Random Thoughts

[Drazen]

My favourites are double street/lines/6 numbers. But I agree with you, that the more you push your boundaries and come out of your comfort zone, you will be able to take the learnings back to your favourite playing position and play a completely different game.

It seems to me that way you analyze or dissect this game is kind general, and can be applied to any part or odds in the game? One just needs to understand it right.

Yes, such approach would be out of my comfort zone, but Pri in any aspect of life is a rule: No pain, no gain... So if you want to gain, be prepared for some not very pleasant period of hard work and flops. That is how I see it

• What is that you are finding common in those 12 combinations that you have selected?
• Why have you not taken into consideration that other combinations where the dozens have repeated in the first two positions?
• Is there a way you can stitch these dozens together?
• Are you able to find out a common theme between the first and second spins or first and third spins?
• Is three spins sufficient for you to derive that commonality?

Not sure I can answer all straight away but some things are common in those 12 combinations there.

First and second second spins are always different, although 2nd and 3rd can be repeat, and we have 6 of them. Same thing for 1st and 3rd. 6 combinations where they are the same, 6 where are they different.

Well looking at this, it is not all possible combinations we can have.

Not sure what you mean by sticking them together.

So much for now

Drazen

[Priyanka]

It seems to me that way you analyze or dissect this game is kind general, and can be applied to any part or odds in the game? One just needs to understand it right.

You are so right there. Unless you dissect the game into simple parts irrespective of bet placement and odd, you are not going to understand game.

First and second second spins are always different, although 2nd and 3rd can be repeat, and we have 6 of them. Same thing for 1st and 3rd. 6 combinations where they are the same, 6 where are they different.

Yes Drazen there are 27 combinations possible and you cannot use 18 and leave the other 9 around. Simply because that is the reality. You cannot play a waiting game waiting for your favourable event to occur. What you have stated as answers are straightforward yes or no answers. I would like you to look beyond the surface for these questions to get answers which will help you not to repeat the same way you are playing currently.

Looking at your examples and combinations, lets see whether we can convert into an alternate way of play. I will give you some detailed initial pointers and set the direction, but the rest you will have to figure out yourselves.

The first and foremost thought process should be how can I make it finite rather than making it a game of chance. In other words, how can i reduce the non-predictability aspect of the game and move closer to predictability. 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.

I said there are 27 different combinations. Don’t have to know maths. Dont have to be a scientist. Dont have to be a complex programmer. Any person sitting with a pen and paper can in the highstreet williamhill shop can write all of them down. (Not that programmers, mathematicians and scienitist  do not go to the billhill)

111
112
113
121
122
123
131
132
133
211
212
213
221
222
223
231
232
233
311
312
313
321
322
323
331
332
333

Three possible outcomes. Three dozens in three spins, two dozens in 3 spins and 1 dozen in 3 spins. So If you take a set of 12 spins, you will have one of these combinations to definitely repeat. Limited. This has to happen. It is not random. It will happen always. That is the key. Identifying events that will always happen.

A sample 12 spins. 133 323 123 323
133 â€" There is one dozen that is repeating here. Our basic premise is in 4 sets of 3 numbers one combination has to repeat. So we will play for the second set to have 1 repeat.
323 â€" You start playing after 32 has spun. For one repeat to happen you have to have either 2 or 3. So you play the double dozen (2,3) and you win.

Second sample 111 131 111 122
111 â€" All dozens are same. Again based on our basic premise. We will play for this to repeat.
131 â€" You start playing after the first spin here. You will be playing for all dozens to be the same. Second spin is 3. Loss. Now you have two outcomes. Three dozens in a row or one dozen to repeat.
111 â€" You start playing after the first spin. You will be playing for either three dozen in a row or one repeat to happen. So you play for dozen 1. Win.

Third sample 321 311 223 312
321 â€" All dozens different. We will play for this to repeat.
311 â€" Start playing after the first spin. For a repeat of first combination to happen, the second spin can be either 2 or 1. So we play double dozen. Win. Now here I pause. One can play every session until a win happens or until the combinations repeat. For those who want a win to happen can stop playing here this set and start fresh with a new set. For those who will want a combination to repeat will go for the next spin. For the combination to repeat the next dozen has to be 2. Play 2 and lose. Two combinations are available for us to replicate. All dozens to be different and only one dozen to repeat.
223 â€" We cannot play after the first spin here. We will not be able to make a decision after the first spin as for one combination to repeat the second spin can be any of 1,2 or 3. So we play only on the third spin. As we have seen 2 and 2, we know that this is not all dozens different. So we play for two dozens in three spins. So our choice for next spin is 1 and 3 and we win.

Fourth sample  132 112 123 111
132 â€" All dozens different
112 â€" Start playing after the first spin. We play double dozen 2 and 3. Loss.
123 â€" We cannot play after the first spin. We cannot play after the 2nd spin. This is a deadlock and we exit out of this sequence and look for the next 12.

So what did we do. We did not leave our destiny to the hands of chance. We are playing for something that we know will definitely happen. You are building a game based on limits to the randomness of roulette or the non-random aspect of it.

Now you can think about statistics and progression in that sequence. Not before and not in a different sequence of progression and then statistics. Typically we tend to focus on these two subjects first, leaving ourselves buried deep into the big hole.

Thinking about statistics now. Out of the 27 combinations that is possible, 3 will be one dozen in 3 spins, 6 will be 3 dozens in 3 spins and 18 will be 2 dozens in 3 spins. It is like drawing a ball from a bag of 3 red balls, 6 green balls and 18 blue balls, then putting it back in and repeating this whole process. Your chances of drawing a blue ball is higher. There is an irregularity and the statistically speaking the 12 spins (4 sets of 3 spins), there is a higher probability of 2 dozens in 3 spins to come through. One way of using this statistic is to bias towards one set when a conflict occurs for your bet selection. Other way of using this is application of VW theory as I explained earlier for the AP to form on 2 dozens in 3 spins. It is left to your imagination, your mood of the day or a mechanical way that you prefer.

Thinking about progression now. Depending on how you chose to play, you can see the irregularities here and you can focus on tuning your progression to maximize your wins. Key is low drawdowns and achieving those low drawdowns using elements that are fixed and finite.

Hope this helps clear some questions that you have posed and help you in the thought process of defining an alternate game.

[NextYear]

  Like!

[Drazen]

Thank you very much for your time and big efforts here. Very appreciated.

Plenty of things to consider here.

Drazen

[Drazen]

Pri

If I am not wrong, there must be a few more other things to consider before creating full model play from your thoughts.

As it seems to me it isn't enough just to break down spins into finite blocks like you said and apply progression.

I would say to get an edge some more concepts are missing here. I wonder also how many of them you are using and how many different it is required to get an edge?

I just hope you will at least say few words about each of them.

Cheers

Drazen

[Drazen]

Thinking about statistics now. Out of the 27 combinations that is possible, 3 will be one dozen in 3 spins, 6 will be 3 dozens in 3 spins and 18 will be 2 dozens in 3 spins.

And I have question about difference in those combinations.

It is not the case that in every 27 combinations of 3 dozens there will be perfectly equal distribution of sets of 3 as you showed above. So what are extremes here and how much that can negative influence on us?

Coz we know that for example we can face 27 (or even more) of the same dozen in a row, which would be 9 sets of 3 in a row, which should happen 3 times in a verage in 81 spins. And we know that already in 30 spins we can face 10.

No matter how you dissect the game and which odds you create, at this stage this is still fight against variance.

So just this is one proof that in order to achieve so low DD or creating an edge there must something else or more elements to it. In this form this is still just pure fight against variance, isnt it?

Cheers

Drazen

[Priyanka]

So just this is one proof

Drazen - may I ask you to explain with an example what you are trying to prove here.  To be honest am not sure am understanding what you are trying to say. 

[Drazen]

OK I ll try again

Well this what you showed on dozens (although without progression and MM) would not be excatly the way in full how would you choose to play dozens for example? Or it would?

I am trying to say that here we will also face variance as I see it. Not all 27 possible combinations would look the same every time. As you said, on average out of the 27 combinations that is possible, 3 will be one dozen in 3 spins, 6 will be 3 dozens in 3 spins and 18 will be 2 dozens in 3 spins. Such ratios wont be like this every time. Sometimes in 27 combinations we can have one dozen in 3 spins 5 or more times, two of the same dozen 14 times (instead 18) for example and so on.

I mean it is possible that we get caught with rolling patterns of all different combinations and that will dig hole for us.

Am I more clear now?

Cheers

[Turner]

OK I ll try again

Well this what you showed on dozens (although without progression and MM) would not be excatly the way in full how would you choose to play dozens for example? Or it would?

I am trying to say that here we will also face variance as I see it. Not all 27 possible combinations would look the same every time. As you said, on average out of the 27 combinations that is possible, 3 will be one dozen in 3 spins, 6 will be 3 dozens in 3 spins and 18 will be 2 dozens in 3 spins. Such ratios wont be like this every time. Sometimes in 27 combinations we can have one dozen in 3 spins 5 or more times, two of the same dozen 14 times (instead 18) for example and so on.

I mean it is possible that we get caught with rolling patterns of all different combinations and that will dig hole for us.

Am I more clear now?

Cheers

My worry too. Even if we live in the casino for a week, its a tiny amount of spins and variance could be the word of the week.

You would punch a person in the face if they uttered the words "on average"

[Priyanka]

My worry too. Even if we live in the casino for a week, its a tiny amount of spins and variance could be the word of the week.
You would punch a person in the face if they uttered the words "on average"

Thank goodness, I saved a punch. Turner, am not saying there will not be any variance. Quoting exactly what i mentioned below.

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.

Am I more clear now?

Drazen, you were clearer with your point on variance earlier as well. But my question was what were you trying to prove? I wanted you to think twice about the point that you were trying to prove. I wanted you to think away from the usual way of thinking. No one is trying to say here that all 27 combinations would look the same every time.

Were you trying to prove that we will get caught in the variance? Were you trying to prove we will get to that dead beat sequence that I explained in the fourth sample back to back and back to back so that any progression that you develop will dig yourself a hole? If you were trying to prove this, then probably you need to read what I have written again.

The direction I am trying to steer you is towards thinking away from statistics based selection as the primary selection. Thinking towards selection that focus on events that definitely happen. There is no variance involved in here. In this case such an event happen every 12 spins. Hope there is no confusion here and is very straightforward as I have explained clearly with examples of winning and losing propositions. I am trying to be very clear and straightforward here as I know it is difficult to get a grasp on as it is a significant shift in the way of thinking.  From here on, it is up to you to define how to utilize this finite event. Statistical relationship will come in handy first followed by progressions. I am not trying to steer towards all 27 sets will look the same or on average we will have similar sets. All I was pointing to was there are imbalances here which could be utilized for your selections and progressions. Don’t do the mistake of trying to play exactly the same way as I  have detailed out in the example. I thought you are a bit more clever and creative than that.

Regarding your question around other principles, yes I do use others. But using only the concepts so far I have mentioned you can play with an edge. It depends on whether you are able to look through what I have written.

[Chrisbis]

Picture copyright acknowledged.

[Drazen]

Were you trying to prove that we will get caught in the variance? Were you trying to prove we will get to that dead beat sequence that I explained in the fourth sample back to back and back to back so that any progression that you develop will dig yourself a hole? If you were trying to prove this, then probably you need to read what I have written again.

Excatly like this. But I wasnt trying to prove this, as it seemed to me I naively went in wrong direction here by taking it literally.

Well all you said was right on the nail, so notthing much to add.

It is not that easy to shift perspectives in understanding so fast but I ll re-read this more times.

Thanks

[Azim]

Just thought this might be of interest to you all.

[Priyanka]

Just thought this might be of interest to you all.

Azim - scratching my head.  I could do with a couple of more lines on the relevance

[Azim]

Azim - scratching my head.  I could do with a couple of more lines on the relevance

If you asking for more, I do have the begin and partial end to this.

The bot had to login to play so I don't know the final outcome.