Good luck with the program Herby.
I'm losing my mind over all those streams. I've never created more useless spreadsheets in my life than in the last few days. To crack it, it's becoming a matter of pride more than anything else.

But... "It does not matter how slowly you go as long as you do not stop." That's from Confucius. Allegedly.

Some thoughts (non-random).
The purpose of this post is to ask the right questions (perhaps answer some of them) and try to revive the discussion.
So... Combining classic (normal) and derived streams. In what way should it be done? Is it enough? What about MM?
Back to basics.
Things we know are needed (crucial) to construct a CWM:
1. Playing both classic and derived streams (as stated by 6th-sense).
2. Playing at least two partitions (as stated by MoneyT). Dyksexlic played all four (?).
3. 'Dividing everything into halves' (as stated by CarpeDiem) and creating mutually exclusive pairs. Priyanka also mentioned creating pairings. Dyksexlic mentioned planet1 - planet2...
4. Flat (flat-ish) betting + continuous play.
5. Cycles are everything. Cycle ends on a repeat. It is also a start of a new cycle.
6. It should be an all-encompassing bet that catches both repeats and singles.
Now... my thoughts:
a) about point 1. Playing all compartments on both streams just as they go is obviously not the answer. I'm sure it's the very thing all of us tried (using the stream tracker).
b) about point 3. and point 6. Using both streams - classic and derived - kind of naturally creates a bet that includes repeats and singles (hits and unhits). How to divide it further? Even before using a stream tracker and playing with just one regular stream, I've tried all kinds of divisions I could think of. I've played black&red numbers as two separate games within one game, high&low numbers, RL-RH-BL-BH and so, and so on. I've played red for repeats and black for singles. All sorts of out of the box tests you could imagine. Some games hold pretty well but only up to a certain point... when they started to crumble.
With the stream tracker, I had a thought: how about pairing two partitions and playing only the derived stream and the other two partitions with the classic stream? But which ones? And how?
The problem with this kind of testing is that it all has to be done manually on a spin-by-spin basis. You can't code something if you don't even know exactly what you are looking for. I gave up on many such trials that might have potential... I don't know. I kept on going with others for way too long before realizing it was a road to nowhere.
So... what other divisions and pairings can we find/create? How to connect them properly together into a game within a game... within a game?
c) about point 4. Money management. What does "flat-ish" really mean? Is it straight flat most of the time + some sort of progression at certain phases of the game? I don't believe so. Is it flat that is constantly moving because of the movements of the derived stream (for those who may not know: you play for positions repeat, so the numbers keep changing) and (sometimes) overlapping numbers and partition from both sets? Maybe so. Dyksexlic talked about held bet (or something like that). This could just be a bet for the classic stream. And the other one (for the derived) is a moving bet. Maybe? Or maybe something completely different? Probably so...
For those in the 'know': Is there anything worth pursuing in the post above? Any further advice on how to bite this subject?
For those outside of the 'know' (): Any new ideas you would like to share?
Let's keep diving in.
Thanks&Regards

Hi duchobor,

from outside of the 'know' ():
I try to find the different aspects of PHP in the tracker which 6th kindly posted.

- order: friends and strangers: min 2 triangles of the same color
- Dijkstra: maximum has to be greater or equal to the mean, toto
- Dijkstra, Erdös: Up and downsequences

- MoneyT: 5 dozens in 13 spins

some more or already too much ?

As you said: Thanks and regards

Priyanka once told me if any concepts are confusing me, then throw them out the window. We don't need half of this crap to play/create a game.

@Duchobor & others ..

quiet a while ago Mel came up with the idea of YN-type groups; I think those were based on the uniques in a repeat cycle .. with 4 types of groups -- YY, NN, NY, YN.

I've done quite a decent study & spreadsheet, coming to the conclusion of the best candidates to be bet, or base the bet on, would be YY, YN .. as you can see on the accompanying graphs.

I think all the bets were simply flat, for the purposes of the sheet & determining any potential advantage constituted by groups.

It akso contains average & max no-hit intervals, lengths in spins till hit.


The bottom line, NN & NY contain to many numbers on average, with the spin returns thus being low; YY & YN groups, contain fewer numbers =bigger payout (quicker recovery), & each on its do not constitute a betting opportunity on each spin = continuous betting, both together combined almost.

This was done, I think on DS district, or compartment alone, so combining with high-probability positions EC & DZ, you just might get to facilitate the continuous betting too.

None of the groups is EV+, although YY shows a bit better graph than all the rest, due to its somewhat enhanced mathematical advantage, as betting the defining element on the first two spins of the cycle.


So, perhaps with a better qualifier in the reduction of numbers, & potentially combining with other districts as well -- the route of YY+YN might be a worthwhile avenue of further exploration .. including, potentially, somewhat parachuted bet construction, in order to keep the expenses, cost low = maintain recoverable drawdowns.

---

Regarding the flat-ish ..

Playing flat, with a bit of, a slight press on a hit .. might be a worthwhile way too;

where the press does not have to necessarily be a press with units alone, but a press in-risk (or combination of both), where you would on a hit decrease the amount of numbers played per spin, as the first stage, then potentially combine with deeper payout too, as the second & finally temporarily increase the amount of units stacked per position slightly, in order to close the game (with fewer hits).

Basically, amplify the fains of a hit with the second, meanwhile, the first hits keep the exposition & its increase low, & the as well, the amount of units used in the press does ≠not exceed the amount of gains of the first hit.

---

Attached is the sheet, some of you are already familiar with it.

Quote from: Blueprint on Apr 19, 06:38 PM 2023Priyanka once told me if any concepts are confusing me, then throw them out the window. We don't need half of this crap to play/create a game.

as you are inside of the 'know' ():
You try to say with probability 99% I can throw out the first half of the concepts. 

Blueprint,
I assume he talked about something specific in regard to your conversations. Otherwise, if for someone a lot of concepts get confusing then he/she won't find anything to work on/construct based on.

TRD,
Thanks for the input and for showing a spreadsheet (top-notch btw). I'll dive deeper into it. With regard to money management, I generally agree with most of the ideas. Although it doesn't seem to be the way Dyksexlic played (and 6th is playing?).

Herby,
the more the better. Potential discoveries on these sound particularly interesting:
- Dijkstra: maximum has to be greater or equal to the mean, toto
- Dijkstra, Erdös: Up and downsequences

With:
- MoneyT: 5 dozens in 13 spins
I've tried to create a non-random game based on that and similar data. Dozens, dozens+columns, dozens+columns(cardinal+ordinal streams), 2nd street repeat (third appearance) within 25 spins, same with splits (37), then streets+splits, then streets+splits(cardinal+ordinal), then vertical streets + horizontal streets = I've created my own compartments and number matrix's in order to find dependencies. Blah. Good luck with that
ps. Some of the above work well with the progression, like 95% of the time until extreme NV kicks in and eats the bankroll. I've never found anything winning constantly with flat bets though... Yet!

The point is to not get lost in complexities.  If someone could play in a casino without a spreadsheet how complex do you think it needs to be?  Also, others have stated if someone watched you play they would see exactly what you're doing.

Quote from: duchobor on Apr 20, 09:19 AM 2023ps. Some of the above work well with the progression, like 95% of the time until extreme NV kicks in and eats the bankroll. I've never found anything winning constantly with flat bets though... Yet!

Hi duchobor,
similar experiences:
- derived of derived

- pairings was my last progression deaster (just simulations  )
- Scepticus: min. 3 doz wins in 4 rows/9 columns

duchobor, seems you are a good diver ("Let's keep diving in")
So take a deeeeep breath and ...

Quote from: Blueprint on Apr 20, 10:10 AM 2023The point is to not get lost in complexities.  If someone could play in a casino without a spreadsheet how complex do you think it needs to be?  Also, others have stated if someone watched you play they would see exactly what you're doing

The point is so complex with so much information and variation for the reader, it doesn't look for a three years old.
The answer is ( If it was so easy anyone should have a copy of the grail) at least on this forum.

Quote from: TRD on Apr 19, 07:08 PM 2023@Duchobor & others ..

quiet a while ago Mel came up with the idea of YN-type groups; I think those were based on the uniques in a repeat cycle .. with 4 types of groups -- YY, NN, NY, YN.

I've done quite a decent study & spreadsheet, coming to the conclusion of the best candidates to be bet, or base the bet on, would be YY, YN ..

That's an excellent post! You remember 

Quote from: alexlaf on Apr 20, 02:04 PM 2023The point is so complex with so much information and variation for the reader, it doesn't look for a three years old.
The answer is ( If it was so easy anyone should have a copy of the grail) at least on this forum.

There are a couple of reasons for this problem.  But it all comes down to what you understand from what someone shared.

If you have a good understanding of cycles.  A good understanding of the fact that repeats come from recent numbers.  A good understanding of why you really lose in roulette!  Then you can look for a solution.

That's why when I try to share things, my goal is to forget complicated terms.

Take things basic and answer step by step and build a solution.  Looking at all the data blinds you and also you miss key points and adjustments to be made.   You can manipulate the data however you like.  No rules remember!

So let's say you see something happens a lot.  Think how can I take advantage of this.  Can I change the way I see the info to make sure when this happens I get a result I want always.  Then move to the next step and see if it helps a little.  And keep adding on to it based on what you see happening.

Trust me there isn't anything new in a cycle.  I posted the example here abc.  You can cover many combinations with 1 combination.  Nothing changes! Pay attention to those details. 

Don't misunderstand! One combination doesn't work for all.  But my point is you can cover many with 1.

The end is easy and someone can see what you are doing and also copy it.  All the steps are involved.  It just doesn't seem logical to do that until you do lol

As funny as it sounds

Mel I was not talking for myself personally but in general, I guess, other members also feel the same about what I said...
Here is an example:
Str8+O/E+Dozen

I like Money's style of thinking, trying to simplify things, understand concepts and look for solutions.
I'm still on the hunt, but I've already managed to make good strides in my perception of the game!
Thanks for everyone's contribution!

Quote from: Blueprint on Apr 19, 06:38 PM 2023Priyanka once told me if any concepts are confusing me, then throw them out the window. We don't need half of this crap to play/create a game.

maybe this will help...think along the lines of friends and strangers and a bit of Ramsey's theorem

stats..