Random Thoughts

[denzie]

No idea about TG. .... I wish he continued with his thread here. Would jealousy be the reason?  Well I'm not gonna lose my sleep over it.

And Ken.....where do I start....lol
jealousy isn't the issue here but more failure. All his stuff failed. Together with his friendly attitude. Well he can talk his same bs on other forums now.  He is a joke .

[falkor2k15]

RESULTS ARE IN !!!!!!!!!!!!!

And what an AMAZING result it is: Roger Federer More takes victory in the outer court to win this year's Roulette championship against next year's champion, Van der Waerden, at an uncontested 4 sets to nil: 56, 31, 11, and 2 !!!!!!!



Let's hear it for them, folks: BIG IT UP for Roger and the people's coach: Priyanka - sponsored by Edge Cycles!!!!!!!!!



Defined by Same = 65%!!!!

[RouletteGhost]

Falkor you are one hell of an attention whore lol.

[Drazen]

Falklor if we now variance borders and they are so constant do you think it could be possible to apply some MM and win even without an edge?

Have you ever investigated that as an option?

Cheers

[falkor2k15]

Dunno Drazen mate... I don't really understand the concept of how edge obtained... something to do with ratios vs. payout odds vs. losing combinations. Priyanka tried to explain it once, but there's still quite a lot of things about this game that's beyond me. I am going to mess around with some more stats before I try and bet anything - in case I lose my fun play money - might affect my real play money next time I go casino!  I don't want any bad personal permanence against my good name.

[falkor2k15]

This new overlay tells us to always play for cycle length 1 and bet the defining quad - in this case quad 4:


Perhaps a progression on single quads will be enough to gain edge by the above stats alone?

[Scarface]

I haven't posted much on this topic, but I have spent a great deal of time myself looking at different ways to bet cycles.  So far, I don't see an advantage either

[Drazen]

Dunno Drazen mate... I don't really understand the concept of how edge obtained...

My humble opinion is that something still must be missing. Or at least isnt shown in the obvious correlated way in this topic. Here we have a shell but designs for jet engines are dropped around the corner.

When I buy a laptop I ll start tamper with those. Good thing is that Priyanka is with us and carefully watching 

Stay well

[falkor2k15]

OK, I sussed it!

The stats only tell us about the next cycle event - not individual spins as far as I can tell yet!

So in the Priyanka tradition of stitching bets we have the following options:

Cycle Length 1

Bet last Quad (3 Streets @ 1 chip each) = 11/3

Cycle Length 2

1. Virtual spin
2. Bet last 2 Quads (6 Streets @ 1 chip each) = 11/6

OR

1. Bet the other 3 Quads (9 Streets @ 1 chip each) = 11/9
2. Bet last 2 Quads (6 Streets @ 3 chips each) = 35/9 parlayed

Cycle Length 3

Part virtual

OR

1. Bet the other 3 Quads (9 Streets @ 1 chip each) = 11/9
2. Bet opposite of last 2 Quads (6 Streets @ 3 chips each) = 35/9 parlayed
3. Bet last 3 Quads (9 Streets @ 6 chips each) = 67/9 parlayed

With 67/9 payout odds for Cycle Length 3 this explains clearly why we want increased constants for CL3 followed by CL2! And that's why CL1 is ignored - because it increases our chances of CL3 and CL2? Before, CL1 was more prevalent, albeit with lesser profit potential.

The parlay bet has been hinted at several times - but must have deliberately been left out of the video.

What was I on? My brain must have short-fused that time...

Cycle Length 1

Bet last Quad (3 Streets @ 1 chip each) = 9/3

Cycle Length 2

Bet the other 3 Quads (9 Streets @ 1 chip each) = 9/3
Bet last 2 Quads (6 Streets @ 2 chips each) = 12/9 parlayed


Cycle Length 3

1. Bet the other 3 Quads (9 Streets @ 1 chip each) = 3/9
2. Bet opposite of last 2 Quads (6 Streets @ 2 chips each) = 12/9 parlayed
3. Bet last 3 Quads (9 Streets @ 2 chip each) = 9/9 parlayed

Odds; wins/losses out of 10; Profit
CLI1: 3/9;   22.5   22.5;   0
CL2: 9/12;   44.4   56.7; -12.3
CL3: 9/9;   25.2   64.8;   -39.6

CL1 (breaks even) is better than CL2 and CL3!? I might have to run away from this game soon... got more important things to do like sort out my photo albums from 10 years ago!

And I might have to start listening to TurboGenius instead of Priyanka! 

[falkor2k15]

My humble opinion is that something still must be missing. Or at least isnt shown in the obvious correlated way in this topic. Here we have a shell but designs for jet engines are dropped around the corner.

When I buy a laptop I ll start tamper with those. Good thing is that Priyanka is with us and carefully watching 

Stay well

I guess the jet engine must be VdW, in the non-random world, which likes to be fed CL2 and CL3 data from the random world depending on the situation. And we know that the CL2 and CL3 data is constant in the random world. That will be my final test at the end of the month.

[Still]

I too will be running a final test-to-beat-all-other-tests at the end of the month.  I will run my test on Sunday, July 31, at 8 pm.  In the meantime, i hope everybody is really really nice to me. 

[falkor2k15]

Sarcasm? 

[Still]

Sarcasm? 

No, satire.  It's going to be an amazingly yuge test and i hope people will be nice to me in the meantime.

[falkor2k15]

Yeah, VdW is a headache and my next annual leave is end of July... I'm trying to beat the game based on all the other principles that Priyanka taught first.

The Russian doll I created was for the defining quads - I need to wrap up the cycle lengths at some point in their own Russian doll too.

Right now I have just increased the span of the biased "defining quads" game to 2 repeats and will see how the stats change compared to the standard 1 repeat based on the 1 defining quad: (example: if defining quad is 4)
CL1: 0 0 0 261
CL2: 86 57 84 206
CL3: 82 59 56 79
CL4: 29 23 24 16

So we only play the first 2 spins only. If the cycle length is > 2 then we increase the span to 2 repeats...

[denzie]

Perhaps you should try it the TG way