Weight of numbers (what the fu-ck)

[nottophammer]

= 236
Steve you never know, the/you experts might just over looked something

[Steve]

I'm open to being wrong of course. But I've already done a lot of testing on the principles discussed. And my conclusion is what ive found. Until i see something that opposes what i found, I'll naturally have the same conclusion.

What i believe is not my opinion. Its what i found from my own testing. Testing that involves billions of rng spins, automated software, and lots of real spins too.

What better way to find real patterns than with automated software to find anomalies? That's what i developed. Manual testing is far too time consuming.

[cht]

Hi nottophammer,  that sum total is the divisor of a weighted series.

What's normally done in linear weighted ma,  the latest numbers are multiplied by the highest weight while the earliest number is multiplied by the lowest weight - giving it the weighted effect.  The cumulative total is divided by this divisor to obtain the lwma.

For roulette,  the raw data(number)  is converted into a binary read to plot the series  eg.  red=+1 and black=-1.

[cht]

What better way to find real patterns than with automated software to find anomalies? That's what i developed. Manual testing is far too time consuming.

No matter whether we find it or not,  it's not limited to only one way.  As to better,  it involves precision,  consistency,   practicality and eventually the edge that draws in the net positive,  the latter to me is the most important since if we're doing it we're living it.

[nottophammer]

Thought it funny that the tier came to 236 in total and the 1st 12 spins was 236, with 5 from the tier section itself, just coincidence, but thanks cht