Random Thoughts

[RouletteGhost]

I've now generated some Double Streets data (2 x 1 million spins) to compare the 2 data sets to see if there's any pattern about what double streets are due based on past spins, but I'm doubtful there will be any patterns. I'm about to begin analysis now...

Ive never been more proud to be named someones internet enemy

[Big EZ]

I've now generated some Double Streets data (2 x 1 million spins) to compare the 2 data sets to see if there's any pattern about what double streets are due based on past spins, but I'm doubtful there will be any patterns. I'm about to begin analysis now...

Falkor,

Can you please explain how to read this graph?  I am not able to understand it, thanks

[falkor2k15]

Priyanka's system is based around waiting for a double street to repeat then trying to cover the part of the board that contains that double street - for a 2nd repeat. So that's how my data is laid out:
DS 1 > many DSs... > DS 1 (again) > many DS.... > DS 1 (final). I checked if certain combinations trigger the likelihood that a certain dozen (or area of the board) is due, but unfortunately, there was no pattern from 1 million spins to the next million spins. Therefore, I think Priyanka is a charlatan! She completely ignored 2 of my emails for no good reason, so this "random thoughts" topic must be fuelled by her inner demons. On the surface she appears reputable in public, but you need to look beneath the veneer to see this topic is nothing but a vanity piece waged through psychological warfare. I guess she must have rehearsed those BV videos several times before she got +50 or +100 profit - but the deception is that these represent a typical playing session of hers!   

[Priyanka]

this topic is nothing but a vanity piece waged through psychological warfare

[Crapshooter]

Now that looks like a graph that I can understand! Thanks for taking the time to build that. It puts it in a very simple perspective.

[Still]

Here's a breakdown of the opening video:
link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=AIvAeaHzKVY

Can you figure out what Priyanka is doing in the above games? Which principles discussed herein are being applied - if any?

Bet   Amount   Result   
Red   0.05   2 Black   lose (107.95)
Red   0.05   4 Black   lose
Red   0.05   17 Black   lose
Red   0.05   7 Red   win
Red   0.05   12 Red   win
Red   0.05   14 Red   win
Red   0.05   15 Black   lose
Red   0.05   31 Black   lose
High   9   29 Black   win
1,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,30,32,33,34,35,36   0.5 each (8.5 in total)   21 Red   win

Haven't figured this out, but what i observe with some certainty, at least on this bet, is some similarity to an EC bet Priyanka mentioned and demonstrated in a video posted in this reply last September 11:

link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15870.msg138322#msg138322

In that video, an EC bet is selected by spinning the wheel enough times to observe 18/19 unique numbers to show up.  Then, the 17 number EC bet is selected from all the unhit numbers left. 

In this video, the observation window is shorter, but notice none of the unique numbers that did show up in the first nine spins are included in the 17 number EC bet. 

Red   0.05   17 Black   lose
Red   0.05   17 Black   lose
Red   0.05   18 Red   win
Red   0.05   11 Black   lose
Red   0.05   35 Black   lose
1,3,5,19,20,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,30,32,33,34,36   0.5 each (8.5 in total)   19 Red   win
1,3,5,6,20,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,30,32,33,34,36   0.5 each (8.5 in total)   27 Red   win

In this series, you can clearly see that the 17 number EC bet is constructed on a "rolling" basis.   For example, the 19 hits.  So it is not included in the makeup of the next 17 number EC bet, replaced by a 6, a number which has not yet shown up at all. 

Red   0.05   35 Black   lose
Red   0.05   16 Red   win
Red   0.05   5 Red   win
Red   0.05   19 Red   win
Red   0.05   13 Black   lose
Red   0.05   33 Black   lose
20,22,23,24,25,26,28,30,32,34,36   0.5 each (5.5 in total)   36 Black   win

Now here is an 11 number bet, which i would interpret as a play on a dozen, made up, like the EC bet, on a rolling basis, consisting of sleepy sleepers. 

Red   0.05   4 Black   lose
Red   0.05   22 Black   lose
Red   0.05   19 Red   win
Red   0.05   30 Red   win
20,23,24,25,26,28,32,34   0.5 each (4 in total)   35 Black   lose
Same as above but 1.0 units on 20   20 = 1; rest are 0.5 (4.5 in total)   32 Red   win

Here is an 8 number bet that i would interpret as some kind of quad play, made up, again, of sleepers on a rolling basis.  The 20 has never hit, and gets an extra boost when it comes time to include some kind of progression. 

Red   0.05   34 Red   win
Red   0.05   24 Black   lose
Red   0.05   5 Red   win
Red   0.05   28 Black   lose
Red   0.05   22 Black   lose
Red   0.05   23 Red   win
Red   0.05   19 Red   win
Red   0.05   17 Black   lose
Red   0.05   36 Red   win
Red   0.05   33 Black   lose
Red   0.05   9 Red   win
1,2,3,6,7,8,10,12,14,15,18,20,21,24,25,26,29,31   1,2,3,6,7,8,10,20,25,26 = 1; rest are 0.5 (14 in total)   9 Red   lose
1,2,3,6,7,8,10,12,14,15,18,20,21,24,25,26,29,31   1 = 1.5; rest = same as before (14.5 in total)   18 Red   win

Here we are back to an EC bet, this time made up of 18 numbers, ten of which get a boost according to some progression scheme. The second bet gives an extra .5 to number 1 after a loss, indicating an up-after-a-loss progression of sorts. 

? (cut)   6.5 in total   12 Red   lose
? (cut)   7 in total   5 Red   lose
? (cut)   7.5 in total   3 Red   win
1, 20, 24, 25, 26   0.5 each (2.5 in total)   2 Black   lose
1, 20, 24, 25, 26   1 = 1; rest = 0.5 (3 in total)   27 Red   lose
1, 20, 24, 25, 26   1 = 1, 20 = 1; rest = 0.5 (3.5 in total)   26 Black   win (180.80)

Now down to a 5 number bet, constructed the same way as the others, probably representing some custom made line bet.  You can see how chips are added after a loss.   

So what i suppose, at least in this scenario, is that there are at least four games (EC, dozens, quads, lines) going on with inside numbers (custom constructed with rolling sleepers), besides the .05 (minimum) red EC game going on for whenever there are no bets to be taken on any of the other four games. 

It's not clear the logic that switches between the games, but it MIGHT have something to do with Priyanka's VdW scheme where the betting goes back to the .05 red whenever there are "dead runs" or nothing to bet on in any of the other games. 

Below find a breakdown of the rolling number EC game demonstrated in the video link posted above:

17   0.05   l         17            
3   0.05   w         3            
16   0.05   w         16            
16   0.05   w                     
11   0.05   l         11            
9   0.05   w         9            
6   0.05   l         6            
27   0.05   w         27            
23   0.05   w         23            
2   0.05   l         2            
31   0.05   l         31            
12   0.05   w         12            
3   0.05   w                     
25   0.05   w         25            
18   0.05   w         18            
6   0.05   l                     
19   0.05            19            
13   0.05            13            
35   0.05            35            
11   0.05   l                     
12   0.05   w                     
18   0.05   w                     
11   0.05   l                     
9   0.05   w                     
17   0.05   l                     
27   0.05   w                     
5   0.05   w         5            
28   0.05   l         28            
24   0.05   l         24   (19 unique numbers showed, now time to construct a 17 number bet from sleepers)         
5   8.5   l   1,4,7,8,10,14,15,20,21,22,26,29,30,32,33,34,36               
33   8.5   w   1,4,7,8,10,14,15,20,21,22,26,29,30,32,33,34,36                  
22   8.5   w   1,4,7,8,10,14,15,20,21,22,26,29,30,32,33,34,36                  
36   8.5   w   1,4,7,8,10,14,15,20,21,22,26,29,30,32,33,34,36                  
15   0.05   l      blank (not shown on video)               
17   0.05   l      blank (not shown on video)               
24   0.05   l      blank (not shown on video)               
17   0.05   l      blank (not shown on video)               
36   0.05   w      blank (not shown on video)               
25   0.05   w      blank (not shown on video)               
11   0.05   l      blank (not shown on video)            
21   0.05   w      blank (not shown on video)               
13   8.5   l   1,2,3,4,7,8,10,14,16,20,23,26,29,30,31,32,34                  
3   8.5   w   1,2,3,4,7,8,10,14,16,20,23,26,29,30,31,32,34                  
10   8.5   w                     blank (not shown on video)
21   8.5   l   1,2,4,6,7,8,14,16,19,20,23,26,29,30,31,32,34                  
3   8.5   l                          blank (not shown on video)
33   8.5   l   1,2,4,6,7,8,14,16,19,20,23,26,29,30,31,32,34                  
34   0.05   w                     
25   8.5   l   1,2,4,6,7,8,14,16,19,20,23,26 29,30,31,32,35                  
26   8.5   w   1,2,4,6,7,8,12,14,16,19,20,23,29,30,31,32,35                  
8   17   w   1,2,4,6,7,12,14,16,18,19,20,23,29,30,31,32,35                  
2   8.5   w                     
13   8.5   l                     
20   8.5   w                     
34   0.05   w                     
18   0.05   w                     
18   0.05   w                     
25   0.05   w                     
18   0.05   w                     
35   0.05   l                     
12   8.5   w   1,4,5,6,7,9,12,14,16,19,23,27,28,29,30,31,32                  

[Drazen]

In my humble opinion, approach for trying to decode the riddle here just from Priyankas videos on youtube might not be the best. Simply because its purpose is not for that. Priyankas passion for the game and knowledge is incredible and so widely applicable and his guidelines should be taken for understanding the principles here upon which one might develop his own play at some point. It is not easy and not straightforward that might be possible to figure everything out just from few spins of play.

I am glad to see that at least someone is still showing some efforts here dough, but will anyone succeed in the end still remains to be seen.

I really wish you best of luck here Still

Cheers

[nottophammer]

Haven't figured this out, but what i observe with some certainty, at least on this bet, is some similarity to an EC bet Priyanka mentioned and demonstrated in a video posted in this reply last September 11:

link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15870.msg138322#msg138322

In that video, an EC bet is selected by spinning the wheel enough times to observe 18/19 unique numbers to show up.  Then, the 17 number EC bet is selected from all the unhit numbers left. 

In this video, the observation window is shorter, but notice none of the unique numbers that did show up in the first nine spins are included in the 17 number EC bet. 



In this series, you can clearly see that the 17 number EC bet is constructed on a "rolling" basis.   For example, the 19 hits.  So it is not included in the makeup of the next 17 number EC bet, replaced by a 6, a number which has not yet shown up at all. 


Now here is an 11 number bet, which i would interpret as a play on a dozen, made up, like the EC bet, on a rolling basis, consisting of sleepy sleepers. 


Here is an 8 number bet that i would interpret as some kind of quad play, made up, again, of sleepers on a rolling basis.  The 20 has never hit, and gets an extra boost when it comes time to include some kind of progression. 

Here we are back to an EC bet, this time made up of 18 numbers, ten of which get a boost according to some progression scheme. The second bet gives an extra .5 to number 1 after a loss, indicating an up-after-a-loss progression of sorts. 

Now down to a 5 number bet, constructed the same way as the others, probably representing some custom made line bet.  You can see how chips are added after a loss.   

So what i suppose, at least in this scenario, is that there are at least four games (EC, dozens, quads, lines) going on with inside numbers (custom constructed with rolling sleepers), besides the .05 (minimum) red EC game going on for whenever there are no bets to be taken on any of the other four games. 

It's not clear the logic that switches between the games, but it MIGHT have something to do with Priyanka's VdW scheme where the betting goes back to the .05 red whenever there are "dead runs" or nothing to bet on in any of the other games. 

Below find a breakdown of the rolling number EC game demonstrated in the video link posted above:

17   0.05   l         17            
3   0.05   w         3            
16   0.05   w         16            
16   0.05   w                     
11   0.05   l         11            
9   0.05   w         9            
6   0.05   l         6            
27   0.05   w         27            
23   0.05   w         23            
2   0.05   l         2            
31   0.05   l         31            
12   0.05   w         12            
3   0.05   w                     
25   0.05   w         25            
18   0.05   w         18            
6   0.05   l                     
19   0.05            19            
13   0.05            13            
35   0.05            35            
11   0.05   l                     
12   0.05   w                     
18   0.05   w                     
11   0.05   l                     
9   0.05   w                     
17   0.05   l                     
27   0.05   w                     
5   0.05   w         5            
28   0.05   l         28            
24   0.05   l         24   (19 unique numbers showed, now time to construct a 17 number bet from sleepers)         
5   8.5   l   1,4,7,8,10,14,15,20,21,22,26,29,30,32,33,34,36               
33   8.5   w   1,4,7,8,10,14,15,20,21,22,26,29,30,32,33,34,36                  
22   8.5   w   1,4,7,8,10,14,15,20,21,22,26,29,30,32,33,34,36                  
36   8.5   w   1,4,7,8,10,14,15,20,21,22,26,29,30,32,33,34,36                  
15   0.05   l      blank (not shown on video)               
17   0.05   l      blank (not shown on video)               
24   0.05   l      blank (not shown on video)               
17   0.05   l      blank (not shown on video)               
36   0.05   w      blank (not shown on video)               
25   0.05   w      blank (not shown on video)               
11   0.05   l      blank (not shown on video)            
21   0.05   w      blank (not shown on video)               
13   8.5   l   1,2,3,4,7,8,10,14,16,20,23,26,29,30,31,32,34                  
3   8.5   w   1,2,3,4,7,8,10,14,16,20,23,26,29,30,31,32,34                  
10   8.5   w                     blank (not shown on video)
21   8.5   l   1,2,4,6,7,8,14,16,19,20,23,26,29,30,31,32,34                  
3   8.5   l                          blank (not shown on video)
33   8.5   l   1,2,4,6,7,8,14,16,19,20,23,26,29,30,31,32,34                  
34   0.05   w                     
25   8.5   l   1,2,4,6,7,8,14,16,19,20,23,26 29,30,31,32,35                  
26   8.5   w   1,2,4,6,7,8,12,14,16,19,20,23,29,30,31,32,35                  
8   17   w   1,2,4,6,7,12,14,16,18,19,20,23,29,30,31,32,35                  
2   8.5   w                     
13   8.5   l                     
20   8.5   w                     
34   0.05   w                     
18   0.05   w                     
18   0.05   w                     
25   0.05   w                     
18   0.05   w                     
35   0.05   l                     
12   8.5   w   1,4,5,6,7,9,12,14,16,19,23,27,28,29,30,31,32

Still the above spun numbers 9 bets +£49.00 stop at £50/60, as a £1.00 short i'd stop and reset.
Simple method play the numbers left on the carpet after 10 spins using +1/-1

[nottophammer]

Still
This is why one stops as near to £50/60, like in Gut jump, reset.
After being +49 in 9 bets, we get 7 repeats then the win, +1/-1, 8 units,
But carry on, Keep the Faith.
At the 24th bet, # 15 hits, £1677 out, £1728 return +£51. So for all that extra betting only £2.00 better off.

So soon as £50/60 or as near to the £50.00  pack up, reset

[RouletteGhost]

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.

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.

hmmmm

this looks eerily familiar

where have i seen something like THIS before

[Still]

In my humble opinion, approach for trying to decode the riddle here just from Priyankas videos on youtube might not be the best. Simply because its purpose is not for that.

Hi Drazen, how are things over there in Tesla land?

In my initial effort here i am just working to dissect or identify something(s) in the first video that i feel certain about before changing to speculative language such as "i suppose" and "MIGHT".  I do want to avoid misrepresenting what was actually being done in the video, so as not to run off on wild goose chases like some people we know.   The video, btw, did end up with a significant positive balance, implying that even though Priyanka may have multiple other ways, maybe even better ways of playing, at least this way, whatever way it actually is,  would make money on it's own, just as Priyanka has stated s/he has a way of making just Red and Black work.   But Priyanka has also stated that some demo's explicitly won't work AS IS.  My impression is that the first video was for "boasting" a bit, implying that yes, whatever is going on, does work. 

So it's only a guess that the switching is done exclusively by some application of Priyanka's "VdW" scheme.  Could also be one of the other "non-random" schemes outlined, but as outlined, don't make money AS IS. 

So while i'm interested in solving the puzzle, my approach is that i don't need to solve it, that is, i assume i don't need an EDGE.   I can wait as long as Priyanka can to add additional light.  But word is that the current information is enough to get some edge, if some imagination were brought to the basic concepts, especially in regards to "stitching" bets together to create the dependence needed that satisfies the Parondo math.   To that extent it is somewhat interesting to dissect the videos in hopes that a light bulb might go off. 

Oh, so getting to the certainties, would you agree that the prime bets in the first video resemble Priyanka's afformentioned *rolling EC* bet demonstrated in the "Extreme" video, enough that we are certain they (whether EC, dozen, quad or line) are custom made up of sleeping inside numbers on a rolling basis?

Priyankas passion for the game and knowledge is incredible and so widely applicable and his guidelines should be taken for understanding the principles here upon which one might develop his own play at some point. It is not easy and not straightforward that might be possible to figure everything out just from few spins of play.

I started my research by reading everything Priyanka has written since joining.  I've observed an apparent learning curve at the beginning, someone learning unusually fast.  What i'd like to know is if Priyanka is also "Grandpa" (not sure i spelled that right).   Anyways, the Priyanka that went to New Zealand to bungie jump seems a different Priyanka that came back this fall, two years later. 

I am glad to see that at least someone is still showing some efforts here dough, but will anyone succeed in the end still remains to be seen.

I really wish you best of luck here Still

Cheers

Thanks.  If i have anything else that might help i'll add it.  However, i'm wondering if even that is what Priyanka wants. For example, suppose i did solve this puzzle and proved it to myself.  Does Priyanka want anyone to disclose it outright? Anyways, it would be nice to know whether an observation, such as the one i posted, is representative or not. 

Still

[Still]

Still the above spun numbers 9 bets +£49.00 stop at £50/60, as a £1.00 short i'd stop and reset.
Simple method play the numbers left on the carpet after 10 spins using +1/-1

Thanks nottophammer, is this method related to something Priyanka has posted.  If not that's ok too, but can i figure out what you are doing from the picture posted, and would you say it's a method that "works" (whatever that means)?  Is this related to something in GUT (of which you are very familiar) or maybe "Keel's Original Recipe?" Where is the full breakdown on what you've so generously shown?

Thanks,

Still

[Drazen]

Still, that in the videos also obviously works, but this way of doing it requires tracker which is by default out of my reach of making it, some spins are left out, and we have incomplete MM and that way I think it is practically impossible to crack it just from the video.

Priyankas understanding of the game is astonishing and he can make winning way out of everything on the table, so that's why I was torn where to actually start out of so many options and possibilities. So I decided best would be to start with basic principles and understand part by part. For me it is all about proofs, so I want to understand why it works. Every single principle and action. I also got some slightly additional guidelines over PM from Pri which I don't want to tell, so I hope I have enough on my plate to make something out of it eventually. Will or when it will be, I really don't know. 

Priyanka is member here for a long time now, and he likes challenges so I think that is the reason he is using multiple identities over years to tell his story and scatters knowledge all around in smaller parts. It is for anyone on its own will it be able to follow and pick all that up, understand it, so in the end being able to make winning way out of it.

I know at least 3 other Priyankas alias (I still search are there some others maybe) and some of them have significant connection with this. Others don't have too much and he deals with different types of ideas but again they are so precisely developed what again shows wide range of knowledge and big commitment. His way of writing is very pleasant to read and one just must enjoy it. One of his aliases Great Grandpa, which you mentioned here, become one of the most popular members on forum in very short period of time. It tells enough.

Things he mentions here  and under some other aliases are especially unique and all together is very unique type of knowledge which I haven't found anywhere else.

You asked does Priyanka want anyone to disclose it outright if it finds? I think he doesn't care much, and with great power comes great responsibility so anyone would be stupid in my opinion to do that. I wouldn't show that even to my own mother to be honest

Anyway I am glad the riddle continues and remains to be seen what and when will Priyanka add more to this.

[wiggy]

So playing two losing strategies at the same time should somehow turn our overall outcome into positive . Let me give the most simple example everyone can understand and test.

We have 2 games observed at the same time:

    In Game A, you simply lose $1 every time you play.
    In Game B, you count how much money you have left. If it is an even number, you win $3. Otherwise you lose $5.

Say you begin with $100 in your pocket. If you start playing Game A exclusively, you will obviously lose all your money in 100 rounds. Similarly, if you decide to play Game B exclusively, you will also lose all your money in 100 rounds.

However, consider playing the games alternatively, starting with Game B, followed by A, then by B, and so on (BABABA...). It should be easy to see that you will steadily earn a total of $2 for every two games. Right?

Drazen, I understand you are just giving an easy example but you are already determining that you are going to win every B game in 100 rounds. None of us can guarantee that we are going to win every first hand out of two playing roulette. I think people are putting the cart before the horse with this paradox. Find a way to win at roulette first and then see if you can improve it with stuff like this rather than the other way around or I don't see how you can make it work.

cheers

[ddarko]

@ Drazen

I got a different sentence from wikipedia.

"There exist pairs of games, each with a higher probability of losing than winning, for which it is possible to construct a winning strategy by playing the games alternately."

I posted this on page 7 but nobody showed any interest. Who knows maybe it will make somebody look at the game
slightly differently this time......