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

News:

Odds and payouts are different things. If either the odds or payouts don't change, then the result is the same - eventual loss.

Main Menu
Popular pages:

Roulette System

The Roulette Systems That Really Work

Roulette Computers

Hidden Electronics That Predict Spins

Roulette Strategy

Why Roulette Betting Strategies Lose

Roulette System

The Honest Live Online Roulette Casinos

The very best regarding trending.

Started by ego, Dec 14, 03:06 AM 2010

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ego

Hello.

Many of us did pass the idea that we could use a bet selection and base our play upon it moons ago as the game has 37 degree of freedom.
Almost every-thing you read about even money position and playing models is ridiculous stuff - my opinion.

Bet selections and trend betting and all the hog-us bogus secrets and claims that my way is better then your way.
Simple facts is that does who claim this and that with out showing you any-thing of substance is liars as they donÃ,´t have any-thing with substance to show you.

What is the intention of a writer or poster on forums - well most of them have very little understanding and unrealistic dreams when it comes to roulette.
This end up with me and to tell you that i am not here to fool you or brag - i am here to educate you if you want to learn.

All you have to know when you read what i say is that there is no public or any roulette system for even money position that beats or are any better then what i introduce you to.

Educated guess work and woo-do models will make you end up with nothing.
Sure there is methods where you can use random against random as method at let the money management let you ride out bad swings and recoup with strict rules - but this post will not deal about that topic.

We will look at real and realistic trends that you can measuring using math and probability to try to achieve a high hit ratio based upon facts and not fiction.
The principals is easy as we will deal with "The observation of the distribution" and not "The law of the distribution of series - that is a significant difference.
There is balance and imbalance and chaos.
There is different ways to observe and measuring the distribution depending on what you are looking for "what kind of imbalance that appears and being present to at a later point try to take advantage of.

The very best regarding trends.
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

ego


To illustrate this i will give you some conditional values of existing formations and it apply to one among many ways.

Singles outcomes has the value of 0
Series of two has the value of 1
Series of three has the value of 0
Series of four has the value of 1
Series of five has the value of 2
Series of six has the value of 3
And so the values move forward and higher depending on the series Length.

This is the values we use when we calculate to find true imbalance within the distribution.
Its not the same as saying something is overdue nothing is due - but the fact remains as we have observe a imbalance - the question is how strong it will grow before we start to observe opposite or side effect of the imbalance and try to capture does events/formations.
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

ego


This is the first step and now i just repeat to make all clear.

Examapel of a sequense when we observe how the distribution unfold it self with series with different lenght and singels.

RR B R B RR BB RR BB RRR BB RRR BB RRR RRR BBBBB RR BB R B R B RRR BB RR BB RRRR

Above you can see the following.

Singels 7
Series of two 12
Series of three 5
Series of four 2

Singels value 0 = 0 above
Series of two value 1 = 12 above
Series of three value 0 = 0 above
Series of four value 1 = 2 above
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

ego


As we can see during this distribution that unfold it self we have lost of or should we say that all does series of two that appear is overrepresented to a certain degree - yes we do and it can continue to flow it that direction as we only observe.

It as a STD of 2.5.

What would we expect or look for - well when there appears a significant change as indication or tendency that does series of two become larger in length of three in a row which indicate larger series start to show - that means series of four and higher.

Next step is the tricky part - when and how do i try to capture does.
Logic would dictate after a series greater then five and if it fails directly attack from the moment series of two appears.

Then would we attack all in with a large progression - no - as it would be the same to playing with or against any sequence of for example 12 reds or blacks in a row - useless.
We would develop a march to follow after certain formations and use frequency of attacks - a certain amount of bets at does opportunities there is a significant change towards a new way that the distribution indicate it unfolds.
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

ego


How and what does a trending model base its principals upon.
First you have to measuring how the trend or the imbalance appears and measruing how Strong the imbalance is using STD and here develop a rule if your bench mark with does waves of imbalance should be at 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 STD before you start the observation for significant change before frequency of attacks.
Then it follow a side rule that for example you use 2.5 then then 12 of the the series that is due to imbalance is the minimum with two series of the opposite which indicate change which would make you to use a window or frame with at least 14 events/formation to qualife as a trending bet-selection to be valid - wave.

That is lesson 1 which apply to any of the following methods i will post.
So now we know how to observe and measuring the imbalance with two simple rules.
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

ego


Some different methods to study.

1:1
Series of 2 has the value of 1
Series of 3 has the value of 0
Series of 4 has the value of 1
Series of 5 has the value of 2 and so on - skip singels as they have value 0

1:2
Series of 3 has the value of 1
Series of 4 has the value of 0
Series of 5 has the value of 1
Series of 6 has the value of 2 and so on - skip series of 2 and singels as they have value 0

Advance.

Isolated singels has the value 0
Series of 2 singels has the value of 1
Series of 3 singels has the value of 0
Series of 4 singels has the value of 1
Series of 5 singels has the value of 2 and so on - skip isolatid singels as they have value 0

Series of 3 singels has the value of 1
Series of 4 singels has the value of 0
Series of 5 singels has the value of 1
Series of 6 singels has the value of 2 and so on - skip isolated singels and series of 2 singels as they have value 0

Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

ego


Singels has the value of 1
Series of 2 has the value of 0
Series of 3 has the value of 1
Series of 4 has the value of 2 and so on

Abstract unknown theory.

Will post about that later - now i will repeat the way to caculate and use math.
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

ego



The chart show the STD.

First you have to get the Absolute value when you calculate.
So lets assume you have an sequence with 14 formations with 2 other formations present.

Then you take 14 - 2 = 12

Now we want to get the statistical value so we continue with...

14 + 2 = 16

Now we take the sqr of 16 = 4

And finally we divide the absolute value whit the sqr

12 sqr 4 = 3,00

The Statistical Value 3,00


Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

ego


A simpel way to understand all this is to do the following test - because this way you will learn and verify it all that has been mention and see the beatiful flower and how it unfold.

Now take any serie with any lenght and give it the value one.
Take all singles event that appers and give them the value one.

Now the two oppisite formations is as follows.

Series that grow and get strong imbalance toward the oppisite.
RRBBBRRRBBBBRRBBBRRBBRRRRBBB or with values +1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10

Now we turn around an look at the oppisite toward the series above.
RBRBRBRBRBR or with values +1+2+3+4+5+6+7 and so on

Now if this two state level or hovering we will get one of each alternating and it looks like this.
RRR B RRR B RRRR B RRRR B RR B or with values +1+0+1+0+1+0+1+0+1+0


Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

ego


Now assume you pick all does sequences when they hovering at zero point then the following will happen no matter what pepole will argue.

The flower will at some point unfold two series that follow each other or The flower will at some point unfold two singles after each other.
The flower will at some point unfold three series that follow each other or The flower will at some point unfold three singles after each other.
And so on.

So assume you follow the rules the measuring waves and imbalance of some kind - then it will unfold with significant change - you challenge is to find a way to capture The flower when is indicate and show a realistic tendency that is start to unfold using a method with frequency of attacks.

Practice and observe - enjoy.
Denial of gamblers fallacy is usually seen in people who has Roulette as last option for a way to wealth, debt covering and a independent lifestyle.  Next step is pretty ugly-
AP - It's not that it can't be done, but rather people don't really have a clue as to the level of fanaticism and outright obsession that it takes to be successful, let alone get to the level where you can take money out of the casinos on a regular basis. Out of 1,000 people that earnestly try, maybe only one will make it.

-