Cut Point Methodology.

[ego]

Basics Advance.

Flat betting / Masse Ègale.

Flat betting following simple rules and the principal is logic.
The minimum is to gain at least +1 unit and the amount of won units has to overcome the amount of attempts that is made to gain at least +1 unit.

Illustration and example.

Lets assume we only attack twice to capture a certain event to win at least +1 unit.
Then the total gain/won units as to overcome the total amount of two loses.

Then we have the line: 1 1

A total loss would be -2
A total gain would be +1

First we name the march wish indicate wish method we use to capture the events with.
Then when we start to test this and we categorize the files with date - example 20101207.
Then we add the amount of qualified states - example (3).
Then we just add the +1 if a win and -2 if a loss.
At the end we write the totals.

Example.

The Sloppy March.
Date 20101207
States 4

+1
+1
+1
+1

Total gain +4
Total loss 0

The Sloppy March
Date 20101208
States 5

+1
+1
+1
+1
+1

Total gain +5
Total loss 0

[ego]

Basics Advance - The Experiment.

As I mention above every trail is independent.
So when we test our first March with rules how to capture certain events it should not be any difference if we use any other sequence then The Ultimate Perfect State as the result should be the same.

I am not a fool and I will not fool you.
You have the Simulation Software.
You know to make simple charts of statistics/results.

So to verify if it is nonsense or a fact or fiction you just compare.
Example foll wing same March after every series of two like RR or BB wish should give the same results as you use The Ultimate Perfect State.

This way you can find out if past results and bet-selection is bogus or not - simple as that.

[ego]

Basic Advance - The Experiment.

One strategy is to try to capture a small quick correction to capture one out of two new states to appear direct after a strong imbalance.

That is why i compare it with betting against or with any bet-selection as for example as series of two and it would make no difference.

The main point i want to make clear is that when we track and measuring to find a state with a strong imbalance - we should not chase or force our self try to hit and capture events with out having any kind of indication towards a significant change among the states.

As the imbalance can continue to grow and get stronger as nothing is due to happen we never know when it will stop to grow until we can observe a significant change.

Now some one might think that just because i or we observe a significant change towards new states and the imbalance stop to grow that we would be home free to harvest and capture all does new strings of events with different formations - it is not that simple.

One thing that can occur is that when we find a strong imbalance is that it goes back to back to a certain degree.
It might get a small draw-down as a opposite effect/correction from previous state and get weaker to a certain degree or just hovering at zero point where it stop to grow stronger and does not get weaker - and we have no clue what so ever for how long this state will be present.

The thing with Cut Point Methodology is that you create a scenario where you know that in the future certain states will appear with high probability and you will observe them over and over again no matter how many 100 000 trails samples you run following this playing model.

The short, medium and large corrections of the imbalance is observations and indication of new states before real play and there exist various of methods to capture them using a march - specific algorithm - betting behavior following certain rules.

The basic idea is that when you have The Ultimate Perfect State with pure singles that you will get separated series of the other two states in the future and a mix of both as a part of correction from a strong imbalance.

Now nothing is due to happen and the trails are independent and everything can happen.
The general talk is that you can observe 100 reds in a row and is useless to play black as the trails is independent you can still get 100 more reads witch would become a total of 200 reads in a row.

So what do we have - i tell you - we only know what has happened and can only use that as our bench mark being the negative expectation or try to be realistic that during our life time we will not experience a 6.0 STD or above during 200 trails.

Note.
There is no such thing as - The law of series - as its only is observations.

When we use different variations of ways to use a march - flat betting - then i just want to add the following.
The warning is that even if you believe you find a positive expectation with one among does ways to capture correction - so will natural fluctuation and overrepresented strings of sequences / states find its way around any betting you can think of in the long run - maybe not during your life time or next day or week - but it will happen.

Obvious many thought i would speak about the house edge as the main reason - but is not.
As if you can gain at least +1 unit and it overcome the attempts doing so flat-betting - then you can use any bet size and place a % to cover the zero tax - witch would be best with a La Partage rule - that means you only lose half your bet if zero strikes on even money position.

[ego]

Basics Advance - Details.

I would talk a little about how to capture one state and two states witch unfold them self like a flower in the future witch is a head of us.

They can come in any combination and now I will deal with this in details as when we use a march I want you to know what it is based upon.

Now the example with The Ultimate Perfect State is a pure imbalance with only isolated singles events.

So the expectation in the future is to observe formation of series of the other two states to unfold them self.

Then they will come as states as single events and as two in a row and three in a row and so on.
We have no clue if they will come as a single short state or if we will observe for example a state which is very large.
And we can get booth this state appear as singles events with different length or we can get Booth mix together with different formations and length.

Example if we would wait for the first single event of a state to appear and play twice to capture it to continue or unfold to the other underrepresented state we could end up with it being single state and lose two bets - and as we so many times mention nothing is due so we could continue to get only single states to appear with out any greater length to capture.

Here there exist two alternatives.
The first one is only to start an attack after a fictive win as a tendency or indication for present correction and then if the first attack fails start to attack after every new present state appears to become with a greater length.
The intention here is that with out any tendency or indication towards a significant change it is no idea to place any bets.

It is a simple thought witch is common regarding Cut Point Methodology and this has different ways using this way of thinking when some one develops a march to capture underrepresented states/formations/waves.

The best option is to aim with one attack with one attempt to capture one state among two underrepresented states - but first we make this simple to capture one out of two underrepresented states.