Deficit Recovery: Random vs. Non-Random

[Taotie]

Put your rotten teeth under the pillow tonight and see if the Tooth Fairy brings you any $$$? Or do you have more faith in Priyanka and Santa Claus?

Priyanka is a ziggly biggly wiggly.

And I'll leave it at that.

[3Nine]

Put your rotten teeth under the pillow tonight and see if the Tooth Fairy brings you any $$$? Or do you have more faith in Priyanka and Santa Claus?

Will do, thank you for your advice. Your posts are always so helpful, especially when you can't even add to 63. 

Best of luck.  You'll need it.

[falkor2k15]

So just to wrap up and summarise...

If you have 1000 spins, are you able to say with certainity that Red will be more or Black will be more? Are you able to say that number 36 will be more than any other number? No. But can you say that the number of repeating cycles of dozens will be more than number of different cycles of dozens. Yes, you can with absolute certainity. Leave aside winning every session for a moment. But lets say you keep a count of red and black. When red goes to 10, can you keep on betting black to balance that count, no. Keep a count of repeating cycles and different cycles. When there are 10 different cycles, can you use this count to get back the same cycles up? May be!

SAME will "catch up" with DIFFERENT, but whether DIFFERENT is ahead by 1,10 or 20 will have absolutely no effect on the behaviour of SAME's ability to catch up with DIFFERENT any quicker - due to unpredictable variance! SAME and DIFFERENT are independent, so this is no different to trying to play catch up with RED vs. BLACK or DOUBLE Dozens vs. SINGLE Dozens. And this has nothing to do with Non-Random, either - it's using past results of (closed) Cycles to play an old fashioned Random game: when one outcome is ahead by 10 let's use that as as trigger to play the opposite side of the coin - bad girl, Priyanka!!!

[19:30][Priyanka]: basically the dozen that defines the previous cycle will define the next cycle 63% of times
No Priyanka - the 63% is based on the first unique - a previous cycle is not needed.

[19:42][Priyanka]: It says same will happen 63% of time
[19:42][Priyanka]: different will happen 27%
[19:43][Priyanka]: that single dozen could hit either in 1st spin, 2nd or 3rd spin...
[19:43][Priyanka]: So if you keep on doing that blindly, then you will hit the house edge
Priyanka, if we wait for 10 DIFFERENT we will still hit the house edge.

[19:44][Priyanka]: so we need a breaking point or an entry point
[19:47][Priyanka]: now betting same is a better option
[19:47][Priyanka]: it is not like 10 reds followed by black..
[19:48][Priyanka]: it is slightly different
[19:48][Priyanka]: now not every day we will find this tipping point
But Priyanka, if we wait for 10 DIFFERENT as our tipping point, this will not change the behaviour of SAME - just like waiting for RED does not change the behaviour of BLACK!

[19:51][Priyanka]: you dont get to see that daily
[19:51][Priyanka]: It is like seeing 18 reds in a row...
And we know that 18 REDS doesn't help us bet BLACK, Priyanka; 18 DIFFERENT is not going to helps us bet SAME either!

[19:51][Priyanka]: so how do we play then..
[19:51][Priyanka]: thats when i said, create your own dozen...
[19:52][Priyanka]: the columns A B C that you made yesterday was an attempt to make dozens of your own
[19:52][Priyanka]: you were arranging them in such a manner that it gives you that tipping point of different different diff diff diff
[19:52][Priyanka]: one set reaching 10 is your tipping point
[19:53][Priyanka]: you keep adding the numbers if you are not winning in the same format.. eventually the "same" will catch up.. that is statistics and probability for you
Similarly, we can take the last 18 unique numbers and say that half the board has hit 18 times in a row then bet the remaining half board straights, but the doesn't mean that the remaining half of the board is "due" or going to suddenly catch up with the first half of the board that hit 18 times already! This is how independence works - one of the basics that has nothing to do with Non-Random. We needn't use Cycles as Priyanka suggests to play this losing system!

[19:54][Priyanka]: within the same, the same occuring in 2 spins is 88% of that 63%
[19:54][Priyanka]: thats why you play only for two spins
And that stat is constant regardless of what DIFFERENT is doing. It's not suddenly enabled when DIFFERENT reaches a tipping point, and doesn't enable us to win in the long term - whether playing SAME alone or alongside DIFFERENT.

[19:54][Priyanka]: hope it all makes sense now.. thats a simple way to utilise cycles in your play
But it's the wrong way to use cycles! Nobody should be using cycles in this way - after they have closed!

[19:58][Priyanka]: and play only same when tipping point happens
But, Priyanka, the tipping point of 10 DIFFERENT or whatnot does *nothing* to influence SAME - just like we cannot use a single dozen to influence the other 2 dozens.

[20:12][Priyanka]: imagine this.. in 50 cycles, we will get approximately 32 same and 18 different
[20:13][Priyanka]: and within that 32 same, we will get approximately 18 in the first spin of cycle itself
[20:13][RouletteGhost]: ok so in 50 we get 32 same and 18 diff. flat bet for same?
[20:14][Priyanka]: same 32.. 18 diff
[20:14][Priyanka]: out of 32 18 will be in the first spin itself
[20:16][Priyanka]: yeah.. so when you reach 10 numbers in that dozen.. you would have had atleast 7-8 cycles gone as different
[20:17][Priyanka]: so u are starting to play after 8 cycles different
[20:17][Priyanka]: so that leaves you with 32 and 10
Taken right out of the book of Manrique and P.A.! 32 and 18 are simply the averages for a typical permutation. If we start to play SAME after DIFFERENT = 8 then that doesn't mean we should now expect 32 and 10 since the variance has clearly changed that expectation for the worst! So by the end of 50 Cycles, rather than some miraculous recovery from SAME, we would expect that SAME will be significantly behind maths expectation for this particular permutation. We cannot expect to save it because DIFFERENT is independent of SAME - does not influence it's behaviour nor speed up it's recovery when ahead of SAME.

PRIYANKA!!!!!!! How could you do this to us - your fans who believed in you?? HOW COULD YOU??? Steve warned us and we did not listen... it was only because some of Reddwarf's lyrics had entered Priyanka vocab that we were thrown off - some stuff seemed legit yet a lot of stuff just didn't make any sense and is clearly proven wrong as per Deficit Recovery.

[praline]

And RouletteGhost is still without a winning system...

Now i understand, guys!
There is no reason in trying to understand and spend years with Priyanka's posts...you can just sh*t in every topic with useless frases and she will give it to you!
Good to know.
Very fair world.

[falkor2k15]

And RouletteGhost is still without a winning system...

Now i understand, guys!
There is no reason in trying to understand and spend years with Priyanka's posts...you can just sh*t in every topic with useless frases and she will give it to you!
Good to know.
Very fair world.

This is not in response to a lack of information and trying to get her to give more - it's showing that a lot of the information she already gave is plain wrong. I am separating fact from fiction, so you should be grateful that at least somebody is alert around here to save you the time of testing random stuff that isn't actually part of Non-Random as originally taught by Red.

[praline]

Priyanka is a smart person! She gave us a lot to work with and all that she wrote makes sense. However many of you decided to give up and blame Priyanka in your errors and misunderstanding of the concepts she gave to all of you, haters!!!
I will never permitt myself to wrote something like Taotie or falkor, maybe its becouse i understand a little more of what she wrote then some of you and i appreciate the way she wrote it. She force you to think and discover the "magical" world of math by yourselves.

Pavlo

[falkor2k15]

Priyanka is a smart person! She gave us a lot to work with and all that she wrote makes sense. However many of you decided to give up and blame Priyanka in your errors and misunderstanding of the concepts she gave to all of you, haters!!!
I will never permitt myself to wrote something like Taotie or falkor, maybe its becouse i understand a little more of what she wrote then some of you and i appreciate the way she wrote it. She force you to think and discover the "magical" world of math by yourselves.

Pavlo

I've explained all her fallacies and misinformation in detail above. We know that 18 Reds doesn't influence Black; likewise I got stats over 1 million spins that SAME and DIFFERENT are also independent. At the end of the day, evidence through observation and experimentation is a bigger and more trustworthy authority over somebody mixing truth with lies.

I appreciate Priyanka too - but here she's done herself an injustice - she's let herself down, and all us fans. People need to see this conjuration for what it is: please show more respect for the truth... put up or shut up!

[Drazen]

Falklor I am really sorry for your disappointment with Priyanka.

But regardless of your circumstances and expectations here, couldnt you save at least a bit of dignity? 

Stay well man

[Taotie]

Priyanka is a ziggly biggly wiggly.

And I'll leave it at that.

LOL.

[DoctorSudoku]

The name of this web site should be changed from :.rouletteforum.cc

to

:.cultofpriyanka.cc

[falkor2k15]

I compared the following in terms of variance every 100 game session x 5,154 apiece:
--Double Dozens (66%) vs. Single Dozen (33%)
--Order 1 (63%) vs. Order 2-3 (37%)

Order 1 maximum variance = 19
Double Dozen max variance = 17

For example, all these sessions were > 15 cycles/games out from:

Maths Expectation = 63% (Order 1)
order   79   21   -16
order   47   53   16
order   46   54   17
order   46   54   17
order   79   21   -16
order   44   56   19
order   80   20   -17
order   47   53   16
order   78   22   -15
order   79   21   -16
order   79   21   -16
order   44   56   19

Maths Expectation = 66% (Double Dozens)
dz   82   18   -16
dz   82   18   -16
dz   81   19   -15
dz   82   18   -16
dz   51   49   15
dz   50   50   16
dz   51   49   15
dz   51   49   15
dz   51   49   15
dz   81   19   -15
dz   49   51   17
dz   49   51   17

The distribution was very similar - so no evidence of stability there!

Next came the cluster test, based on 120,113 recorded clusters apiece:

Maths Expectation = 63% (Order 1)
1   44754
2   27653
3   17503
4   11275
5   7097
6   4362
7   2728
8 to 33   4740

Maths Expectation = 66% (Double Dozens)
1   39881
2   27638
3   17974
4   11836
5   7799
6   5230
7   3536
8 to 32   7118

Taking into account 3% difference in maths expectation, both perform very similar - so this pretty much confirms that Order 1/Defined By Same has no extra(ordinary?) stability over random double dozens vs. single dozens. Case closed.

[falkor2k15]

So this is just more nonsense from Priyanka:

Lets take the following dozen cycle as an example. Following is the statistics across various number of cycles for a set of few thousands of spins. The fact is the percentages defined there say something about the edge and they remain the constant irrespective of the set you will use.

500 cycles   
Dozen that defined the previous cycle same as the dozen defined the next cycle - 306 ~ 61%
Dozen that defined the previous cycle different from the dozen defined the next cycle - 194 ~ 39%

1000 cycles   
Dozen that defined the previous cycle same as the dozen defined the next cycle - 618 ~ 62%
Dozen that defined the previous cycle different from the dozen defined the next cycle - 382 ~ 38%

2000 cycles   
Dozen that defined the previous cycle same as the dozen defined the next cycle - 1241 ~ 62%
Dozen that defined the previous cycle different from the dozen defined the next cycle - 759 ~ 38%

[praline]

Case closed.

Oh, thank you Falkor for the clear explanation!
I need to go now, got a lot of notebooks to burn...

[MoneyT101]

Falkor, what Pri posted was just ideas that can help lead to better system creating.  She just shared the CONCEPTS!

What she shared and what red shared can't be used at face value.  It's needs to be looked at a little different.

No reason for this thread to be written the way it is....

[falkor2k15]

Falkor, what Pri posted was just ideas that can help lead to better system creating.  She just shared the CONCEPTS!

What she shared and what red shared can't be used at face value.  It's needs to be looked at a little different.

No reason for this thread to be written the way it is....

MoneyT, you obviously haven't read the recent topics properly or you've misunderstand what is going on here...

*Red was the first to share all useful Non-Random concepts
*Priyanka reiterated Red's useful Non-Random concepts in the form of plagiarism
*Besides repeating Red's Non-Random concepts, Pri integrated old ideas about Variance Avoidance that she probably learnt from Manrique - claiming it was part of the Non-Random repertoire.
*Variance avoidance is entirely random and doesn't work - got nothing to do with original Non-Random concepts revealed by red.

Money, remember that Non-Random is based on defined limits? Once you close that cycle then you are no longer working inside any fixed limits (and Priyanka's variance avoidance doesn't describe outer cycles or VdW), so is just like using Red to play Black or a single dozen to play double dozens, which is back to a random game. All evidence presented above, and in the other topic, is ample and sufficient to prove my case. You've seen Red's original writings so you should know better; Priyanka took his ideas and then contaminated them with misleading crap. Go back and read these topics properly.