Questions for Priyanka...

[Priyanka]

1). In your humble opinion What non-randon theory/principle should we study the most?

Different people have used different non random principles with varying degrees of success. The common non-random theory that people use without even knowing non-random is "repeaters". That could be a good starting point. Starting from knowing when a repeat happens, then moving on to where it happens and how it happens - there is so much undiscovered.  The key irrespective of the method you use is, not to play spins or numbers, but to play for an event.

2). Are you combining this principle with the LOT (Law of thirds) to reach the advantage you speak of?

No. I don't. Having said that statistics and probability are always a good guiding points. Will you be surprised if I say there is no law that is called as law of thirds in mathematics. Think about it. Think about why one can observe such phenomenon in statistical averages. Then you will find your statistic that is unbalanced in this mathematically balanced game. Then you have the selection or the event and the predictability that people talk about.

3). Do you use a parachute type progression when your non random event fails to materialize?

One doesn't have to. The key is finding parallel plays.  Parachuting is a potential parallel play but not the only one.

4). What is your starting bet placement.. Ie.. Dozens or six line... Etc.

The concepts are so versatile it can be applied to any roulette playing positions. But depending on the concept you apply some of them may yield notable imbalance, some may not. So it is not a question of what is the starting bet, it is a question of what is the position that yield the imbalance for the event you select.  As to my preference, I do prefer lines. But that has got nothing to do with the concepts here.

5). Do you think the pigeon hole principle is of little value, medium value, or great value to us as players?

I don't get the question . I would say I find the principle enticing. 

now, while I encourage you to look into non-random, I would also like to discourage you by saying there is no single person including me has posted a method that beats roulette using these concepts. Sometimes theory doesn't get backed up in practicality. Be aware.

[falkor2k15]

Why do you prefer lines then, Priyanka? Does it have something to do with the 55% for 3 uniques lines in 3 spins? And why is that any more significant than 2 dozens in 3 spins being the more likely event (MLE)?

[Priyanka]

Why do you prefer lines

No reason!! No logic!!

[Malvador]

Thank you so much for your enlightening answers... Surely if you play in this style the one you have described (ie. Events not spins) it would be more like chess than roulette? The strategic placement of chips when your "events" is more likely to happen, removing them and moving almost continuously to keep up... It feels more like a "game" playing this way... If I'm on the same wavelength of thought at least.

You truly have been an inspiration to me and thank you for that...

May I summarize your answers like this: Events happen with more predictably than spins, our task is to find the relationship between thoose events.

Would you agree?

Malvador

[Malvador]

Priyanka,

May I also ask your opinion on parallel games? What do you mean by parallel?
Side by side? Or playing numerically parallel streams of a certain cycle length?

Sorry for bothering you but am so intrigued into your thought process. The task of finding a reliable structure in a random stream is mathematically exciting and has huge implications.

It's a real honour to have your guidance. So thank you again for your time. 

[Malvador]

Different people have used different non random principles with varying degrees of success. The common non-random theory that people use without even knowing non-random is "repeaters". That could be a good starting point. Starting from knowing when a repeat happens, then moving on to where it happens and how it happens - there is so much undiscovered.  The key irrespective of the method you use is, not to play spins or numbers, but to play for an event.

Just a quick thought on this... We observe this phenomenon because we are adding more spins to our event or cycle. As our cycle grows it has more and more chance of repeating/ending?

[falkor2k15]

This was my first ever puzzle game...

Anyone played Lemmings before?
link:://:.elizium.nu/scripts/lemmings/

[Malvador]

This was my first ever puzzle game...

Anyone played Lemmings before?
link:://:.elizium.nu/scripts/lemmings/

I fail to see the relevance falkor? Please can we try and keep on track as I don't want Priyanka to lose interest in discussing the principles that we want to learn.

Many thanks

[praline]

there is no single person including me has posted a method that beats roulette using these concepts

[Malvador]

That's  Why we still can play roulette against casino.

Hmmm... Interesting point Praline, maybe we are being lead further from the truth in order to protect the method? I hope not but it would be a wise descion.. If for example I was in possession of such a method I would want to protect it for as long as possible? Anyone intelligent enough to exploit randomness would surely protect it? One way of protecting it would be to steer everyone in the opposite direction maybe?

[DoctorSudoku]

This was my first ever puzzle game...

Anyone played Lemmings before?
link:://:.elizium.nu/scripts/lemmings/

Gilius-Falkor,
From the little snippet that I played, it seems very similar to the Japanese puzzle game of Sokoban.

Sokoban is one of my all-time favorite puzzle games.

[Priyanka]

Events happen with more predictably than spins, our task is to find the relationship between thoose events.

Spins and events are equally predictable. Playing based on spins or numbers will always lead to the expectation of game if not worse. Playing based on events may provide a possibility to overcome the expectation of the game.

[Malvador]

Thank you for your wisdom again Priyanka, I must admit that I feel frustrated in myself that I cannot seem to peice the puzzle together, I am trying! How would one combine a knowledge of events and cycles of these events into a bet selection or moreover into a betting amount? A kick in the right direction would be very much appreciated.

[Kimo Li]

Spins and events operate in the same manner; organize them into groups most familiar to you. Each occurrence will produce separate results. The piece everyone is looking for is the actual event.

What does this mean? It means the player does not need any tracking device, manual or computer.
It means you can actually walk up to any table and start playing. Why? Because the events everyone seek is right before their eyes, but fail to see it.

Know this, any player who has tried to decipher the winning formula, whether through math, statistic, AP, or other methods, have touched upon at least one facet of events. Events are not random by nature, nor are spins. As Priyanka stated, “Spins and events are equally predictable.”

Events facilitate spins to become winners. Using Priyanka’s numbers, basic events:

7
4
32
30
5
21
9
7

R
B
R
R
R
R
R
R

L
L
H
H
L
H
L
L

O
E
E
E
O
O
O
O

See the basic events.
Complex events operate on a different level, but the principles are the same.

[falkor2k15]

I fail to see the relevance falkor? Please can we try and keep on track as I don't want Priyanka to lose interest in discussing the principles that we want to learn.

Many thanks

FYI: your failure to see the relevance is what led to your assumption about my post being off-topic. And it's assumptions like that, i.e. human stupidity, that leads to mass programming regarding topics like roulette being unbeatable or, say, Earth - the place we call home - resembling a spinning ball through space with other 3D bodies as well as not-so-3D bodies like black holes, etc. Can you see how easy it is to go off-track there?