Random Thoughts

[Nickmsi]

"The number theories are also a dead end.  They prove that the "game" can not be beaten, not the other way around.  The  number "theories" will not help you exploit the non random nature of the game"

General, I am assuming this is your own opinion. 

I am open minded, if you have proof that the number theories are a "dead end", then prove it.

Don't refer me to the WizardofOdds or Math forums, just provide some proof that number theories don't work.

I provided you with an example of how the number theories can be used.

Kindly do the same .  Show me they can't.  I am not too old to learn new tricks.

Thanks

Nick

[Steve]

I provided you with an example of how the number theories can be used.

Exactly what was this example?  I can't find it.  I'm looking for anything that indicates the odds can be increased.  Really i want to be wrong and apologize for my ignorance because of what it would mean. I just need one clear theory or concept i can test, and see if it's true.

[MoneyT101]

Exactly what was this example?  I can't find it.  I'm looking for anything that indicates the odds can be increased.  Really i want to be wrong and apologize for my ignorance because of what it would mean. I just need one clear theory or concept i can test, and see if it's true.

Steve look at post #625

[Nickmsi]

Hi Steve

The example I gave was that we play roulette looking for an AP.  This is not random.  We are playing for a math theorem to complete, which it has to, no doubt about it.

I cannot give you anything to test else I would be giving away the system.

What I can do is give you and everyone else the basic Van de Waerden Theorem in excel format so that you can test it yourself to see how it works, every time.

This is how we play, spin by spin we look for an AP to be formed.  This is a Non Random way to play roulette.

This VDW is not the Holy Grail in itself, it is just the first step to understanding.

Hope this helps.

Nick

[Tacwell]

Hi Steve

The example I gave was that we play roulette looking for an AP.  This is not random.  We are playing for a math theorem to complete, which it has to, no doubt about it.

I cannot give you anything to test else I would be giving away the system.

What I can do is give you and everyone else the basic Van de Waerden Theorem in excel format so that you can test it yourself to see how it works, every time.

This is how we play, spin by spin we look for an AP to be formed.  This is a Non Random way to play roulette.

This VDW is not the Holy Grail in itself, it is just the first step to understanding.

Hope this helps.

Nick

Ok now I'm confused, does the wheel somehow know that it needs to hit a certain pocket to complete an arithmetic progression, or is there some other force that causes the wheel to hit that pocket, or is it a mathematical anomaly that can be applied to any 9 random numbers? Remember pockets are just pockets, we could use letters to identify them, or hieroglyphics for that matter, it wouldn't change anything.

[Nickmsi]

Hi Tacwell. . .

The VDW does not play numbers, it plays R/B colors or H/L or O/E.

In any set of 9 Colors, you will have an AP.  Guaranteed.

In any set of 9 H/L you will have an AP.  Guaranteed.

In any set of 9 O/e will have an AP.  Guaranteed.

Hope this helps.

Nick

[Tacwell]

Hi Tacwell. . .

The VDW does not play numbers, it plays R/B colors or H/L or O/E.

In any set of 9 Colors, you will have an AP.  Guaranteed.

In any set of 9 H/L you will have an AP.  Guaranteed.

In any set of 9 O/e will have an AP.  Guaranteed.

Hope this helps.

Nick

Thanks Nick

So for any 9 spins, there is no combination of red vs black what won't form an arithmetic progression? Surely then the odds and payout stay the same as without betting for the progression, thus negative expected value? Or am I still missing something?

[psimoes]

Actually the chances RB are not being considered as numbers per se as what matters here is how they´re distributed across the nine spins. They could instead be pig pig dog pig dog dog pig dog pig yes, or anything else lol. But yeah the arythmetic progressions are always there whatever the outcome will be. Sometimes just one as in RR BB RR BB R or lots of them as in RRRRRRRRR. This means they don´t have any influence on what colour the nex spin will be. Whatever the next spin is, it will either form an AP or there was one or several already formed in the past 8 spins.  It´s unpredictable as always. No edge for the player, just wishful thinking I´m afraid. If you happen to win like 6 times in a row using this method you´ll lose 6 times in a row afterwards.

[winkel]

Nickmsi,

Ignore the layout and forget the game.  Both are a fools folly.  Recorded history, math, all prove this much.    The "game" is merely a distraction for ordinary gamblers. 

The number theories are also a dead end.  They prove that the "game" can not be beaten, not the other way around.  The  number "theories" will not help you exploit the non random nature of the game.

Focus only on the wheel.

I´m still waiting for your answer to this questions:

Quote from: The General on May 03, 2016, 04:40:28 PM

    Sorry, but it's nothing more than a random fluctuation.    I wish I could tell you that it would work, but it won't, and can't for obvious reasons.  One our of play is meaningless.

    Best of luck,

    The General.


Just a simple question to the General:

If we start watching a wheel and we make an 0 for every unhit number (37 0s) and we cross that 0 when a number has hit 0:
Will there be a situation where we have 19 unhits ( means 0s) and 18 hits (means 0)?
Could we say that the count from 37 to 19 could go on and end at 0?
Could we say that the count of hits will go from 0 to 37?
If we only watch the situation 19 0 vs 180, could we say IT MUST CROSS TO 18 0 vs 19 0?
Is this forced by nature of the game to happen or is it a such rare event, that we couldn´t bet on this to happen?
Is that a math-fact or is it a lie or a trick?

If we have this proven, could we transfer our knowledge to other situations than 0 vs 0?

[falkor2k15]

Actually the chances RB are not being considered as numbers per se as what matters here is how they´re distributed across the nine spins. They could instead be pig pig dog pig dog dog pig dog pig yes, or anything else lol. But yeah the arythmetic progressions are always there whatever the outcome will be. Sometimes just one as in RR BB RR BB R or lots of them as in RRRRRRRRR. This means they don´t have any influence on what colour the nex spin will be. Whatever the next spin is, it will either form an AP or there was one or several already formed in the past 8 spins.  It´s unpredictable as always. No edge for the player, just wishful thinking I´m afraid. If you happen to win like 6 times in a row using this method you´ll lose 6 times in a row afterwards.

Yeah, it's 50/50, but the graph for Non-Random series looks different to a 50/50 Random series (Nick demonstrated this in the early pages). In Random we are waiting to catch the win, but in Non-Random we are waiting to be caught. The secret to using Non-Random seems to be that it combines well with Random to gain edge - but it's not been confirmed exactly how that works (yet).

[psimoes]

That VDW theorem is just stating the obvious. The outcomes are still unpredictable. Probably there´s a bit more to it, but if it´s the case then why isn´t there a MOP published yet? Look at the G.U.T thread and the instructions were posted right on the first page for immediate discussion. You may agree with it or not but there´s merit. Frankly I find the "patience, Grasshopper" tone irritating, sorry.

[Tacwell]

As I said earlier...

Why does it have to be so complicated? With a mechanical system you know the odds of a specific sequence occurring, that's not an assumption, you know what the payout will be, that's not an assumption, so you can calculate expected value. If it's negative, don't expect long term profit.

BTW, I find this thread rather entertaining, I don't see the jealousy or whatever falcor was referring to, and there's no derogatory defensive nonsense from that ghost.

[Nickmsi]

Hi Psimoes . . .

"Probably there´s a bit more to it"

Yes, of course there is more to it. Sorry if you have to work for it.

I have been trying for 10 years to develop a winning system and have failed.

Priyanka sparked my interest in this post because, it reminded me of a Poster named "Dyksexlic", you old timers remember him.

He used riddles and hints to explain his Holy Grail and was heckled and derided by almost everyone.

I know now he had a Holy Grail based on the Pigeon Hole principle.

Here's his Holy Grail.

If you have 38 pigeons and 37 pigeon holes, one of the pigeon holes has to contain 2 pigeons.

In roulette terms, if you have 38 spins, 37 numbers, then 1 of the numbers has to repeat.

Simply play every number as it is spun.  That's it.  That's the Holy Grail, all you have to do is figure out a progression to handle it.

Again, the point of this thread is to get you to think of playing roulette in a different way, a Non Random way.

Cheers
Nick

[Turner]

You know, I always see 50:50 choices where ever I look. Even in the most pretty Escarty/VWDesq. applications

1-2-3                  
2-3-4                  
1-3-5                  
3-4-5                  
4-5-6                  
2-4-6                  
5-6-7                  
1-4-7                  
3-5-7                  
6-7-8                  
2-5-8                  
4-6-8                  
7-8-9                  
1-5-9                  
3-6-9                  
5-7-9

so......                  
R
R bet R for 123
B (loss)
R
R bet R  for 456 & 246,
B (loss) bet R for 147,
B (loss) bet B for 678 (or R for 258?)

well..... Van de Waerden won that one, but any win along the way was 50:50 or luck.

[Tacwell]

Here's his Holy Grail.

If you have 38 pigeons and 37 pigeon holes, one of the pigeon holes has to contain 2 pigeons.

Nick, I know you're not saying this is your holy grail, but regardless, the same logic could be applied to columns or dozens, 4 pigeons and 3 holes, or ECs, 3 pigeons and 2 holes, it really means nothing re roulette.

10 years is a long time looking for a system to beat fixed odds.