My Holy Grail For Sale.

[denzie]

With all do respect. ... there's nothing hgish at Vaddis.

[DoctorSudoku]

With all do respect. ... there's nothing hgish at Vaddis.

I agree -- and in my humble opinion, the primary reason for that is that Vaddi's method is searching for numbers that have appeared once and (this is the key) that MIGHT REPEAT.

That is actually quite different from seemingly similar methods that advocate betting on numbers that have ALREADY REPEATED.

[Steve]

Why the big deal with repeaters? Anyone who properly tests will find the odds of a repeater spinning next or anytime soon haven't changed at all.

Its pure fallacy. Its actually really, really old news.

[Bayes]

Agreed, there is no inherent advantage in repeaters or hot numbers. Show me even one test which conclusively proves that they're better than picking numbers randomly. And there is nothing special about the "Law of the Third" either. All it says is that as you record more numbers there is an increasing chance that the number's you've already recorded will show up, and a decreasing chance that the numbers which haven't hit, won't. This because you're choosing from a pool of more/less numbers. That's just basic probability and therefore already factors in the unfair payout. In which case, how can there be any advantage? 

[falkor2k15]

Repeaters provide a structure - and as long as you track repeaters from both sides of the coin instead of just your favourite - stats based on triggering such repeaters will become stable across all data sets. Uniques can also contain structure too - that's why some permutations are rarer than others. So I think repeaters are important for establishing a framework without necessarily betting on them each time.

[INTERCEPTOR]

I must agree with Steve and Bayes, I have done many tests on repeaters and non hit numbers and it lead me to nowhere, better results I have on outside bets and chaos theory can rely only on roulette table not numbers.

[Steve]

It makes sense to first research what other people have tried. Don't repeat the mistakes. It just takes a bit of research and understanding.

Falkor, there is no framework with repeaters. Its all just random, or at least we know the approaches that don't work. Why repeat the same mistakes?

I'm not saying it's completely unpredictable. Just that the proven ineffective methods don't need to be tested again by every new generation of players.

[RouletteGhost]

I think the whole basis around using hot numbers to be successful at roulette is the fact that in MOST 37 spin cycles there will be at least one number that has hit more then twice

Therefore betting on numbers that have hit twice within 37 spins for a 3rd could yield profit

[ozon]

Ok, we have a system structure, we cycle 37 spins, we only play numbers that hit 2 times, we finish the session after  first  hit or after 37 spins with not hits.
The question is whether it will generate profit flat bet ,, do we need some kind of progression as it does TG?

[falkor2k15]

Ok, we have a system structure, we cycle 37 spins, we only play numbers that hit 2 times, we finish the session after  first  hit or after 37 spins with not hits.
The question is whether it will generate profit flat bet ,, do we need some kind of progression as it does TG?

Check out Priyanka's video.. might give you some ideas to improve on that... link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=3J4Lf7zxk4I

[Herby]

And there is nothing special about the "Law of the Third" either.

In its Limit this "Law" is just a number: 1/e with e ... Euler Number

[RouletteGhost]

Ok, we have a system structure, we cycle 37 spins, we only play numbers that hit 2 times, we finish the session after  first  hit or after 37 spins with not hits.
The question is whether it will generate profit flat bet ,, do we need some kind of progression as it does TG?

A progression could be used safely in my opinion

For multiple reasons
1- we will most likely only be betting 1 to 3 numbers so it would be very very mild

2- if we don't get a hit this cycle we most likely will next cycle. Change numbers after 37 spins. Start cycle as you sit at table.

[DoctorSudoku]

Therefore betting on numbers that have hit twice within 37 spins for a 3rd could yield profit

A progression could be used safely in my opinion

only be betting 1 to 3 numbers so it would be very very mild

If you are planning to bet on 2-peats hoping that one of them will become a 3-peat, then you will be frequently betting on way more than 1-3 numbers.

According to the law of the thirds, in a cycle of 38 numbers, one-third of the numbers (10-12 numbers) do NOT show up even once.

This means that to "compensate" for their absence, 10-12 OTHER numbers will have to appear more than once.

In order to apply your above betting suggestion of catching one of these 2-peats becoming a 3-peat, most of the time you will have to bet on more than 1-3 numbers.

It may not be as high as 10-12 numbers all the time, but frequently it will be in that neighborhood (the first 3-peat number appears late in the 38-number cycle -- usually).

[denzie]

Around spin 24ish. ... But Really stop thinking about 1 cycle. It won't work. Think further.

Anyway best of luck to all. 

[Madi]

@denzie

Does it win everytime? I mean in 3 or 4 cycle? Not in 7 days session.