Can Parachuting help?

[Scarface]

Falknor, this is what you told me the other day

"The permutation from hell can hit you any time. Doesn't matter how much time or how many spins you delay between sessions - your luck will run out."

That applies to you too!  The question is what are you going to do about it.  Do you follow your simulations?  Or do you make a change with your bet selection?  Negative variance can hit us at anytime, but there are no rules we can't make changes how we play 

[falkor2k15]

Oh, I forgot the other type of parachuting, making it (3):

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

becomes

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

We do that because CL2 is below expectation and so is Order 1 (or specifically the option CL2o1).

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.

Trying to get a discussion going about these seldom mentioned concepts. Plenty of unanswered questions as I progress and try to answer them - single-handedly so far.

"The permutation from hell can hit you any time. Doesn't matter how much time or how many spins you delay between sessions - your luck will run out."

That applies to you too!  The question is what are you going to do about it.  Do you follow your simulations?  Or do you make a change with your bet selection?  Negative variance can hit us at anytime, but there are no rules we can't make changes how we play

I already told you. I hope it can be avoided through combination bets since combinations are more limited than permutations. If we follow the advanced recovery methods discussed herein we should hopefully be able to avoid the combination from hell and find a winning combination before we get hit by a losing permutation.

[Scarface]

The longer you run your simulations, you will eventually find it. 

[falkor2k15]

The longer you run your simulations, you will eventually find it.

Meaning you haven't understood what I told you last comment regarding permutations vs. combinations. Here's one quote from rrbb, but I am trying to find a second one:
"because the number of numbers is limited (37), the number of combinations I can make are limited. It is impossible to to have a infinite set of combinations with a finite set of numbers...  "
"Point is that if we look at roulette as game with limited number of combinations, it can be beaten"
There was one more quote I cannot find, but again, it was about there being less combinations than sequences/permutations.

[falkor2k15]

Not forgetting other ways to increase the span of a session through multiple repeats or outer cycles with higher MLE ratios instead of parachuting to lines:
1... 62% chance repeat will be on 1, i.e.:

11
121
1231
131, etc.

121... 71% chance 2nd repeat will be on 1, i.e.:

1 2 1 3 1
1 2 1 1
1 2 1 1
1 2 1 1
1 2 1 2 3 1
1 2 1 1
1 2 1 3 2 3 1

1... 44% chance repeat will be on Cycle Length 2, i.e.:

121
122

CL2... 76% chance repeating cycle length will be CL2, i.e.:

CL2 CL2
CL2 CL1 CL2
CL2 CL1 CL3 CL2

But then it becomes too complicated to play.

Quite disappointed to discover that the 2nd repeat is a dead end in terms of Cycle Lengths - 66% for CL2+ with no point to really stitching multiple spins. 2nd repeats are not comfortable to track anyhow. However, there are the front runners as quoted above @ 71%, i.e. Order 1 (and to a lesser extent Order 2). Specifically the stats look like this depending on how long the first repeat took:

CL1…   

21494   81%
5171   19%
26665   

CL2…   

25069   70%
10678   30%
35747   

CL3…   

11195   63%
6628   37%
17823   

Of course, with a ratio as high as 80% we wouldn't expect expect the front runner to hit immediately, and it might not hit at all, as there's a danger of being overtaken by another front runner or taking increasingly longer to hit. This is the classic problem of playing hotties as was discussed in the Turbo topic. Such front runner bets, as discovered in this topic, cannot be stitched or parlayed. There's few ways of playing them in fact - the only options being 2 kinds of parachutes:
CL3... has the same options as a single repeat (3-hit Order 1; 2-hit Order 1; 1-hit Order 1)
CL2... and CL1... have up to 4 hits and 5 hits, respectively, that could be parachuted down to 1 hit.

I guess CL1 (first repeat) is a good entry point as it leads to the 80% ratio for the 2nd repeat that would be ideal to begin a new session. Likewise, CL1 > CL1 would benefit the 3rd repeat with an even higher ratio. As mentioned in this topic though, higher ratios are not better since the payouts are less - but they act as a good starting point to begin a parachute.

Finally, we have the true parachute to Lines Order 1 that was suggested by Priyanka a long time ago. The first repeat ratio starts at 46%, which is less than dozens (63%), but of course results in a better payout. What's interesting is that the 2nd repeat on dozens is 80% (following CL1) within 5 hits, but the first line repeat is 46% within 6 hits. Therefore, the parachute's recovery is based not only on the number of hits to potentially encapsulate an Order 1 front runner, but also on how many other sleepers could potentially overtake it (Orders 2+).

Let's say we could boost Dozens and Lines to 99% by following what I refer to as the "Non-Random singularity" of increasing ratios... prior to reducing spins or parachuting, would you start on Dozens or Lines? I guess we would start on dozens still, and we could use the lines to recover with better payouts, and the dozens would be expected to hit in the short-term. If an Order 1 is missed on Dozens then often it is also missed on Lines (take my word for it), so is perfect for parachuting in order to target both. Therefore, with Order 1 front runners we are looking to parachute in 1 direction only. Hedging is also applicable hereafter for advanced strategies.

So those are the only weapons for dealing with hot numbers. Anything else you might consider in Turbo's topic could potentially waste up to 3 years of your life as it did for me. Incidentally, most recovery techniques discussed here are based on below maths expectation events/cold, albeit within a repeats framework, but of course you could target hot as well. It really doesn't matter as, again, it's the repeats framework and when to retrack that counts - regardless of hot/cold. You may even have noticed that some of Priyanka's videos target cold, whereas other videos target hot. It's synonymous with the other opposites I mentioned at the start of this topic: recovery vs. accelerated profit - you can parachute on a win instead of a loss. So to reiterate yet again: this is about techniques to help us with a break even game.

[falkor2k15]

One last thing about the front-runners: if you bring in Orders 2+, i.e. 2nd place front runners and beyond, the payouts will be reduced and may not compensate, but it might still be possible to balance it and bring in enough additional front-runners providing the payout retains enough for adequate recovery. So I guess that opens up the possibility of parachuting bi-directionally based on reducing front-runners first from lines to dozens before moving back to lines.

One thing I might attempt to measure is whether one particular recovery option is better than another besides what we already know in general: extra hits, stitching, parlaying, parachuting and hedging, etc.

[falkor2k15]

Oh, one more thing:

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.

The only application for the above - now that we have a better understanding - is that we could increase the number of repeats whilst parachuting down on the number of front runners we cover. So that helps with putting each recovery option in the most appropriate order - but might restrict bi-directional play. I can already envisage that the best strategy would hedge both lines and dozens at the same time; each ascending repeat level and descending number of front runners would comprise a series of descending hits per target - a complicated parachute formation indeed.

[falkor2k15]

Not forgetting other ways to increase the span of a session through multiple repeats or outer cycles with higher MLE ratios instead of parachuting to lines:
1... 62% chance repeat will be on 1, i.e.:

11
121
1231
131, etc.

121... 71% chance 2nd repeat will be on 1, i.e.:

1 2 1 3 1
1 2 1 1
1 2 1 1
1 2 1 1
1 2 1 2 3 1
1 2 1 1
1 2 1 3 2 3 1

1... 44% chance repeat will be on Cycle Length 2, i.e.:

121
122

CL2... 76% chance repeating cycle length will be CL2, i.e.:

CL2 CL2
CL2 CL1 CL2
CL2 CL1 CL3 CL2

But then it becomes too complicated to play.

Here are specific stats for the 2 main outer cycle constants, including the one above:


The Outer CL ratios are quite similar to standard inner repeats on dozens, albeit comprising more spins. Therefore, they provide an opportunity to parachute to: inner > outer. However, stitching them often involves missing out spins or deadlocks, so any such attempts at stitching or parlaying may be futile:

11... bet 2+3
11 12... no bet or bet 1+2
11 121... no bet or bet 2+3
11 121 12... bet 1+2
11 121 122 = CL1, CL2, CL2 = Outer CL2

vs.

1... bet 2+3
12... bet 1+2
121 = Inner CL2

Both inner and outer have 2 definite bets, but the outer cycle has 2 optional bets, which I suppose could be used in succession to parachute the Outer CL2.

As for Outer Order that is sure complicated! Actually, it's kind of tied to the previous optional bets, which are expressing both Outer CL2 and Order 1. Something similar is happening with the most wackiest way of playing 3 options to date - covered on page 1:

Note: this covers the same concept that Priyanka used with "ECs as Quads" and some other examples she gave.

That needs further exploration to try to uncover potential new parachuting and hedging methods, which I'm sure must exist within those events spread out across so many extra spins.

[falkor2k15]

Next I'll explore parachuting to positions before returning to hedging:

[falkor2k15]

Another look at the inner vs. outer cycle first - since outer CL targets are harder to play without combining with the Outer Order targets:

INNER



OUTER


Some outer options are beginning to acquire higher ratios that are more playable - with stitching and parlaying - compared to 2nd+ repeats, and at the same time the spins are increasing. With traditional parachuting though, the ratios are always decreasing as the payouts increase. The outer cycle method would therefore seem to offer the most potential for guaranteeing recovery the longer you play, but unfortunately becomes increasingly complex to track.

[falkor2k15]

Last thing about the outer cycles, including the wacky 3 option method (Inner High-Low; Outer 3 options), is that you can combine unofficial parachutes (increasing spins, stitching, parlaying) at both inner-outer levels to make the game different each time albeit based around the same targets.

Onto positions...

Next I'll explore parachuting to positions before returning to hedging:

Dozen Cycles and their corresponding Position Cycles are created equally with the same ratios and payouts, so there's really no point in parachuting from one to the other since we require extra spins - not less. And both cycles often close at the same time. That only leaves a couple of remaining considerations. When we parachute to Lines we begin to target events that are common across both the dozen cycle and the line cycle. We could start out that way with dozens + positions bypassing parachuting altogether, providing they are in sync. Hedging is also applicable here - better suited when cycles are out of sync. One hedge method I already tried, but did not measure, was targeting change in states (open/closed) for both cycles simultaneously using a single bet (see above chart).

Positions are extremely overrated due to rrbb's "outside the box" topic. There really is only that single consideration (above) as far as I can tell - the targeting of common events (hedged or with equal overlapping) - discussed in private circles and commented on by Priyanka:
"line 1 - corresponding element in new set is 1.
Now on playing for repeat, you play line 1 and Pos 1 which is again line 1. Can you see that here instead of playing two
lines you are playing only one line as you are able to lose apples?"
Of course it breaks even during the long run, but we need to assess if this concept has any recovery potential in terms of combined ratios and payouts.

[falkor2k15]

So we are almost reaching the end of this study. Stitching, parlaying captures more spins and increases payouts; hedging could potentially capture more wins by cancelling out wins and losses - converting them both to a win. Overlapped bets are still in need of testing across dozen + line cycles as well as dozen + position cycles.

In this topic every possibility of creating a strategy to combat a break even game has been explored. Besides what I've covered the only other things that exist are different Non-Random frameworks, such as Friends, VdW and Erdos; this whole topic has been about Pigeonhole Principle (PHP).

Before final testing and final strategy implementation, there is all but a single concept remaining. Priyanka addressed ratios as blue, green and red balls - each with a statistical quality (or irregularity) associated with them. However, some of her videos that target hot over cold, on the contrary, do not consider ratios whatsoever. Reddwarf doesn't seem to concentrate on ratios either, which he says is part of the prediction game, though he does kind of contradict himself at times. He seems to only consider stats that applies to all types of pigeons and repeats. In other words, he would play both inner cycles the same way as outer cycles. He would play dozen cycles the same way as line cycles. This is because the ratios are being ignored.

So what relevance does stitching, parachuting and hedging have in a PHP universe where ratios are not even considered?

Usually, Order 1 is favoured regardless of the pigeon ratios, and we can still reduce front runners without knowing their ratios. Uniques can still be stitched to repeats based on the number of pigeons and how we expect them to behave during a cycle. We can still target multiple pigeons with 1 bet - parachuted to 2 (stitched/parlayed) bets. And we can still parachute from anything with 3 options to something with 6 options. 

So the recovery techniques are not confined to ratios like roulette is not confined to hot/cold. Perhaps we can begin to develop a strategy that totally ignores ratios and payout odds, but still ends up recovering based on concepts discussed herein.

[junscissorhands]

Who is we ? You mean you.
Thanks for sharing your daily diary.

[falkor2k15]

Who is we ? You mean you.
Thanks for sharing your daily diary.

Any readers who may be following now or in 10 years time. Don't expect any other useful topics till then.

[junscissorhands]

You are going to singlehandedly beat roulette! My man!