Can Parachuting help?

[Steve]

Keep it simple.  Play what's hitting

Are you missing something?

[ego]

Well, I will share something, you might consider using positive progression in combination with parachute method.
For example, you will see one side getting very strong with EC where it can strike and go zig zag for several times in a row.
Regression Up & Pull kill such sequence and let you walk away with table limits, sometimes.
Another way is to use a three or four step Paroli and each time you lose your single unit without riding the wave you recoup using the parachute.
But the point it that does strikes with up as you win compensate any loss with the parachute method.

Cheers

[Steve]

Why would it help if provably you're just making larger independent bets with the same odds?

[ego]

No, you don't make larger bets or change the odds, the parachute method stays the same with or without additional positive progression.
The return on investment is better than just playing the parachute by itself.
But my parachute uses binomial probability calculation and are queal 50% probability no matter you play Dozen or Split or any other location.

That is my opinion and you can agree or disagree.

Cheers

[Steve]

Can you explain the math that proves it's better? Math isn't a matter of opinion.

I don't know enough about what you suggested, which is why im asking.

[falkor2k15]

I think this is the first time that Parachuting is really being properly analysed as a concept since the problem up until now has been understanding that Roulette is a break even game more so than a losing game, and having to accept that hot/cold cannot help bets of an independent nature. People need to move on from those concepts I feel. So we are left with trying to understand what positive effect, if any, parachuting, positive progression, stitching, and hedging has on a break even game. Rather than trying to gain direct edge we are considering whether it's actually possible to recover at a new high within a session (or within a finite set of spins as they say), but going beyond standard progression methodology used with sequences, and instead working through non-random combinations but with multiple targets in mind. My hope is that we may find a way to guarantee recovery against rare event combinations in a realm where the permutation from hell cannot find us (at least in this lifetime).

[falkor2k15]

Coming back to the above chart and exploring these concepts has resulted in new understandings for me in the short time since this topic began:

Spin 1: dozen 3
Spin 2: dozen 1+2
Spin 3: dozen 1+2
Spin 4: dozen 3
Spin 5: dozen 1+2

Game 1: CL2
Game 2: CL2
Game 3: CL1
Game 4: CL3
Game 5: CL2

Understand that with multiple games/multi-spin cycles we have more flexibility on how we play each game compared to single spin decisions.

The key learning here is with how to play CL2 and why it's usually 44% ratio (2 dozen bet stitched over 2 spins), but can be played as a reduced sequence @ 66% (1 spin). Why is one different to the other? Well, our decision on how to play CL2 affects how we let thru CL1 and CL3 in our sessions. So, by playing CL2 we have - indirectly - some control over CL1 and CL3 in terms of the distribution we are forging in a certain direction of extremity that we wish to recover from.

When you fail a 1-hit CL2 @ 66% instead of 44%, you are not failing on CL2 per se, but you are risking more CL1s and CL3s simply by playing it that way. And by using it at the start of a session you only risk CL3 since CL1 is missed out. You cannot do this with single spin targets. You cannot have indirect control over other outcomes except via hedging perhaps, but will come onto that in due course. Again, this is the first realisation of how multi-spin events coupled with concepts discussed herein may provide the tools for a different kind of game.

I think the secret being hidden from us with regards to roulette is not that there is edge, but that there might be a way to always recover a session; when I studied Priyanka's videos in more detail, he/she did not appear to be playing a fixed template that resulted in edge; but rather a combinatoric method of recovery.

[falkor2k15]

Here you can see that Priyanka got quite desperate and needed to recover with a progression after losing so many bets (in red). This is not indicative of edge. He also stated that when playing Quads he could have used X strategy, but the session never demanded it - reminiscent of recovery tactics. Finally, Priyanka said that besides cycles, parachuting and stitching are equally important, hence these are the final concepts in need of a better understanding before we can altogether dismiss him as a potential cheater. reddwarf also spoke a lot about stitching and hedging, so a topic like this is long overdue despite many myths having already been dispelled.

[falkor2k15]

Those are not the only observations regarding Priyanka's playing style. Here you can see she employed a similar recovery method using parachuting and hedging:

35 H36
22 H24s
26 H35
35 H36 - High (lose)
18 L23 - Dozen 3 (lose)
12 L12 - Line 6 (lose)
13 L23D - Line 6 (lose)
19 H24 - Line 6 + Dozen 2 + High (win)
15 L23S - Low (win)
9  L12 - Low x 2 (win)
13 L23S - Low (win)
7  L12 - Low (lose)
20 H24 - Dozen 2 (win)
18 L23S

Let's say she never got 4/5 wins after the hedge she may well have gone back to using it again in the same session before considering it won, at a new high. Again, this is not edge.

[falkor2k15]

I've updated/corrected the chart and put some of the main Line targets alongside:


Let's say our main bet is Dozens CL2 then we have some control over winning on a choice of outcomes that are unequal, but I would say my understanding was a bit exaggerated before. Betting double dozens on a single-spin, likewise, has a choice of outcomes but they are equal. Therefore, with cycle outcomes that are not equally-likely, rare/extreme events will become more apparent.

Missing out CL1, also, was a bit exaggerated before. It could still let in CL1s or CL3s, so only seems useful at the start of a session in order to begin the combination with a restricted selection of outcomes. Once the non-random sequence has begun then there's no further restriction possible unless you take a risk to miss out further CL1s - but you could end a session early if the CL1 does hit. Therefore, there must exist some kind of strategy based around missing out CL1 - same with Lines where you can miss out further CLs.

Main observations in the chart above: Lines have the highest ratios over Dozens; but Dozens can achieve a better payout from stitching and parlaying most likely events: CL2 vs. CL3-6. With Lines and Streets you cannot target a specific CL and hope to maintain a good ratio since CL2 and CL3 are both 27.8%. A CL3-6 bet is a bet for 3 unique lines = 55%. Therefore, an effective strategy may begin with a parachute from Lines to Dozens to target uniques and then a parachute back to Lines to target repeats.

So what else have we learnt?
*When we parachute on the same group we do so to target one or more outcomes that are below maths expectation, i.e. against an extreme event, and at the same time we are attempting to recover our losses based more around better payouts and less on increasing the units - achieved through additional stitched spins and/or covering less of the board.
*When we parachute from one group to another we do so in either direction for better payouts when the opportunity arises** and to target one or more outcomes simultaneously on both groups that are below maths expectation.

**The opportunity depends on the sophistication of the repeats framework and where each cycle is in relation to each other. If Dozens CL2 and Lines CL2 are below expectation then we can target them both with a double line bet for 2:1 payout instead of a double dozen bet @ 0.5:1. If we are lucky then we will kill 2 birds with 1 stone - otherwise we keep trying to be lucky (and patient) as part of the recovery process.

So now feels the right time to talk about hedging.

[falkor2k15]

Hedging is the most difficult concept to understand. When we parachute we expect to do so based on targeting separate unique/repeat events in separate groups (besides looking for better payouts of course). We could target Lines CL2 and Dozens CL2 using 2 lines (or just a single dozen) instead of 2 dozens. This is almost the same concept as hedging, but with parachuting we still only have 1 outcome based on ratios and payouts that we are familiar with from the separate stitching charts. With 1 such outcome based on simultaneous events that have been amalgamated into 1 bet we can either win or lose. However, hedging is different because the bet selection comprises, say, 2 overlapping groups with 2-3 outcomes typically, instead of just the 1:

1) Dozen wins
or
2) Lines wins
or
3) Dozen + Lines win

OR

1) Dozen wins
or
2) Dozens + Lines win

Therefore:
a) If all groups win at the same then I guess (without testing) that we can achieve higher payout odds than previously charted.
b) If one wins then we have reduced losses - or with the right balance of units we could still maybe reach a new high without breaking the bank - to be tested
c) If both lose, however, then we lose big, and recovery could take longer.

Above I have described only hedging/stitching on a single spin. The challenge is to understand hedging over multiple spins based on the shifting relationship between 2 cycles, such as Dozens + Lines:
link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=20445.0

Since we can sometimes lose a bet that prompts an advanced gradual recovery through stitching, parlaying and parachuting, and continue to lose bets throughout the recovery process, perhaps through the use of hedging - the final frontier - we may be able to eliminate losses through cancelling out bets, thereby aiding our recovery more effectively. There may even be some super advanced parachute option available within a hedged betting plan when things go wrong (to be explored).

Up next: the 2nd repeat + Outer cycles - can we further push the boundaries when it comes to ratios vs. payouts through a more sophisticated repeats framework?

[Steve]

In a few words, what is parachuting?

Please give a clear and simple example.

[falkor2k15]

In a few words, what is parachuting?

Please give a clear and simple example.

We expect a dozen to repeat in 3/4 spins = CL2.

Ratio = 44%; Payout = 0.5:1

1... bet 2+3
12... bet 1+2
121 = win

Let's say we haven't had a dozen repeat in 3 spins for a while now,

Ratio = 44%; Payout = 1.25:1

1... bet 2+3
12... bet 1+2 (let it ride)
121 = win

Let's say the above failed to happen that way on the first spin we can do the 2nd type of parachuting, to Lines:

1... bet 2+3
1 (line 2) 2 (line 3)... bet lines 2+3
121/232 = win!

The payout would then be higher than 0.5:1, and with let it ride (parlay) the payout would be even higher than 1.25:1

[falkor2k15]

The first type of parachuting (unofficial) is going from 1 spin to 2 spins for increased payouts through stitching:

12... bet 1+2
123 = lose

becomes

1... bet 2+3
12... bet 1+2
121 = win

but see previous example for true parachuting (from dozens to Lines)

[junscissorhands]

What exactly are you trying to tell people on this forum Falkor?

Do you like typing and making graphs?

You're good at that. Hands down.