How Priyanka plagiarized reddwarf/rrbb with her Random Thoughts topic

[falkor2k15]

When Priyanka began posting her Random Thoughts topic regarding the newer, somewhat controversial, theory of Non-Random, she was actually - unbeknownst to most of her readers and fans - plagiarizing the pioneering work of reddwarf AKA rrbb (from Holland) without ever mentioning him or giving him any credit!! On top of that she distorted his teachings regarding the defining element of cycles and used them to promote a Variance Avoidance system that turns a Non-Random game into a Random game (see: link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=19185)

Where did terms like "Parallel Universes" and "Magical Relationship" come from that were never explained by Priyanka - yet explained by reddwarf? Here, I present to you just some of these "selected" sources of plagiarism from about 2-3 years prior to Priyanka giving birth to her infamous topic - the mother of deceitfulness and misrepresentation.

The bigger the number of repeats you are tracking you will find that the number of unique dozens that you will track on an average will reduce.

If I wait for a N repeats of a number and start betting on all numbers that repeated N times, the higher N, the higher the less unique numbers I need to bet on.

1. Conditional probability, Odds and random â€" This is the common if not traditional way to approach the game.

I. Roulette and Statistics
Unless to what some people on this forum claim: statistics is proven, all phenomena in roulette can be described by statistics, just by assuming that the spins are independent and the numbers have equal probability of falling.

Of three spins that yielded red or black numbers, there will be at least two red or two black. Hmm! This is not random right. This is an absolute result.

1. of all humans that enter the wormshaped vehicle, 99.00000% leave the vehicle at B
2. the remaining humans, 1.00000% leave at C.
3. at C the wormshaped vehiclereturns to A again

Bet on the driver to stay on the train!!!

Can that be used to our advantage during the play where some steps are random and some steps are non-random

Please note we did not say that all steps shouldn't be random play: ate least some of them during the sessions shouldn't be.

Our relevance comes through a dutch bloke who followed Ramsey. His name is Van der Waerden. What he believed is slightly complex. To make it too simplistic, we can restate it by saying

“in 9 spins of roulette yielding black and red, there will be one arithmetic progression of 3 integers holding the same colour”

2. related to this: link:://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_der_Waerden%27s_theorem: when we have two colors, there will be a pattern in maximum 9 spins, involving 3 spins. The distance between these 3 spins of the same color is identical

So a short answer to your question Maestro, it is definitely possible to take advantage of birthday paradox. Using it in conjunction with Pigeonhole principle and stopping when you are winning in an attacking session while you are progressing towards a non-random set will definitely give you the edge.

Now coming back to parallel universes, as drazen has asked about it, the whole thing of birthday paradox(problem) works because of these parallel universes. A person on its own will have a lesser probability of finding a birthday match as opposed to a group finding its match as there are more number of pairs involved.

Pigeonhole principle (as advocated by Dyksexlic): repeats happen on all numbersets.

...

1. RTM: regression to the mean (the a sampe average/stdev of the second sample will most probably be closer to the mean than the sample average/stdev of the previous sample)
2. birthday paradox (leading to the so called law of the third, which of course is not a law at all,but a rule-of-thumb)

I do have mathematical proof that Parandos paradox can work in roulette.

...

What are we trying to do here. We are trying to enter Game B at a point where we believe it will most likely give a positive expectation.

What is important for Parrondo to apply: there must be a positive expectation game, then by alternating between 2 losing games and a winning game, overall you can win...

The law of large numbers always catches up. This is why when some one tests thousands of spins, you always get a southward graph. So what is the issue? Your playing sessions are not short enough to stay ahead of the curve for forseeable future.

a session must be short as not to be pulled in by statistics so to speak

Everythign that happens in roulette happens in a cycle. A cycle starts and ends when a number repeats.

A cycle starts with a repeat and ends with a repeat.

a strict definition of what a number cycle is must be found

Now you can think about statistics and progression in that sequence. Not before and not in a different sequence of progression and then statistics.

progressions can only be used once a winning method has been found

and the law of large numbers will never come into picture.

Then you can play such that the law of large numbers will take longer to catch you

The holy grail must somehow escape the "law of large numbers"!

...

we only can prove that IF we allow the law of large numbers to take grip we will lose.

When repeaters do happen the statistical relation between these finite cycles tend to lean towards and form a magical relation between two finite cycles.

Find a magical secret relationship with which we can guess what comes next.

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.

Would it matter if we replace the numbers by all types of fruit? Would the odds change? Or the patterns?

“A dozen on the carpet, a dozen on the wheel, a selection of 12 numbers that changes constantly. Are they different? Do these bet selections result in changes to your predictions or the distribution?”

Do you believe that the table layout matters?? I could also put it differently: do you really believe that "odds" and "lows" differ?? Or for that matter that the current lines are different from self-defined lines??

"How many elements of some structure must there be to guarantee that a particular property will hold?"

Where most people tend to see random numbers as unorganized, mathematics proofs that there must be some kind of structure.

It is based on Iron steel and Turner's quads, but taking non-random into consideration.

We could also bet on 9 numbers (lets call in quarts) and it would also hold.

Before I move my thought process into an interesting concept of Parallel universes, I would like to explore another aspect of non-randomness.

A 'universe' is actually a collection of spins ... No universe is better or worse or more fundamental than the other.

Here I could potentially have two streams one as a stream of quads with teh above combinations and other as a stream of ECs made of L and H.

some of the remarks I made previous are important (like using MULTIPLE) streams.

Creating your own playing positions

...

But stringing together ECs we can create an odd placement that we like like quads, dozens, so on and so forth. We don’t even have to look at the numbers or wheels.

...

7 â€" 1 unit on red. Win.
29 â€" 2 units on black. Win. We got the win at odds of 3/1

4 â€" 1 unit on red. Loss
18 

...

This is not a progression. This is not letting it ride. This is an example of stitching together simple EC components to create an odd that is better than even return. Now the possibilities are endless and everyone can create opportunities based on their comfort and style of play. You can create dozens, quads, splits, all possible odds through stitching together these components.

first bet on EC
When lose, stop (-1)
When win, let it ride (so you now bet 2 numbers on straight):
When lose: -1
when win: +71

...

See the pattern? ... is as if I'm betting on 72 numbers

"Dozen that defined the previous cycle same as the dozen defined the next cycle - 306 ~ 61%"
"We saw that when in cycles, the same dozen to that defined previous cycle to define the current cycle is more than 60%."
--Priyanka

"You will find that the probability that a repeat has the same half as the starting number is larger than 50%"
--reddwarf

[falkor2k15]

"Girl, you know it's true!"

[plolp]

Who is Papryka ?

[falkor2k15]

Who is Papryka ?

[DoctorSudoku]

Gilius-Falkor,
Interesting group of quotes that you have curated and listed in your thread-starting post.

Thanks for drawing our attention to them.

[RouletteGhost]

Just when you thought it was over.....

Things must be empty at the random thoughts forum.

[falkor2k15]

Just when you thought it was over.....

Things must be empty at the random thoughts forum.

"Don't worry, be happy!"

[RouletteGhost]

Don't be annoying again

Make a conspiracy blog if that's what you got to do

No one  wants to read that crap with roulette.

[falkor2k15]

When Reddwarf was posting about Non-Random, Priyanka was still playing Snake:

But it's partly Red's fault for letting others take credit for his work and not coming out to say something...

[maestro]

falkor since you are so good at cracking things can you please shine some light on this one...

i wanted to ask normy but did not see him on the chat..

see the link


link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=uu5Xc2zk9GU

[RouletteGhost]

In regards to post #1 in this thread

You refer to priyanka as "her"

You still know so much that isn't so

[DoctorSudoku]

In regards to post #1 in this thread

You refer to priyanka as "her"

You still know so much that isn't so

On this particular issue of Priyanka's gender, I think Gilius-Falkor is (probably) correct in thinking that she is a female.

Priyanka's  writing style is more typical of that of females than that of males.

Here is a specific example that I remember from the top of my head. A couple of months ago, you started a thread titled, "Priyanka is not the problem."

To which she replied that she gets "put off"when people starts threads with her name in it (see the link below to her message).

link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=18912.msg176805#msg176805

I doubt too many males would react to the thread as offensive or use the term, "put off" to describe his feelings.

It is much more likely that a female would treat the thread (or its title) as offensive and use the specific term, "put off."

I firmly believe that Priyanka is a female (of Indian origin and living in the UK).

[falkor2k15]

More importantly: who is Reddwarf?? Priyanka sees herself like this:


But really Reddwarf/rrbb is the intellectual giant whose shoulders Priyanka rests upon:

[nottophammer]

message to oneself, never look in this shite thread again, in fact, in anything that you post

[falkor2k15]

That's you there, mate... circled in red...