37 back to basics

[MoneyT101]

To win is not a problem,
to win and stay in profit with a maximum of of 2736 units is the art.
And this without progression ?

I can't sit here and tell you what his exact method is, but I can see how it required 2736 units. Which btw that's the max.  It doesn't mean it would ever get there.

It goes back to making sure you win every possible sequence.  The regular method can't accomplish it by itself to get you 100%.  But you don't need to get 100%.  You can use the regular and still win.  The reason why you want the 100% is because it can beat cheating rng.

And about 1 time out of 38.
I took the probability that the cycle is 38 long. It will come out only 1 time in a billion (there should be another hundred zeros here). That is, 1 time in a billion you will receive a gain in cycle 38, the question is - how much is this gain? He did not say...

He said he will make atleast 1 unit on every 38 cycle.

[Herbyx]

He said he will make atleast 1 unit on every 38 cycle.

Good morning,
here's 5:30 in the morning.
For me interesting if it still holds:
at least 1 unit on every 38 cycle - no progression

if you can't win "1 unit on every 38 cycle" there's a black hole in the system and you can play until this black hole gets all your money.
Recently I programmed such a complex system with progression.
You know what followed: winning, winning for days, followed by a very expensive crash.

[Herbyx]

The last few days even one of the greatest mathematician Erdös was cited here.
Erdös and millions of mathematicians didn't find a strategie - we can ?
So keep on going. 

[TRD]

You know what followed: winning, winning for days, followed by a very expensive crash.

Your bankroll is too big .. & start thinking of designing & implementing inter-session modules, scaling on the performance of your base-system, with super-small bankroll <100u ideally,  there's room for perhaps a more. That is, if I can suggest something ..




@Mel, so you basically confirmed that there's no increased accuracy in bet selection alone, that's what I was interested in -- presumably, all you've done is learnt how to minimize the cost, lower the volatility & thus increase cost/reward ratio .. so that you by design self-generate the least amount of exposition, that then requires the least amount of hits to profit.

If wrong, correct.

Something I wrote long time ago:
Minimized volatility requires the shortest intervals of variance turning in favor.



What I am attempting to determine is, even though the positioning of MM might not be consistent ev+, is there an improvement overall with bs, in shorter-term intervals of spins, session length (& to anyone who has an inkling .. don't even get started to talk to me about an infinite test of gazillion of spins converging all bs types to 0.027 -- every tire type gets slick after driving with it for 137 years).. if you were to just use last outcome ..  would your results be the same?

Or is something in the way you utilize the knowledge of streams & PP in itself that makes the surplus, @Mel?

[ᶦ ᵃᵐ|Ä-łëx]

Unique vs 37

[MoneyT101]

if you can't win "1 unit on every 38 cycle" there's a black hole in the system and you can play until this black hole gets all your money.
Recently I programmed such a complex system with progression.
You know what followed: winning, winning for days, followed by a very expensive crash.

I already addressed this

@Mel, so you basically confirmed that there's no increased accuracy in bet selection alone, that's what I was interested in -- presumably, all you've done is learnt how to minimize the cost, lower the volatility & thus increase cost/reward ratio .. so that you by design self-generate the least amount of exposition, that then requires the least amount of hits to profit.

If wrong, correct.

Something I wrote long time ago:
Minimized volatility requires the shortest intervals of variance turning in favor.



What I am attempting to determine is, even though the positioning of MM might not be consistent ev+, is there an improvement overall with bs, in shorter-term intervals of spins, session length (& to anyone who has an inkling .. don't even get started to talk to me about an infinite test of gazillion of spins converging all bs types to 0.027 -- every tire type gets slick after driving with it for 137 years).. if you were to just use last outcome ..  would your results be the same?

Or is something in the way you utilize the knowledge of streams & PP in itself that makes the surplus, @Mel?

TRD you are getting way to technical lol...

If the odds say i should win 1 in 36 and I'm getting 1 in 24... is my accuracy increased? Or it's not increased because I minimized the cost/lowered volatility?

Spin 1- L
Spin 2- L
Spin 3-W

Or

Spin 1- W
Spin 2- L
Spin 3-L

These 3 spins are one game to me.  So if my cycle ends on spin 3 and I'm +1.  That's my result for that cycle.

I don't care about winning and losing spins until the end of a cycle! You cannot beat individual spins.

It all depends on how you look at it. The accuracy is increased because you are getting wins at better odds in the end.

At the end of the day we are trying to win!  Or am I wrong?

If I'm flat betting every spin....If I'm not picking accurate bets then I'm losing and my bankroll is going down.

So the bets must be accurate to cause an increase in bankroll without progression.

[MoneyT101]

you were to just use last outcome ..  would your results be the same?

Or is something in the way you utilize the knowledge of streams & PP in itself that makes the surplus, @Mel?

If you use last outcome only for each spin then you are playing individual spins and you aren't going to beat the game.

Maybe you can but idk how to do it

[d80]

MoneyT101,How do you analyze to bet when have 2 differents EC at cycle? see this your image below as example.We have 19 and 16.How do you choose bet at High if before we have 2 differents EC?


gcdnb.pbrd.co/images/tWfa0FgxbeEE.png

[MoneyT101]

MoneyT101,How do you analyze to bet when have 2 differents EC at cycle?

That bet strategy I showed in the simulator is not 100% how it should look like.  It was just one of steps in my process of learning what was needed and its public space; to many eyes.

But what you just pointed out might or might not be of value. 

[ᶦ ᵃᵐ|Ä-łëx]

Mel the truth is I and many others can't get what Gordon has discovered and because I can't see as far as him, I am getting better results with (cycles too) but there is something more I guess or maybe is already there...
Let's say I bet numbers but my criteria for what to bet are Lines, is that close to what you are doing?

[TRD]

@Mel .. when I say last outcome .. I mean;

that already includes the low-derived fact
&
that last number out, as a qualifier to generate an actual position, is then used to determine the appropriate best payout, strategically speaking, based on the PP
& as well, that there may be more, multiple qualifiers used in per spin placement .. as a varying interval of last appeared qualifiers, so potentially a few of them;


vs


using a less strict, or more adaptive bs based on the repeats & repeat cycle itself (original, derived streams, defining element).

[TRD]

Yes, based on the 6th comment, there was something extra pointed, & in the way it was said implied that neither Mel got to comprehend it & become aware of it.

So, perhaps, its maybe better 6th answers the above question .. but that seems to be a vain request, even to get a just confirmation about it only.

[MoneyT101]

Let's say I bet numbers but my criteria for what to bet are Lines, is that close to what you are doing?

Yes and no... you have the overall idea now find the balance

[MoneyT101]

@TRD

Let me put it this way for you.  Using the derived set you can forget about groups and what the numbers mean since they keep changing.  You can create your own groups and it will behave the same as the original roulette groups

It doesn't matter whether you use derived with roullette or just roullette numbers.  The derived set might help you guys more cause it will show you clearly where numbers are. But in the end the regular set works the same.(atleast for me)

All that matters and all that never changes is repeats and unique. That's the big secret!

This fact jumps across compartments.  It's the only thing you need to play with.

Yes, based on the 6th comment, there was something extra pointed, & in the way it was said implied that neither Mel got to comprehend it & become aware of it.

It's possible who knows.

You can't say you know exactly what someone does without also showing the application of all the other details like bankroll amount and progressive bets/flat bets. If you don't have an answer then you cant claim you know his method!


All of this I can prove with my ideas on dyksexlic method.  But even still I don't know if it's exactly how he did it unless he told me. 

But I can tell you why he used that bankroll and I did show you the progressive flatbets in my 3 unit example.  Not in detail but enough to get the idea.

Yes there's things I haven't shared and there are things that I shared that were never clear.

But while you guys are here waiting for more answers; you can use what you have already and make it work for you.

[ᶦ ᵃᵐ|Ä-łëx]

Mel, can you say me (if you can say that) if you focus on one part or if there is a need to combine it as in the photo?