Randomer Thoughts

[psimoes]

So we covered one aspect which is cycles. Pls do ask if its not clear.

Now, lets see the VdW. As I said already the Vdw doesnt give us any advantage as it doesnt help in predicting what is going to happen next spin. What it did give 512 possibilities with 406 wins and 406 losses. Now is there a way that we can tilt this in favour of Ws? Like apples and pears. You have 5 pears in one hand and 5 apples in other hands. How do we make apples more than pears when we dont have the possibility of having more apples? By losing pears.

What does this translate to here. If we can potentially find a way of not playing even 1 spin that leads to a loss, the advantage can trip to Wins. But how the heck do we do that? I dont know yet. So unless we find a way to do this, this information is useless.

IMO as the outcomes are always 50/50, that 1 spin you skip that leads to a loss might as well lead to a win. You don´t know if you´re losing pears or apples until they have just hit.

The VdW is just a curious byproduct of a process athat can not be reversed. Like a car passing by that leaves a cloud of dust behind and you can collect the dust and throw it back to the road, but it  won´t produce a car.
To me it´s proof enough of the independence of outcomes.

[psimoes]

@psimoes

There are 3 kind of cycles, as you can see.

Any cycle is defined with the repeated dozen, which can happen at spin 2, spin 3 or spin 4.

1st kind is cycle which have repeated dozen in 2nd spin
2nd kind is cycle which have repeated dozen in 3rd spin
3rd kind is cycle which have repeated dozen in 4th spin

No more. It's just an observation!

Oh yes, it has to do with the "every four spins one dozen will have to repeat" observation. Now it makes sense. Thanks!

[Bayes]

Now this is where I need to get a grip. Maybe I already know but its in the wording
I can see how increasing the acccuracy of prediction will make you win more...but not how the odds change.
Im stuck with the pit boss saying " That prediction was accurate sir...we will pay you 40:1 not 35:1"
Could you explain please?

"Probability" and "odds" often seem to used as though they're synonymous, which can be confusing. I think the general really means "probability".

You can't get better odds in roulette like you can by shopping around the bookies in sports betting. Roulette odds (the payoffs) are fixed, so the only way to win is to get a better probability of winning (increase the accuracy of predictions).

[Turner]

its "what ends the cycle" and "how long is it"

123 is still going but 1,2 or 3 will define it
1231 is a cycle of 3 and 1 defines it
1233 is a cycle of 3 and 3 defines it
1232 is a cycle of 3 and 2 defines it

123, 321,231, 132 etc all will be cycle 3 but arnt defined yet 

1322 is is a cycle of 3 and 2 defines it

Psimoes
It would help if I wasnt such a knob and typed cycle of 4 throughout the whole post
Of course its 3

[psimoes]

No problem. It all makes sense under the right perspective now.

[Turner]

"Probability" and "odds" often seem to used as though they're synonymous, which can be confusing. I think the general really means "probability".

You can't get better odds in roulette like you can by shopping around the bookies in sports betting. Roulette odds (the payoffs) are fixed, so the only way to win is to get a better probability of winning (increase the accuracy of predictions).

I did say its probably in the wording
We do tend to say "what are the odds of that happening" to which the reply is...what ever the bookie gives you
Cheers

[atlantis]

I try  VDWt  AP's applied to 2 sides of an EC - together
Betting only on first trigger...

Am I correct??

r    e   
r   o   
r    o   
r w   o w      2-3-4
b    o    
r   e   
b   o   
b   o   
b   o   


r   o   
b   e   
b   o   
r    e   
r   o     
b   e   
b   e   
b w     o L          6-7-8   
b   e   

r   o   
r   e   
r    o   
b   o   
r w   e L          1-3-5
b   e   
b   o   
r   o   
r   o   

b   o   
b   e   
r    o   
b   e   
b   o    
r L   e w          2-4-6   
r   o   
r   o   
b   e   


b   o   
r   o   
b   o    
r   e   
r L   e L          1-3-5   
b   o   
r   o   
r   o   

r   o   
b   o   
r   e    
r    o   
r    o   
r w   o w          3-4-5   
b   e   
b   e   
r   o   

r   o   
r   e   
b    o   
b   o   
r L   e L          3-4-5    
r   e   
r   o   
r   o   
r   o   

b   o
r   e
r   o
b    e
b   o
b   e
r   o
b   e
b w   o w          1-5-9

b   o
b   o
b w   o w          1-2-3
b   o
r   o
b   e
b   o
b   o
r   e

Regards,
A.

[falkor2k15]

I still can't figure out how having 2 VdW streams is meant to help us... betting on 2 ECs just speeds up the losses... I don't know how Priyanka expects us to "find a whole new way of playing roulette" (with 2 simultaneous VdWs)

[ego]

I try  VDWt  AP's applied to 2 sides of an EC - together
Betting only on first trigger...

Am I correct??

r    e   
r   o   
r    o   
r w   o w      2-3-4
b    o    
r   e   
b   o   
b   o   
b   o   


r   o   
b   e   
b   o   
r    e   
r   o     
b   e   
b   e   
b w     o L          6-7-8   
b   e   

r   o   
r   e   
r    o   
b   o   
r w   e L          1-3-5
b   e   
b   o   
r   o   
r   o   

b   o   
b   e   
r    o   
b   e   
b   o    
r L   e w          2-4-6   
r   o   
r   o   
b   e   


b   o   
r   o   
b   o    
r   e   
r L   e L          1-3-5   
b   o   
r   o   
r   o   

r   o   
b   o   
r   e    
r    o   
r    o   
r w   o w          3-4-5   
b   e   
b   e   
r   o   

r   o   
r   e   
b    o   
b   o   
r L   e L          3-4-5    
r   e   
r   o   
r   o   
r   o   

b   o
r   e
r   o
b    e
b   o
b   e
r   o
b   e
b w   o w          1-5-9

b   o
b   o
b w   o w          1-2-3
b   o
r   o
b   e
b   o
b   o
r   e

Regards,
A.

Antlantis it takes one to know one and i have solve the VDW if my assumptions is correct - because i could not find the orignial post by Priyanka.
As i understood it so will there be a change among 9 outcomes, that is what VDW dictates.
For example you will not recive RBB RBB RBB or RRB RRB RRB is that correct?

If yes i can tell you that it takes four attempts to cover all combinations with the example above.
And the clustering solution towards VDW is not linearity or vertical outcomes when charting.

You can use VDW with different sample size, just like RTM.
It for example take two attempts to cover six outcomes clustering in the same way as above RBB RBB or RRB RRB or any other repeat.
You could also make the 9 outcomes to become 12 outcomes and it would take six attempts to cover all combination to Catch a winning bet.

I also know the solution for dozen play as it is based upon same principal.

[ego]

I apoliges now i find the topic and is about something else, so forget about my post above.

[Tomla021]

maybe Priyanka is suggesting that we can get rid of one of the cycles when playing?

[TurboGenius]

maybe Priyanka is suggesting that we can get rid of one of the cycles when playing?

I have a few cycles, and I'm not getting rid of them !!!

[RMore]

I think part of the problem of comprehension is the ambiguity around the term "length". It took me a while to understand it too. You see, to me -
11
22
33
are cycles of length 2. Because there are 2 events in this particular cycle right?
122
121
133
131
are cycles of length 3, by the normal (dare I say it) understanding of the word length. And
1231
1232
1322
1323
are length 4.

But Pri has used the term differently and we have to get used to it. "Length" in Priyanka's world means "the number of different dozens in a completed cycle". And a cycle completes when a dozen repeats, with that completing dozen being considered part of the cycle AND the commencement of the next (when in continuous play).

So in the above 3 situations the lengths, when in discussion here with Priyanka, are 1,2 and 3 respectively. Rather than 2, 3 and 4 as most people would usually have understood by the term.

Have I understood it right?

It's also worth noting that we are using the term "cycle" in a non-rigorous sense. By that I mean we are creating cycles to suit our purposes. We can create any sort of cycle we like - I could say, for example, that a cycle begins on a dozen and ends WHEN ANY OTHER DOZEN APPEARS - which is, of course, the opposite of the one we are working with here. But my point is that the term "cycle" is a completely artificial one, generated for no other reason than to provide an agreed platform for study. So while it is true that the "cycle of 4" concept is what this new cycle we are discussing is based on in principle, that is NOT the cycle we are using as defined, albeit subliminally and never actually stated, because our cycle is not limited to 4 - it can be 2, 3, or 4. (And I am talking about the number of events in the cycle - I hesitate to use the word "length" because the normal usage of that word has been co-opted by Priyanka for other usage).

So - how does that help us? Probably not at all - I just wanted to make a statement about the usage of terminology and how carefully we need to define our terms so that we are all agreed and on the same page.

But Pri, surely you must understand that simply saying "no HG, no clues ..." etc. is not going to stop people (myself included I have to confess) trying to figure out, from this thread and others, how to repeat your success as demonstrated in your vids and the game I have seen here. Of course that is why we are here - why else do you think? So making your initial statement is not going to change anything in terms of our motivation - we are here to find ways to win at roulette. Yes? Am I right?

Now I know that General and a few others advocate AP to the exclusion of all other approaches, and I agree with them that AP is successful. But here we are exploring other ways. Note that I say "exploring". We may or may not be totally misguided but we are having fun exploring an alternative view (well, I am anyway), but make no mistake Pri, why we are here is simple - to see if this approach can lead to a successful strategy. I assume there is no problem understanding the term "successful strategy", right?

Gosh - I didn't mean to ramble on for so long. Sorry.  Anyway, my point with all this Pri, is that you surely must understand what our goal is here. Regardless of your initial disclaimer - it doesn't change our motivation.

best to all
Rog

[falkor2k15]

But my point is that the term "cycle" is a completely artificial one, generated for no other reason than to provide an agreed platform for study.

It's not artificial - it's natural - so when you break games down based on repeaters then curve fitting no longer applies. I guess this was a bigger secret than VdW...

I was looking at Priyanka's PP system based on the Lines - it's possible she plays here for cycles that have 2 or more repeats as the "agreed platform for study".

[RMore]

Natural? I guess it could be viewed that way. It simply depends on how you look at it. It's only "natural" when you choose to define a cycle by termination due to a repeating dozen. If I choose to close out a cycle by some other definition then the "naturalness" changes into something else. It all depends on your definition of the term - that was my main point really.

As for the lines, I think Pri plays both lines (6 numbers) and quads. Note that Pri uses the term "quad", and again, this is ambiguous and confusing to some - me in the beginning. I have always heard the term "quad" used as a synonym for "corner", i.e. a 4-number grouping. But Pri uses it as a definition of 9 numbers. Why? Who knows? Best guess - because, excluding the zero, there are 4 ways to create groupings of 9 numbers and since there is no official term for this grouping in roulette as there is no such defined bet it was necessary to define a term so "quad" is what she decided on. Fair enough - but it was never actually stated and we had to figure out from context.