Frequency of an event

[Blueprint]

& I do not rely on luck.

Yup... you're in control, I see.

[nottophammer]

You sound like Falkor.

Forum idiot
Turbo quote; take 5'000 to win 5'000

[TRD]

Sure, I am.
Erase that, you sound like a child.

[TRD]

Let's move on back onto the course.

Here I've included 13 contiguous sessions -- 620 games, till the first hypothetical non-complete;
game (to nominal profit) = event = 'base sequence' to potentially be Martied.




disregard the unit placement mistake on ≈spin210, 3ST 34u/position instead of 4u

[TRD]

& with this one makes, that was not added in the beginning

All these games are played with mechanical bs, last outcome;
so no advantage constituted from it (eg. trend, repeaters).

All done simply by mechanism constituted of the only two interactive things in control,
how many units bet & how those are spread .. or in short money management.


As you can see, 2x 'extreme games' went beyond 110 spins (0.3226%) over 200 spins;
one still resolved withing 150u bankroll, (-133) to be precise, & the other got to (-240),
so with 250-300u bankroll, ALL is resolved in positive.

The first-mentioned game, although it required

Although the variance in both games is mostly out of favor, in the non-complete game extraordinarily so, with an interval of over 100 spins without the focused single ST hit -- the exposition is kept in control, slowly descending meanwhile keeping the ratio between the combo hit (wide coverage bet first, with its gains reinvested sponsoring the focused bet = bot hitting close-by is a combo hit) & exposition proportional .. (not expanding the vertically unnecessarily);


so yeah, I am in control -- in control of my emotions, mind, focus, deliberation, resolve, exposition (keeping the drawdowns at all times recoverable) & thus the games in its entirety .. so that/& even when the variance is extremely out of my favor, simply patiently awaiting its (game's) inevitable resolve.

[TRD]

[TRD]

Correction

As you can see, 2x 'extreme games' went beyond 110 spins (0.3226%) over 200 spins;

As you can see, 4x/620 games went beyond 100 spins (0.3226%),
-240(266),  -133(225),  -92(110),  -88(118);

of which 2x called 'extreme games went over 200 spins,
3x of those were still kept within a hypothetical 150u bankroll,
& 2x within hypothetical 100.

[TRD]

So, toying with hypothetical event termination,
taking the 150u hypothetical bankroll;

with probability p = 0.998387, or 99.8387% reliability of an event completing in positive,
makes 1 - p = q .. 1 - 0.998387 = 0.001613, or 0.1613% chance of event non-complete ← terminated ..

the question is what's the avg & the most intense frequency of (1 -q)
(=how many of those non-completes can happen in a row max).

in a bit longer version

given that the confidence interval is a vector + the amplitude is the angle of the vector ..
& we are looking for the frequency of the 1/q events ..

(in other words, practically -- the application of Marti, over/on the 'base sequence' = event
= bottleneck game terminated as a non-complete of an event)

.. & since in roulette neither the amplitude nor frequency is constant .. specifically,
we are looking for the highest intensity of such frequency telling us essentially
either

•  how many 1/q events in a row we can expect max .. in the desired interval of games
played, thereof the most likely frequency of these 2x, 3x, (4x?) in the row event appearing
•  or, taking another angle, given the resulting frequency of 2x in row event is low enough,
    what would the required 'play bankroll' amount be, ascertained from the fundamentally
   required P (see image, top left array) .. which satisfies the premise of the one-step Marti
   takes care of the most intense frequency manifested (potentially extended max to two-step)

[TRD]

Nevermind, that the above method has been already further improved by itself, further tweaked & optimized, moreover added the benefit of playing the repeats which further adds to its overall avg performance parameters;

& now evaluating the MoneyT101's high-performance bs concept in detail, further enriching something that already works consistently .. null-hypothesis: absolve the extreme games entirely;
making it a true masterpiece.

[Bigbroben]

No matter what...

1/q will be the amount of numbers played divided by the amount of numbers available.  At every single spin.  No matter what you try, no matter what the averages are.
and odds are against the player.  One cannot beat random.  One cannot argue with maths.

[Bigbroben]

You've probably had a lucky strike

[Azim]

No matter what...

1/q will be the amount of numbers played divided by the amount of numbers available.  At every single spin.  No matter what you try, no matter what the averages are.
and odds are against the player. One cannot beat random.  One cannot argue with maths.

Why do we go to work? We never get 100% return on our time spent at work, the governments take away 30% of our earnings.
The odds are against the worker to ever be able to get 100% of his earnings to take home.
Does that mean we stay at home and not work?

[TRD]

SUMMARY

My question to you is regarding the 'base unit increase' + Marti (reverse, halving
the base unit .. or neg, doubling the base unit) on the hypothetically terminated
game is --

are you able to calculate the fluctuation & thus the highest intensity of frequency
of such terminated events;

confidence interval is a vector (of standard deviation), amplitude is the change of vector (of its direction) .. amplitude & frequency are correlated (but not constant as in eg. cos & sin graph) -- thereof it should be in theory possible to get the result above out --

the result being the most intense frequency of the (1-q) event = in a row, or practically how many Marti-steps are required to surpass the worst variance;

where an event is one game, so how many session possibly terminated sessions in a row at worst, given that a session is about ≈50 on average (range ± 30-60)


REPHRASED QUESTION

bringing us back at the most intense point in the fluctuation of frequency, or every how many games the non-complete event happens at the highest congestion, or how close-by those non-complete (1-q) events in terms of games are at the worst variance

â†' =Marti-steps require -- & if this is still too high, how much does the 'p' or reliability of the 'event = base betting sequence' need to be (where q=1-p) for those (1-q) events to be .. to not exceed 2x in about 150-180 events or games

[bigmoney]

Lotsa varaiance there