How to play and win with VdW (from "Random Thoughts")

[cht]

Does Nickmsi still maintain this believe that the use of VdW theorem can possibly generate non-random play that Priyanka proposed on RT thread ?

[winkel]

Betting on a possible AP?
I just have one question
How is a win in five tries guaranteed
We have to choose the correct AP. Still a guess?

In a random game there is never a guarantee. You should know that.
If you had read my first post, you would have seen, that I only go for 6 spins. so there are no 5 tries possible.

[winkel]

1. B
2. B
3. R -1
4. R
5. B -1
6. B
7. R -1
8. R -1
9. R or B = mutual

The problem with playing it in it's basic format is when you start getting consecutive games like the above

or

1. B
2. B
3. R -1
4. B
5. B
6. R -1
7. R -1
8. R or B = mutual

This can go on for a while and you can be easily down double figure units just flat betting.

Like ATI said, I don't really think it's supposed to be played like this and this info is really nothing new. Everyone was talking about it 2 years ago. It's like GUT getting regurgitated every couple of years. How's that going?

your first reply to this thread was more accurate, describing your intelligence.

I said max. 6 spins and after a loss restart with last two spins:
restart at spin 6 with
6. B
7. R -1
8. R -1 no mutual bet for spin 9!!!!!! It is only saying "R"
9. R or B = mutual

same for second example: no mutual bet for spin 8

[wiggy]

It's not going to guarantee anything though is it?

You are still 50/50 as to if R or B comes on spin 9. How does doing it your way change the odds in our favour.

Thanks.

[cht]

It's not going to guarantee anything though is it?

You are still 50/50 as to if R or B comes on spin 9. How does doing it your way change the odds in our favour.

Thanks.

I'm all ears. Prof Winkel ?

[winkel]

It's not going to guarantee anything though is it?
Do you have such a betselection? No? Then shut up!
You are still 50/50 as to if R or B comes on spin 9. How does doing it your way change the odds in our favour.

Thanks.

Again: What are you talking about spin 9? I don´t recommend to wait till spin 9!

You can´t change odds! You only can play intelligent. So this is nothing for you!

[winkel]

I'm all ears. Prof Winkel ?

Are you also "all eyes? Did you read? Did you understand what van der Waerden proofed?

He said: it is 100% guaranteed, that in a row of 9 randomly sorted 2 colours there is at least 1 AP.
I say: In a row of 6 there is one AP with a probability of 68,71%
I try to find this one AP!

[wiggy]

LoL....so you are spouting nonsense which offers no advantage over someone just walking up to the table and playing R or B.

You can carve it up anyway you like. Pretend the 9th spin is now the 4th spin in your example if you like. 

Pretty funny really.

[cht]

Are you also "all eyes? Did you read? Did you understand what van der Waerden proofed?

He said: it is 100% guaranteed, that in a row of 9 randomly sorted 2 colours there is at least 1 AP.
I say: In a row of 6 there is one AP with a probability of 68,71%
I try to find this one AP!

I understand Van der Waerden's theorem properly.

I do understand what you say about "In a row of 6 there is one AP with a probability of 68,71%"
Nothing wrong with what you said.

Does this rolling method you proposed inside this row of 6 give an edge ?

Is there any particular reason for it to be winning bets itlr ?

Tbh I tested VdW in similar segregated fashion for the same reason, 3-6row, 7-9row.

link:s://i.gyazo.com/89cf65ba2ab2c172e2dda6c1aba5bd07.png

[RouletteGhost]

I am trying to wrap my head around it

But to me it seems that even in perfect circumstances the next spin can be anything. So I'm not sure how this helps

If someone could help me understand

Maybe I'm just missing a piece of this puzzle.

[MoneyT101]

I am trying to wrap my head around it

But to me it seems that even in perfect circumstances the next spin can be anything. So I'm not sure how this helps

If someone could help me understand

Maybe I'm just missing a piece of this puzzle.

I haven't attempted or tested what winkel is proposing but my reply is to everyone that say what's the point of tracking it a different way

I'll use notto for example since he plays heavy using gut/ktf/which ever name it has now, I lost track sorry

Notto plays based on a lot of tested data and based on the averages of what happens most and with that information they found something that works for them

Non random games will contain the same data as a random game and yes nothing changes!  Odds don't change!

What you need to understand is the view!!  The data is being tracked to see something else.  Non random has it's on math based on the tracking.  This data can help because the swings are shorter

The environment on which you decide to bet is more controlled.  This new data has its own strengths and weaknesses; it's on limits!

This is stage 1!  Sorry to tell you, in stage 1 you have no game and you will not win with this information alone.

So for everyone complaining about random thoughts and non random, YOU ARE RIGHT!  Your still in the same place. 

Only difference now is that you have something with less variance with very good averages on the whole data set.

[MoneyT101]

btw if you learned anything from Pri videos when she played her bets seemed mechanical but they were always CHANGING!

Here is a tip for everyone.  Any bet that stays the same will lose!

[cht]

I have a lot of respect for Prof Winkel. His ideas helped me design a flatbet game that has a 66+% winrate on a 2 to 1 payout. My  1st real money test quadrupled the initial balance with a whopping 80% winrate over 1200 spins, small online account though. I owe it to him.

I've been reading silently ProfW on this VdW theorem and if anyone on this board who's to truly unravel the real edge, it's got to be him. A lot of other claims to me is hotair BS by my standards. I know I'm on almost the same page with him and this is my 2nd and final project with this roulette forum, I'm done. I hope he contributes more...

[falkor2k15]

Only difference now is that you have something with less variance with very good averages on the whole data set.

I never found any Non-Random bet selection with less variance or less wild swings. Are you sure you have found this yourself or are you just repeating the myth?

[Nickmsi]

What’s the big difference between a Non Random and a Random system?

A Random system is subject to the wild swings of variance.

A Non Random system is more stable and subject to less variance.

I tested3 sessions of 3,000 spin each for both a Random system, FTL (Follow The Last) and a Non Random VDW.  Flat betting graphs attached.

Notice the results for FTL had a high of +34 and a low of -122 (a 156 swing).  It had an overall loss of -121.

The 2nd picture (VDW Stability had a high of 49 and a low of -44 (a swing of 93, notice the symmetry) and ended up +28 units.

Which system would require a lower bankroll?

Which system would be safer to add a progression to?

Which system do you think has a better chance of ending up in profit?

Remember this is only for No Zero or baccarat.  I have not yet finished testing with a SZ table.

Cheers
Nick