.

As I mentioned in my original correspondence, this ancient secret has remained out of the reach of the common man for far too long.

This is YOUR opportunity, to own the system which has currently profited me to the tune of £825,000 +

I have been blessed with the enviable position of custodian of this incredible secret for far too long.

Now it is YOUR turn..     

I will make this ROULETTE SECRET known to the first 1000 people who fulfill the following:

7 STEP PROCEDURE FOR OWNERSHIP:

1. Contact Me By PERSONAL MESSAGE If You Wish To Apply For Ownership of This 100% Winning RNG Roulette System.
2. Make a DONATION of AT LEAST £10,000 (or its equivalent) to...
3. Obtain a receipt stamped and dated...
4. Upon verification of the DONATION, YOU will be required to sign a Legal Document agreeing to MY Terms and Conditions prepared by a UK based solicitor.
5. Upon signing this legal document, I will then make my 100% Winning RNG System available to YOU.
6. Under NO circumstance will YOU be allowed to SELL this system. If you attempt to sell it, I will commence immediate legal action against you.
7. Under NO circumstance will you be allowed to make my intellectual property available in digital or printed form to ANY third party.



This is it people. The sh*t is now hitting the RNG roulette fan.. No More Talk.. Just ACTION !

This Golden Opportunity will NEVER be made available to ANYONE again.

Bless others, and I GUARANTEE you, my 100% Winning System will bless YOU beyond your wildest dreams.
"Carpe Diem"


PLEASE NOTE:

This Offer Is Currently Only Being Offered To Citizens / Nationals Of The Following Countries:

United Kingdom
United States Of America
Canada
European Union Member Countries
British Commonwealth Countries
Australia
New Zealand
I'm sorry, but all Terms and Conditions are binding and are non-negotiable.

SEE YOU ALL AT THE TOP !!!!!!
______________________

I also recently unearthed a whole chat from 'The Children of the Light' group which was set up back in the day to discuss Dyksexlics teachings. I will need to edit it down before posting as a lot of stuff in there is just idle chit chat. There were a few notable members in the group - I believe one of the members in there (Red Dwarf/RRBB)cracked the puzzle and was going to share until they decided not to and the group died out. Also got a few messages from red dwarf asking to test the 99% winning method but again this fell away to nothing (I think after they realised they didn't need anyone else or decided not to share and give out vague clues in the forum instead).

I guess it all comes back to the 'put in the work' mantra and no-one will give anything for free. Fair enough I suppose.

It's more brain storming rather than actual methods though and the Eureka moment is sadly left out but again will post once I have it edited down so people can have at it. Sharing = Caring people!!

Cheers!

Akiraa

OK, I will post my HG soon.

Mumbojumbo, are you ill or something? Check out something about "schizophrenia" and get checked... 2 nickname changes in less than a week...

Priyanka, is Preethi Varambally.

Rrbb/reddwarf is David Ochoa Peris.

Those who need a proof, can check it by themselves, based on their postings on this and other forums.

I'm trying to get a new topic approved in the main forum.

I thought Priyanka's name was Sana? Recently, I detected from reading Pri's old texts that she may be a practising Christian? I've since converted to Islam and am now focused exclusively on the maths.

Hey Pri, I look forward to reading anymore info you can provide - or just a basic strategy with a tiny percentage of edge or something that we can build upon.

Last night I discovered that when betting EC cycles we can reduce losses with a parallel hedge bet on the line cycles that favours a particular order. I then found that we can parachute from EC to Line cycles with half a bet on EC both winning/losing as well as covering dozens cycle length 1 at the same time. It's about trying to keep the streams alive!

It is nice to see some old faces back (even if not commenting yet) and especially to see that Pryanka is still around who gave us all something to get our teeth into.

I had a few messages after my last post asking if I could share anything regarding how I play and I offered to help. I think it's fair if I just share out in the open because I think I have some useful things to say which might help.

Going back and looking over what Pryanka and others shared the last couple of days has certainly helped me look at the info in a bit of a new light. As you gain more knowledge and experience, things can either just make more sense or you might even be able to see an application for them.

What piqued my interest with the whole 'Random thoughts' thread was the Cycles using the dozens. Those stats looked like they were crying out to be taken advantage from. Alas, after a lot of false dawns, I couldn't really get anywhere with them. Where I was going wrong in my opinion is that I was expecting everything to work out of the box (cycles, AP etc...) It's very hard to find and create an environment where these concepts become effective.

Now as I said in my last post, I have created a profitable baccarat strategy and evolved it a bit to the point where I can play the dozens at roulette as well and so I went over a few baccarat shoes the last couple of days and revisited the 'dozen's Cycle' concept and also the AP concept (arithmetic progression) They worked! Now I sit here and say to myself well why wouldn't they work because they are clever ideas and they are going to work when used in the right environment as I mentioned.

To get to the nitty gritty of it all, what I am seeing is that I can discount the D in the cycles completely.

What do I mean by that?

Shoe 1)

stream 1)

16 x 123 AP on S.

3 x 456 AP on S.

1 x 147 AP on S.

1 x 678 AP on D. (so for all intents and purposes, the D is negligible)

Stream 2)

16 x 123 AP on S.

3 x 456 AP on S.

1 x 567 AP on S.

1 x 246 AP on S.

1 x 123 AP on D. (so again the D negligible)

Rather than type out all the stats for the AP's on all three shoes....

Combined over the three shoes for the 2 streams.

83 x 123 AP on S.
11 x 456 AP on S.
8 x 147 AP on S.
1 x 345 AP on S.
1 x 246 AP on S.
3 x 567 ap on S.

3 x 123 AP on D.
1 x 345 AP on D.
1 x 567 AP on D.
1 x 678 ap ON D.

So Pryanka's Cycles and AP concepts resoundingly work in the right environment. Playing the Cycles in an EC environment significantly cuts out a LOT of the long losing gaps in conjunction with the AP because you don't even have to worry about the D.

I couldn't get this to work on my dozens idea which evolved from my EC Baccarat game. It just gets very messy and variance steps in the way.

So in conclusion my thoughts are NOT that the concepts (cycles and AP) didn't work. It's just that probably most of us  were expecting some kind of miracle 'out of the box' winning strategy which really doesn't exist.

Now that might not help all of you, but I hope it can point in the right direction for some.

cheers

This is nothing new Tobacco, do we really base anything on that AP or apply it it's self, or even with an extra stream!!

Aren't there better events then this AP thing so we get an edge?

Good to see you back around Priyanka. I'm sure anything you can share which would give some sort of edge would be greatly appreciated by all - even if it isn't the Holy Grail everyone has been searching for all these years.

Cheers!

Akiraa

Quote from: Akiraa on Aug 01, 04:49 AM 2024I also recently unearthed a whole chat from 'The Children of the Light' group which was set up back in the day to discuss Dyksexlics teachings

Akiraa is this on the way , that would be nice!!

OK as promised here is the recently unearthed 'Children of the light' chat from years ago. Below is the part of the chat where one of the members (i think this may have been Red Dwarf / RRBB but can't be 100% certain - showing as C in the chat log) apparently found the secret behind Dyksexlics method after some brain storming with another member.

You can see they said they had it and would share but to my knowledge this never happened and the group fell away shortly after. Posting here for all in the hope someone may be able to figure it out.

Cheers!

Akiraa

[10:05:03 09/05/2011]
C: there are 4 subsets on either colour
C: odd low
C: even low
C: odd high
C: even high
C: if i say black even high is referring to 20 22 24 26 28 and nothing else
C: if 24 show you play on the whole subset
C: inside bets
C: 5 chips
C: but 2 chips on either black odd and low
C: if a black show
C: it must be that subset or if not then 4 chips win 2 chips loss on even chances
C: you understand it?
C: whats the purpose?
C: to have a repeat on that subset and win 33 chips!!!!!
C: seeking a subset will repeat - outside bets feeding partially inside bets
C: seeking the big win
C: with the inside bets
C: there are 8 subsets in total plus 0
C: but dont doubt it - D. plays 38 chips on every bet
C: that's why he talks about 38 x 36
C: well
C: 38 x 2 = 76
C: 76 x 36 = 2736 chips - D. bankroll
C: 38 spins worse scenario
C: 36 chips for every bet
C: well this is going too far for the moment - talking about amounts of chips to bet
C: but most important we need to find how he makes both brothers win every cycle playing this way
C: 1 brother playing on black, the other one playing on red
N: i think he play 76 unit for 38 spin
C: yes you are right i agree
N: hmm...
C: but of course there are losses till we achieve a win
N: something wrong
N: 76 x 38 = 2888
C: 76x36 2736
 C: right
N: but he said 38 spin
N: 1 st spin no bet
C: well this is my 2 cts assumption
C: im not talking about percentages for the bets
N: 72 x 38 spin = 2736
C: yes thats right too
C: wait a moment please
C i got to go guys
N: thanks C... really appreciate it
N: one thing about betting outside bet is we need to take care of the zero- still scratching my head
C: no big worries about 0
C: D. treats it like another number
C: he seek 0 repetition if it shows
N: thanks for the brainstorming
C: welcome mate


[11:59:54 09/05/2011]
ND: what are you guys discussing? Found out anything interesting?
C: maybe ND i dont know for sure
ND: oh?
C: read my previous ideas here talking to N
C: some brainstorming mate
C: it is explained there it is not difficult to follow believe me please
C: read it carefully and you 'll see my point
C: copy  paste and save conversation and think about it
ND: C, u saying D is telling the truth?
C: yes
ND: You believe him 100% now?
C: sure he was telling the truth - 100%
C: center on D. teachings there are so many clues hints in this writings
C: it is in a way that we haven't deduced yet
C: but it has to do playing opposites
C: a trap
C: the roulette can't avoid it
C: or it can avoid it till 37 spin at the most
C: D. is very smart guy mate
C: and his nick means dyslexic
C: it is a clue too lol - dyslexics misconfuse things
C: or mis understand
C: so the trap has to do with two natures
C: two opposites natures
C: one winning all the time
C: false winnings
C: till the real BIG win falls on the other side
C: you dont mind it losing all the time cos when it loses it will give all the bets to the other side
C: like a ladder
C: well a ladder beats roulette
C: this one is so consistent it beats the roulette in the last spin if necessary
I: but also I think one of the biggest clues is... That roulette is confined randomness...
C: order kills randomness
I: I mean if 1 shows it always is going to be red, odd and low... It's not 1 black even high
C: yes you are on the right way mate
C: two brother playing opposite
C: one brother winning all time while the other losing
C: at the end the winnings change hands with a profit
C: the higher the wait the higher the price
I: say for instance there were 18 different reds...
I: you are all betting them, because you are waiting for a repeat...
I: So it would then be a good thing to bet black (EC) as well...
C: yes both
C: your winnings are paid by the casino after a win
C: in a ladder
C: till the ladder fall on the other side
C: you are betting all time with casino money!!!!!
C: till it reverts on the other side!!!!!
C: one playing inside bets mate
C: the other playing outside ones
C: if outside winning all the time the inside waiting for it chances meantime

[12:18:19 09/05/2011]
C: I solved D. riddle
C: I will share it with you in the proper time
C: soon
C: forget about dozens and streets
C: focus on high low colour and inside bets
C: thats all
C: D. bets all numbers all the time
C: but it has to do with percentages in chips
I: not always remember...
I: he sometimes bets all numbers...
C: some numbers are inside all numbers
I: but he always bets some...
C: yes
I: so some is not all????
C: yes some is all
C: because some is included in all too
C: he couldnt say plainly he bets all numbers
C: a combination of inside and outside bets
C: but this way all numbers
I: It has to be something like that I'm sure....
C: including 0
C:  if i tell you it is a bet with casino money i tell you almost all
C: with the money paid for the casino
ND: Tho i didn't understand everything, as i am very new to roulette..
C: well ND - copy paste and save your reading
C: ill post it
N: I hope u post that message..
C: yes ill do
C: ill share with you how to beat rng
C: 100% guaranteed lol
C: maybe you'll see it before i have to share
N: C, do you think you have got it?
C: i know i have got it
N: man! Ur making me excited here..
I: ??? you got something RD ???
C: and ill share it with you that was the purpose in this forum right?
C: i know the answer mate
I: and that is?
C: 100% guaranteed
C: it's got to do with what ive written here yes
C: but if you dont see it for your self ill share
C: it is my word ill do
ND: RD, i didn't understand much of it.. But i hope u can explain it a little easier.. As i read through it fast..
C: well ND take your time i want some work on you to make you think
ND: i am trying, but the thing is: I am very new to roulette etc.. So im not so good in figuring things out etc..
C: it is here in this chat mate hahahahah
I: Now I'm really confused :)
C: today i give away the solution
N: I, it's here in the chat!
N: scroll up..
C: yes i think so I but try to understand what ive already written
N: C, i hope u mean this :D that u really got it :D
C: ive come on the solution after talking to N
C: just this morning mate
C: and has to do with outside bets combined with inside bets
C: think mates
C: one brother playing red
C: another playing black
C : continuous play
I: you mean with the subsets?
N: yeah, i understood that.. but i don't know how they can help each other..
C: not necessary subsets
C: no just play
C: no gamble
C: playing for sure
C: a win for sure
C: all numbers at a time
C: crazy lol
C: but not impossible
ND: have you tried it yet?
C: D. is very very smart man
C : yes ive tried it already
C: and no matter if the rng delete the winning
N: can you say to me honestly: N i have the HG
C: i have HG N yes
C: but only for rng
N: i don't care! Rng is fast
C: you cant play it on based landed casino
C: welll mates i must leave it - will share it with you no doubt
C: but first think a bit
C: i must leave now
N: C! Thanks for everything...
C: see you in any moment soon
C: welcome mates
N: Don't be gone too long!
C: no for sure
C: ciao

Quote from: Akiraa on Aug 02, 06:26 AM 2024Cheers!

Appreciate that.

Akiraa - post above is not really Priyanka.  It's MumboJumbo messing around.

The post above reminds me of a question I asked a member a while back -

If Player 1 could only see Colors and Player 2 could only see Numbers, could both players Win?

Thank you, Akiraa!

Akira awesome post!  It's amazing how we went down almost a similar path in our conclusion of how the twins work.

The way I looked at it....1 bet keeping you in the game until the real bet wins

I enjoyed reading that  8)

Some good information there guys!

Very welcome all. The idea here is to share everything I have so hopefully it will spark some ideas and if anyone gets anything from it and want to share either privately or on here all the better! Keep going guys the solution is definitely out there. We just need to find it!

Cheers!

Akiraa

It's good to always take a break and go back to the info shared.  Looking at things with fresh eyes and different understanding.

I'll share this gem with you guys since we are on the topic of twins maybe it will make more sense for you, maybe not!  But enjoy anyways...

Dyksexlic said "the opposite of a profound truth is also a profound truth"

**Twins don't always have to be identical there are different types of twins but still twins  :xd:

Happy searching!!! (Praline enjoy the journey my friend, be thankful to those guys because without them many of us would still be trying to martingale even chances  :xd: )

Is there any connection what Akiraa posted with this part:

A. I bet on all previous unique numbers
B. I add a second Result stream, the opposite from A, but shifted 1 spin:

E.g.
A. -1, -2, -3, -4, -5, +30
B.  0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, -30

A is a losing proposition, B is a losing proposition. However, combined they give a winning system (when we have a repeat we break even at least)

We now also know that the A and B "systems" must be interwoven: at any time, we can NOT create 2 bets that totally separate A and B!
example to illustrate this concept: bet on number 1, and on low. when 1 hit, we have the proceeds of 1 AND the low, so A consists of the low bets, however, when 1 does not hit, but low hits, the low acts like the B system. Again, this is just an example to illustrate the interwovenness of A and B. There is now way we can split the two bets in the above example into A and B. They are a unity
What also should become clear: It could just occur that we MUST bet all numbers on the table!

Quote from: alexlaf on Aug 03, 07:14 AM 2024Is there any connection what Akiraa posted with this part:

Yes, and no reason for that to be posted on the forum!

Any piece of private information shared with ppl ends up on the forum.  I can see why ppl stop helping.  No matter how much ppl beg and say they won't share with anyone.  🤦�♂️

Completely agree, with MONEYT101!!

Thabks, Akiraa, for your inputs

I'm out.

Tobacco Vanille, what's S & D?

Quote from: TRD on Aug 03, 07:41 PM 2024Tobacco Vanille, what's S & D?

23 doz 2
15 doz 2
---------
20 doz 2 (s)
---------
19 doz 2 (s) 
---------
15 doz 2 (s) S123 on the AP progression

29 doz 3
11 doz 1
29 doz 3
------------
15 doz 2
20 doz 2 (D)
-------------
27 doz 3
32 doz 3 (D)
--------------
10 doz 1
12 doz 1 (D) D123 on the AP progression

To get a higher concentration of S rather than D, you need to get more groupings of either 1, 2 or 3.
They don't HAVE to be the actual dozens themselves. You have to manafucture them yourself. That's why I said I don't believe that the Cycles or the AP progression work out of the box. You need to create the environment to make them work. But the kicker is that if you can do that, then you don't even really need them although admittedly they can act as a signal (especially the S123) as to when you are in profitable situations.

I hope that helps you TRD.

Cheers

Quote from: TRD on Aug 03, 07:41 PM 2024Tobacco Vanille, what's S & D?

23 doz 2
15 doz 2
---------
20 doz 2 (s)
---------
19 doz 2 (s) 
---------
15 doz 2 (s) S123 on the AP progression

29 doz 3
11 doz 1
29 doz 3
------------
15 doz 2
20 doz 2 (D)
-------------
27 doz 3
32 doz 3 (D)
--------------
10 doz 1
12 doz 1 (D) D123 on the AP progression

To get a higher concentration of S rather than D, you need to get more groupings of either 1, 2 or 3.
They don't HAVE to be the actual dozens themselves. You have to manafucture them yourself. That's why I said I don't believe that the Cycles or the AP progression work out of the box. You need to create the environment to make them work. But the kicker is that if you can do that, then you don't even really need them although admittedly they can act as a signal (especially the S123) as to when you are in profitable situations.

I hope that helps you TRD.

Cheers

So basically, S = Same

D = Different

*Sorry about the duplicate post, not sure what happened there!

As an example from a game today.

actual numbers themselves converted to their respective dozens.

3
3
--
2
3
--
1
3
--
3
--
2
1
3
--
2
3
--
2
2
--
3
1
3
--
1
1
--
1
--
1
--
2
2
--
3
1
2
--
2
--
3
3
--
3
--
2

That wasn't bad for producing some S in the cycles. However, as far as concentrated groupings go, there was 4 consecutive 1's and 3 consecutive 3's.

Now for one of my derived streams.

1
2
1
--
1
1
--
3
1
--
1
--
1
--
1
--
3
3
--
3
--
1
1
--
1
--
1
--
3
1
--
2
1
--
1
--
1
--
2
1
--
1
--
1
--
1
--
2
1
--
2

and so a much better result for the S and a lot more consecutive groupings to get stuck into.

One of the interesting aspects of Baccarat is what's known as the derived roads. All they basically are is additional streams but then it's how you can frame the streams to manipulate them for your own purposes which is where someone could be looking to benefit from them.

Again, it took me a long time to figure a lot of this stuff out. Years actually and if I typed everything out, it would take days to type it and then days to explain the nuances and I sometimes think that unless someone goes through that process themself, they are never really going to get a true understanding or the full picture of it.

A) I don't have the time for all that and B) I don't want someone going of half baked thinking they have the grail and are totally unprepared because it takes some getting used to in a live casino environment.

On saying that, I sincerely hope I have a given a bit of an outline and I am sure it can help a few of you.

Cheers

You can turn things as said on other topic into half.
This is for dozen so you either bet 1, 2 or not bet for dozens for the AP is recalculated again .

This is for dozen

One of the AP will repeat also!

Hi, I believe that if we combine 2 or more partitions (DS, DZ, EC) intelligently to attack a dz cycle or a Ds cycle we can create some advantage. But I haven't been able to do that yet. I believe the secret is that it can't be anything static, but rather something mobile that changes according to what's happening in the cycle.

Priyanka, I shared in the Random Thoughts thread that the dozen that closed the previous cycle will close the current cycle by an average of 62%. This is always using the last DZ of the cycle as the first of the current cycle.

In a test with a flat bet, I waited to close the first cycle and bet flat on the DZ that closed the previous cycle until the current cycle closed. And I restarted the attack with the dz of the second cycle and did this for 81 spins. It reached -14 and returned to +1.

This is certainly not a winning attack, but I believe we can use this combined with something to make an effective attack.

I just wanted to share it to see if any ideas come up here.

Quote from: Rond1nell1x on Aug 04, 09:23 PM 2024I just wanted to share it to see if any ideas come up here.

I'm trying to let this topic get buried because of the personal info posted about members.  I'll respond to you in my new topic and we can keep the conversation going there if you don't mind

My quote doesn't work but...

"The fact is things do clutter. When they do clutter, repeaters do happen. When repeaters do happen the statistical relation between these finite cycles tend to lean towards and form a magical relation between two finite cycles."

Every little thing she does is magic.