Random Thoughts

[denzie]

Lol Turner....your not the only one. He lost me some time ago 

All I see is he got an edge and 2 posts later it's gone. But talking about determination 

[falkor2k15]

I am going to update Random Thoughts - A Simplified Overview soon, which will hopefully make things clearer... sorry. For now I will summarize:

*Each cycle is an event comprising 1 to 4 spins.
*You can play cycles in many different ways and over a differing number of spins based on the event you are playing.
*If you play only 1 spin you will break even using my method of calculating/evaluating ratios (each cycle length has a fixed ratio) vs. payout odds.
*New revelation: if you stitch bets over several spins during the course of the event (a cycle) then you will gain edge! (but not for CL2 under default conditions)

My latest brainstorm (never seems to end!): 

Could we we play for both CL3 and Same or CL2 and Different (etc.) - albeit with a whole new set of ratios ? ? ? ? ?

[falkor2k15]

Actually, that last test just failed on a 2nd data set... the ratio went down to 12.10%... and at this ratio we are doomed... but dispersion killing may help...

Spin 3 - CL4
# Quads Bet	Streets Payout	# Streets Bet	# Units per Street	Win	Lose	Win Ratio (%)	Win Ratio	Lose Ratio (%)	Lose Ratio	Win Total	Lose Total	Total Profit/Loss
2	11	6	1	6	-6
1	11	3	4	42	-6	12.1	0.121	87.9	0.879	5.082	-5.274	-0.192

Most of the entire data set was below 12% even, in the 11% range... but it wasn't up and down... it looked fairly predictable and stable from the outset, hence we need a dispersion killer algorithm. But when it comes to the outer cycles game, Russian doll 2, we going to smash it big time(!) - you get me though!? 

[falkor2k15]

Remember this discussion? It looks like it's related to dispersion killing:

"rrbb I said spend some time on it, not trying every system in the world with VdW and posting why it will not work. You had this great conversation with Priyanka at the start of this thread. She did explain why it will not work as it is. Something else is needed. Otherwise, forget it. And no, you will never find it by chance!"
link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.705 (page 48)

"OK, I reckon we might gain EDGE if we bet on the opposite colour for first bet (if the Ws are greater than 50%)?"
Why only first bet? You are getting there mate.

link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.30 (page 3) 

[Turner]

FFS....lol
My mother thinks the aliens have landed

[falkor2k15]

Seriously, with these multi-spin event based on PHP (and VdW) we can ride on the waves! 

[falkor2k15]

Pick your Non-Random component then let's go surfing! 

[falkor2k15]

I am currently testing CL2 (same) - but there might be some dependency between both sets of ratios depending on how the cycle lengths and same/different are performing? So I need to run some more stats...

We might be looking at a 4D link here instead of 2D or 3D?

[falkor2k15]

Strange bet this one... betting opposite of defining x 2 leaves several options open after 2 wins, including just stopping there:

[falkor2k15]

"X person: Master Manrique whats your secret to win?

Manrique: Dispersion Surfing....."

"Apples and pears. Don't want an apple - want a pear. I can't rearrange them â€" but I could ignore the apples until I reach a pear and then take the next one."

"Also how can you make your sessions short enough (not in number of spins, but in terms of elements of play) so that house edge doesn’t catch you and you are able to ride on those imbalances or variances."

How do we ride on the imbalances from playing cycles?

I think we need to look back at RayManZ's analysis of Priyanka's Quads play in terms of virtual wins/losses:

Code Select Expand


Number Quad Cycle quad W/L Bet Why?
29 4
3 1
9 1 1 Bet 2 - 3 - 4 End of cycle: Bet all the other quads
26 3 W Bet 1 - 3 We won our first bet. Now we bet the last two quads
27 3 3 W Bet 1 - 2 - 4 End of cycle: Bet all the other quads
4 1 W Bet 1 - 3 We won our first bet. Now we bet the last two quads
27 3 3 W Bet 1 - 2 - 4 End of cycle: Bet all the other quads
32 4 W Bet 3 - 4 We won our first bet. Now we bet the last two quads
18 2 L No bet We lost. Wait for a virtual win.
1 1 No bet
7 1 1 Bet 2 - 3 - 4 End of cycle: Bet all the other quads
28 4 W No bet No bet. We wait for the virual win.
27 3 VL No bet Virtual loss.
24 3 3 Bet 1 - 2 - 4 End of cycle: Bet all the other quads
5 1 W No bet No bet. We wait for the virual win.
7 1 1 VW Bet 2 - 3 - 4 Virtual Win. End of cycle: Bet all the other quads
28 4 W Bet 1 - 4 We had our virtual win. Now we bet again the last two quads.
2 1 1 W Bet 2 - 3 - 4 End of cycle: Bet all the other quads
15 2 W Bet 1 - 2 We won our first bet. Now we bet the last two quads
31 4 L No bet We lost. Wait for a virtual win.
30 4 4 No bet ??? No ideal why we dont make a bet here…
14 2 VW No bet Virtual win.
29 4 4 VW Bet 1 - 2 - 3 End of cycle: Bet all the other quads
31 4 4 L No bet Here we lost our bet. Now we wait for a virtual win.
36 4 4 No bet
35 4 4 No bet
5 1 No bet
11 2 No bet
20 3 No bet
23 3 3 No bet
23 3 3 No bet
1 1 No bet
9 1 1 No bet No bet. We wait for the virual win.
27 3 Bet 1 - 3 Virtual win. Bet all the other quads. This bet is still active.
19 3 3 W Bet 1 - 2 - 4 End of cycle: Bet all the other quads
7 1 W Bet 1 - 3 We won our first bet. Now we bet the last two quads
15 2 L No bet Lost
10 2 2 Bet 1 - 3 - 4 End of cycle: Bet all the other quads
16 2 2 L No bet Lost
12 2 2 No bet
10 2 2 No bet
4 1 No bet
26 3 No bet
16 2 2 No bet
15 2 2 No bet
22 3 No bet
31 4 No bet
25 3 3 No bet
9 1 Bet 2 - 4 Virtual win. Bet all the other quads. This bet is still active.
11 2 W Bet 1 - 2 - 3 Here we see a new trend. Our previous cycle was lenght of 3. Now we bet it will also be 3. Bet the 3 previous quads.
23 3 3 W Bet 1 - 2 - 4 End of cycle: Bet all the other quads
25 3 3 L No bet
14 2 Bet 1 - 4 Here we switch bet. We now bet the two missing quads because we bet for a cycle of 3.
2 1 W Bet 1 - 2 - 3 Our previous cycle was lenght of 3. Now we bet it will also be 3. Bet the 3 previous quads.
5 1 1 W Bet 2 - 3 - 4 ??? Why bet? We did not have a virtual win here.
29 4 W Bet 2 - 3 We now bet the two missing quads because we bet for a cycle of 3.
20 3 W Bet 1 - 3 - 4 Our previous cycle was lenght of 3. Now we bet it will also be 3. Bet the 3 previous quads.
2 1 1 W Bet 2 - 3 - 4 End of cycle: Bet all the other quads
24 3 W Bet 2 - 3 We now bet the two missing quads because we bet for a cycle of 3.
16 2 W Bet 1 - 2 - 3 Our previous cycle was lenght of 3. Now we bet it will also be 3. Bet the 3 previous quads.
12 2 2 W END



[falkor2k15]

Priyanka first loses playing for CL2 on the 2nd bet. No further bets were placed till the next cycle, so we can only assume the cycle was considered lost as an event.
*Now we bet the last two quads (lost)

Come next cycle the following bet was still carried out and is not the same bet that lost previously:
*End of cycle: Bet all the other quads (win)

Priyanka re-attempted the following, albeit virtual, as this is what lost two cycles ago and hasn't yet been compensated for:
*Virtual: Now we bet the last two quads (VL)

Come next cycle the following bet was still carried out as before:
*End of cycle: Bet all the other quads (win)

Priyanka re-attempted the following, albeit virtual, as this is what lost on two previous cycles:
*Virtual: Now we bet the last two quads (VW)

As before the first bet continues to be played:
*End of cycle: Bet all the other quads (win)

The one virtual win of the previous seemed sufficient to surf back on a winning streak, i.e. she never had to wait for 2 virtual wins to match the 2 former virtual losses - one was enough:
*We had our virtual win. Now we bet again the last two quads.


A few bets down the line Priyanka loses again on the same bet as before and waits for a virtual win:
*Now we bet the last two quads (lost)

Surprisingly, she suddenly halts with the opening cycle bet that she would otherwise always play. Perhaps this is because she already had 7 wins in a row and was expecting a loss? Otherwise it could be something to do with VdW?
*Virtual: End of cycle: Bet all the other quads (VW)

CL2 closes promptly with the virtual win she was waiting for:
*Virtual: Now we bet the last two quads (VW)

Then Priyanka is back to betting the opening bet of the next cycle, so it's even less clear now why she missed this out before:
*End of cycle: Bet all the other quads (lost)

The next series of bets are not played - neither real nor virtual it seems, including after 4 cycles ending in CL1 and one cycle ending in CL4. After a CL2 is tracked, however, Priyanka resumes play waiting for a virtual win on the end of cycle opening bet that lost 10 spins prior:
*Virtual: End of cycle: Bet all the other quads (virtual win)

Priyanka proceeds with the 2nd bet of the cycle even though the opening bet was virtual. Would this still apply if the bets were stitched instead of flat? So this dispersion algorithm is broken down over individual spins that make up the complete cycle event.
*Now we bet the last two quads (win)

Now back to playing normal:
*End of cycle: Bet all the other quads (win)
*Now we bet the last two quads (lost)

The next opening cycle bet now loses, so by rights we should be waiting for a virtual win on the opening "other quads" bet as well as the "last 2 quads" bets, respectively.   
*End of cycle: Bet all the other quads (lost)

Next a series of bets are missed again, including post 5 CL1s and 1 CL3!? According to my stats for CL1, this should give a 3% increase for CL2 when played in an secondary outer cycles framework. It was hinted that this bet has to be waited out, but for what reason? Part of Dispersion killing or VdW? Why the CL3 this time and the Cl4 last time? She continues again - only after a 2nd CL3 is tracked - makes no sense!?
*Virtual: End of cycle: Bet all the other quads (virtual win)

Now, for some reason, she doesn't wait for a vitual win on the "last 2 quads" bet, but bets opposite; I suppose it could be considered equivalent to waiting for a virtual loss, but supposedly its based on matching the previous cycle (CL3):
*Bet opposite of last 2 quads (win)
*Bet last 3 quads (win)

Back to the opening cycle bet:
*End of cycle: Bet all the other quads (lost)

The previous bet lost, so the cycle should be considered lost, but Priyanka interrupts it by "switching" tactic (VdW based?), it seems, and going for a CL3:
*Bet opposite of last 2 quads
*Bet last 3 quads

She finishes by playing a series of CL3s, including the first opening bet without a virtual win. Seems to defy logic and is contrary to a scenario at the beginning of the set where she left out the opening bet for no reason. We do know, however, that VdW is used here besides dispersion killing, but it may be impossible to figure out most of the above mysteries.

[falkor2k15]

post deleted - I was mistaken. There is no dependency between cycle length to cycle length.

[Drazen]

Priyanka published new video. Maybe that can help.

link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=dNWygC4ApEY


Cheers

[falkor2k15]

DEFINED BY 1 THEN 2 > REPEAT 2

Defined by 1: 871 (19%)
Defined by 2: 2951 (63%)
Defined by 3: 444 (9%)
Defined by 4: 439 (9%)

DEFINED BY 2 THEN 2 > REPEAT 2

Defined by 1: 1768 (10%)
Defined by 2: 12213 (69%)
Defined by 3: 1829 (10%)
Defined by 4: 1839 (10%)

I did some more testing on expanding the quads to 2 and 3 repeats.

Going from repeat 2 to repeat 3, the first situation increases to about 68% and the 2nd situation increases to about 75%. However, the combinations become more numerous. Praline's application on Cycle Lengths instead of Quads is far superior, I must say.

[falkor2k15]

Defining Element (same/different) + Cycle  Length both seem to work in parallel. You could potentially wrap them both up in outer cycles and then play as a parallel game.

The most common outcome has been touted as CL2 - but actually it's CL1 (same) to be more precise!

I was just looking back at the stats of my inferior span increase on the Quads - Praline, in a stroke of genius, figured out we should really apply this to the cycle lengths instead of the quads - and I just confirmed that mine was indeed a losing proposition.

CL1 (same) on 2nd repeat is 25%
CL1 (same) on 3rd repeat is also 25% - so doesn't grow.

CL3 (different) on 2nd repeat is 10%
CL3 (different) on 3rd repeat is 7% - so doesn't grow but actually diminishes for crying out loud!

That's because the combinations become more numerous - defeats the object of cycles: to limit the combinations.

Thanks again Praline!