A very clever and extreme method - even money bets.

[ego]

This is how the results look like when you don't use any kind of trigger - just follow the random flow.

2015 07 16
LLWLLWWWWLWWLWLLLWLLWWLWLLWWLLWWWLWLLWWWWLLLWW

2015 07 15
LLLWLWLWWWWWLLWWLWWWWLWWWWLWLWLWWLWWLLW

[sturrock]

Hello . . .

Attached is a Tracker to help test Pattern Betting of this type.

The Tracker simply tracks the formations of the 8 patterns of XXX, OOO, XOX, OXO, XXO,OOX, XOO, OOX.

When it finds that the last 6 patterns are Unique (no repeats), then it bets that the next 2 patterns will not be unique, ie. it bets for a repeat.

Cheers

Nick
Just downloaded tracker and is read only do we have a working tracker?  Thanks

[sturrock]

Just downloaded tracker and is read only do we have a working tracker?  Thanks 

[ptzelepis]

Hey Sturrock. Got my email ? Maybe we have something here

[Baelog]

Could someone please explain the method used again? I seem to have problems understanding the bet selection. If you look at the attachment. Why is the selection "B" for a loss on row 26 when the only repeating pattern in the last 6 would be "R"? Or should I bet on the pattern that has not show in the last six?

[sturrock]

Is everybody winning with this? I have tested for a week now and only seen 4 losses in a row just once. Is anybody playing this and what are your results like? (I'm using the tracker)

[sturrock]

Is any body there ?

[SamNL]

Is any body there ?

I'm here Sturrock. Max L still 4? Wouldn't this be better suited to Baccarat?

[sturrock]

Hi Sam Glad your there . Yes still only 4 losses in a row so far but haven't played it that much since I posted. But will give it a good test the weekend. I haven't played baccarat for years I will have to have a look at that. Have you played on either? If so how are you finding it?
Cheers
Dave.

[sturrock]

Played all over the weekend have now seen 5 x losses in a row now But only once.
Bit scary as playing marty but well up now and using casinos money. I will carry on and
see how it goes. I will let you all know 

[RayManZ]

Maybe it's an idea to use this money management strategy?

link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15750

+1 on a loss
-2 on a win
if win is with a 1. next bet is 2. Then on an other win its 1 again.

[sturrock]

Eight losses in a row    Thats the end of that then lol

[Tamino]

All good things come to an end regardless how clever.

Fortuna soon takes what she has given.

[ego]

There you go - now you understand that even if you have 99% of winning so can you end up with 8 loses.
This means that odds and probability - no matter how good they are you will still lose.

Cheers

[ego]

I solve the HG and Birstday Paradox, i attach all Three files.
1) eriscott HG
2) Birstday Pardox discussion
3) Nick excel sheet

Both eriscott and the Author for the Birstday Paradox got it wrong and i have the solution.
You need to read both documents to understand the five bet solution to cover all compinations no matter what 6 uniq combinations you got with the random flow.

Here is one example where the assumption from both is wrong.
For example lets take this string of formations

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP

Now the assumption is that if you get PP next you can not match with PPB or PPP as both alredy has hit.
But this is wrong.

If you look at the sequense again you also see that all P combinations has hit.
So even if we would get PB we could not match with PBB or PBP as both alredy hit.

Here is the sequense again.

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP

Now you bet Before you have a result and you bet P once with one single bet and you cover all previos four patterns to have a chance to repeat once, no matter if you get PP or PB.

PPB PPP PBP  PBB BPP BBP P

Easy and it takes a total of five bets to cover all possibilitys from this position.
Assume you got a B result, then you can see above that we have BPP and BBP.
This means that if you get BP next you would bet P and if you got BB you would bet P next.

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BP
PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BB

But lest say you have a new situtaion similiar towards the PPB and PPP example where you can not bet both.
For example BPP and BPB where both begin with BP and you not match your next bet to cover the two possibilitys.

And again the solution is similiar as the first one.
You only have to wait for one B to show and bet P next to cath the begining of the formation BP.
One single bet.

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BPB BP
PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BPB BP

This work as a cancelation march where you then force for a non repating formation to show.
So we cover both situation with one single bet each.

Now to the final stage where you have seven formation and only one missing pattern to complete the hole cycle to alternate with no present repeats.

For example with following sequense:

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BBB
PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BPB

Then you have to bet up to Three times to cover all possibilitys.
Total five bets with the othe two bets.

And again we are using the cancelation term.
As all four formations with P patterns has a show, then the only way to cover all possibilitys to Catch one repat among the them is to bet P once.
If a loss you force the beginning of the last B pattern to show, which is missing or will repeat.

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BBB P
PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BPB B

Now assume we don't get a repeat of the previos P patterns and we get a B result.
Then we again face a situation where we have to patterns that begin with the same formation and end with two differen results, BPP BPB.
So our next bet after B show is for P once to cover the BP formation and cover both patterns BPP BPB to repeat once.

Now to the last final cancelation bet and we have lost four bets with no present repeat.

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BBB BB

Here you simply bet for BBB to repat once and if not then you have 8 uniq patterns show with no present repeat.

This might not improve the original or change any thing, but i just want to show have you cover all possibilitys to repeat once with placing a total of five bets.
As the autors of both Writings argue you can not cover a situation where two similiar patterns has a show, which is wrong.

Cheers

PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BBB BBB
PPB PPP PBP PBB BPP BBP BBB BBP