Outside the box: a different view on roulette numbers

[Joe]

It's quite simple. First take the DERIVED  sequence and form a parallel stream.

THINK about dependency. Form cycles in the real streams and THINK about the FACTS about the closure of those cycles. THINK how the cycles are DEFINED. THINK of innovative ways in which parallel but DEPENDENT universes might be DERIVED.

Do not WAIT and do not PREDICT. What DEPENDENCIES are there between real and imaginary streams?

How can you focus on more than 37 numbers by PARACHUTING onto virtual numbers and get a certain PROFIT because of DEPENDENCY on a parallel real stream? THINK and work it out for hours with a PENCIL AND PAPER and you will see the way.

You can view it as different UNIVERSES. Maybe not with numbers but with apples and pears. Do you want apples or pears? Maybe you want apples but you only get pears. Can you THINK of a way to catch more apples? What are the FACTS? What are the distances between the objects in the derived stream and the real stream? Are they friends, or are they strangers?

Once again do not PREDICT. Do not WAIT. Do not HEDGE. THINK of a way that DEPENDENCY must give you the fruit that you want.

Only by THINKING about the FACTS  will you EARN the answer.

If I said any more I'd be giving it away. So when you find it, be sure to GUARD it closely.

Good luck in your QUEST!

Interesting post, but is it your own or are you just taking the mick? It seems odd from someone who, judging from prior posts, believes that all systems are bunk. 

[Person S]

I think the defining element being the same as the previous is a bit misunderstood. It is the same more than 50% because of cycle length 1's. Every time you remove CL1's, the statistic turn the opposite and the defining element will be more likely to be different from the previous. Even Priyanka asked someone long time ago to try and remove CL1's, and notice the difference.

I think we can link the defining element as follows:
with a cycle length of 1 - 100%,
2 - 50%,
3 - 33%.
Plus, we have statistics on the length of the cycle, is it possible to calculate all this by contacting the statistics?
I may be wrong, but correct me if this is not correct - 1st element W, 2 - L / W (breakeven), 3 - L
But the disadvantage is that we do not know which cycle to appear and this is again a guessing game.

[falkor2k15]

I think the defining element being the same as the previous is a bit misunderstood. It is the same more than 50% because of cycle length 1's. Every time you remove CL1's, the statistic turn the opposite and the defining element will be more likely to be different from the previous. Even Priyanka asked someone long time ago to try and remove CL1's, and notice the difference.

No big difference to notice! Nothing enlightening about choosing particular options during a cycle. Was previously discussed here. Why would these targets be favorable over any others? Everything breaks even as you know:

So no original ideas here. 3.5 years later nothing has changed. All these different forms of smoke and mirrors are all part of the same break even game - different ways of dressing up the same turd.

[precogmiles]

No big difference to notice! Nothing enlightening about choosing particular options during a cycle. Was previously discussed here. Why would these targets be favorable over any others? Everything breaks even as you know:

So no original ideas here. 3.5 years later nothing has changed. All these different forms of smoke and mirrors are all part of the same break even game - different ways of dressing up the same turd.

Bravo!! I appreciate you persevered for 3.5 years. Time well spent atleast you now know that AP is the only way to play.

your options are:

visual ballistics/computers, dealer signature or precognition

take your pick

[ati]

No big difference to notice! Nothing enlightening about choosing particular options during a cycle.

I don't think that's true. Just create a system with random flat bets, and create another system where you consider cycles, positions and statistics before the bets. There is a noticeable difference. I agree that if you break down the cycle stats, the expected return is zero, but the tests show different results.

Please see below a chart of a typical follow the last H/L EC bet, and below that a chart for a simple system where I track dozen cycles, but only bet on H/L, based on what happens in the cycle. Both flat bet for 30K spins.
It has and extremely low win rate, and I don't know how to make it better, but the variance can be much smaller when we use cycles in our play I think.

[Firefox]

So are you trying to track when a dozen cycle is defined by say dozen 1 or 3, and then betting high or low as a dependent EC on a high or low dozen completing the cycle? If so, then what happens if the cycle is defined by dozen 2, is that a no bet?

[Firefox]

Not the same, but Falkor's example of playing two positions on dozens and line cycles, and winning when both lose independently:

link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=20445.0

[ati]

I didn't save the file, but in this specific test when a cycle ended, I always bet the last high or low EC. So if the defining element in the cycle was the 2nd dozen, and a straight number was 13 to 18 then the next bet was on low, if 19 to 24, the next bet was high. There is no good reason why, I also tried betting the opposite, but that gave negative result. So I can be accused of curve fitting
This is not a winning method, it only uses cycles and statistics. In the next 30K spins it could go down to zero or negative.
I just tried to show that making betting decisions based on cycles can somewhat reduce variance.
Nick posted something similar in the random thoughts thread a couple years ago.

[Joe]

Nice wrap up, I couldn’t have done it any better 👏👏👏👏👏

Any questions or concerns regarding this topic feel free to ask Firefox.  He has just graduated to mentor status

Firefox was just yanking your chain. He doesn't really believe what he wrote. 

[MoneyT101]

Firefox was just yanking your chain. He doesn't really believe what he wrote. 

I know I was being sarcastic 

Plenty of the stuff he said made no sense

“THINK of innovative ways in which parallel but DEPENDENT universes might be DERIVED.”

“You can view it as different UNIVERSES. Maybe not with numbers but with apples and pears”


😂🤣

[Anastasius]

Keep doing 30k tests it looks good.

[mickavelli]

I'm having fun playing with the stats / new table... Been looking at Positions etc like dozens...
For example Double streets..

Pos 1 + 2 = Doz 1
Pos 3 + 4 = Doz 2
Pos 5 + 6 = Doz 3

For example...

Result + Dynamic stream

2      213456
4      421356
1      142356
5      514236
3      351426
4      435126
2      243516
6      624351
5      562431
3      356241
1      135624
1      135624
4      413562

Derived  ---> Converted to Dozens

2   --->  1
4   --->  2
3   --->  2
5   --->  3
5   --->  3
4   --->  2
5   --->  3
6   --->  3
5   --->  3
5   --->  3
6   --->  3
1   --->  1
6   --->  3

[MoneyT101]

I'm having fun playing with the stats / new table... Been looking at Positions etc like dozens...
For example Double streets..

Pos 1 + 2 = Doz 1
Pos 3 + 4 = Doz 2
Pos 5 + 6 = Doz 3

For example...

Result + Dynamic stream

2      213456
4      421356
1      142356
5      514236
3      351426
4      435126
2      243516
6      624351
5      562431
3      356241
1      135624
1      135624
4      413562

Derived  ---> Converted to Dozens

2   --->  1
4   --->  2
3   --->  2
5   --->  3
5   --->  3
4   --->  2
5   --->  3
6   --->  3
5   --->  3
5   --->  3
6   --->  3
1   --->  1
6   --->  3

Nice post continue working behind the scenes 

[redhot]

Nice post continue working behind the scenes 

Hey MoneyT,

Do you actually use the derived stream in play or is it just a useful learning tool?

Using it in live play at the casino with pen and paper must be quite difficult I'd imagine...

[Blood Angel]

I'm having fun playing with the stats / new table... Been looking at Positions etc like dozens...
For example Double streets..

Pos 1 + 2 = Doz 1
Pos 3 + 4 = Doz 2
Pos 5 + 6 = Doz 3

For example...

Result + Dynamic stream

2      213456
4      421356
1      142356
5      514236
3      351426
4      435126
2      243516
6      624351
5      562431
3      356241
1      135624
1      135624
4      413562

Derived  ---> Converted to Dozens

2   --->  1
4   --->  2
3   --->  2
5   --->  3
5   --->  3
4   --->  2
5   --->  3
6   --->  3
5   --->  3
5   --->  3
6   --->  3
1   --->  1
6   --->  3

Hi, I’m unsure how you worked out the derived dozens.. can you please explain? 
Thanks BA