Person s you are veering off the topic..there are different threads for your idea...

Please keep this thread on track

Winkel has give his ultimate truth about roulette..

Yet it still contains the essence of what to bet within certain spin counts...that even without his meaning to pertains to a lower half of his example..

So is winkels idea the ultimate truth or not...everyone who is activated on my software can quickly check this..

Let them post if it is the truth and works..or not...but winkel did explain it can lose or hit at any point....

Winkel is very knowledgeable..but is this truth correct ..?

Does the cycle ends where it begins?

I'm more interested in creating the principle of couples. We need to divide the table into H/L halves. Or we need to divide the low derivatives into 2 halves i.e. from 18/2=9. Two halves of 9.
Mutually exclusive pairs with sandalwood flavor to create simply in case we divide the table into 2 parts - it would be pairs 1-36,2-35,3-34, etc. 18 in all. The rest is still a mystery...

Can we bet then the last 4 as winkel told from those 18!

It wouldn't work, I tested Vaddy by playing with 8 numbers - constantly discarding the old number, but it didn't work.

These 4 seem to hit well, but the betting amount will dig a hole.

For sure there is more then just betting all the time the last of something...

let me tell you a story:

In a forum someone publishes some thousend spins for testing.

A guy lets call him Raz looked at the first spins and found out that betting Red after Zero could be a good strategy. So he tested several hundred spins more and found out he wins 80 out of 100 spins and  was convinced: That is the winning System because the trend is your friend.
He gathered his money went to the casino next day. After three hours he left bankrupt.

Same day another guy lets call him Baz created an idea every time Zero is coming out I will bet Black.
He looked at some spins and it didn´t work. so he tested several hundred spins and found he loses 80 of 100 bets.

What do you think did the second guy?
Did he go to the casino thinking this trend must end?
Imagine if Baz had been simultanesly betting as Raz, Baz would have won all the chips, that Raz lost.

This is Roulette, besides: there are no Baz. Nobody tests a strategy -50% and then goes to the casino to win with it. Everyone would rather dismiss the idea.

Think about.

A system is found only when it works. But when its time is over it will be a losing system.

Winkel with what are you winning now? The story was n1.

The first guy fell victim to the variance in the casino, and the second guy fell victim to the variance during the test.
Conclusion - don't play if you don't know what it can do.
Or create a system that has a couple of eons of time to spare.

A bit of reflection. So, in the beginning we know from Notto's stats that there will be about 4 repeats in 20 spins. So there will be more unique ones in that span, and the repeats will be from spins 21 to 37. We can simplify and say that there will be more repeats in the next 20 spins. We end up with 40 spins and 20 will have more uniques and the next 20 will have more repeats. Nothing new, but it could be interesting.

Quote from: Person S on Sep 04, 02:51 PM 2022there will be about 4 repeats in 20 spins. So there will be more unique ones in that span, and the repeats will be from spins 21 to 37.

Yes and No at the same time.

This is anaverage, not a standard outcome.

I know a spin-sequence with only 11 different numbers and another with 33 different numbers.

At spin 25 (my calc-point) there 18 or 19 unhit 13 or 14 unique hit and 4 or 5 hit more than once.

don´t mix statistical average with reality.

Here what can be at spin 20
read:
there were 8 times 3 repeaters(2) at spin 20
there were 7 times 30 reapeaters(2) at spin 20

8    0    275    3    0    0    0
7    0    176    30    0    0    0


count  0-hit  1-hit  2-hit  3-hit  4-hit

29    0    0    0    0    0    0 28    1    0    0    0    0    0 27    3    0    0    0    0    0 26    17    0    0    0    0    0 25    102    0    0    0    0    0 24    350    0    0    0    0    0 23    818    0    0    0    0    0 22    1346    0    0    0    0    0 21    1482    0    0    0    0    0 20    1017    11    0    0    0    0 19    413    0    0    0    0    0 18    112    112    0    0    0    0 17    11    23    0    0    0    0 16    0    390    0    0    0    0 15    0    185    0    0    0    0 14    0    877    0    0    0    0 13    0    560    0    0    0    0 12    0    1061    0    0    0    0 11    0    628    0    0    0    0 10    0    801    0    0    0    0 9    0    462    0    0    0    0 8    0    275    3    0    0    0 7    0    176    30    0    0    0 6    0    66    164    0    0    0 5    0    33    721    0    0    0 4    0    6    1378    0    0    0 3    0    5    1627    46    0    0 2    0    0    1216    384    3    0 1    0    1    464    2018    331    11

Quote from: winkel on Sep 04, 04:13 PM 2022there were 7 times 30 reapeaters(2) at spin 20

Thank you, about the 30 repetitions, didn't understand the last post. Do you mean that there were 30 repeats such as x5,x4 etc. in the first 20 spins? 
I agree that averages are not reliable. There should be a maximum and minimum range. But I look on the other hand, maybe you should not bet on the whole group, so as not to cover much, but only on part of it?