Bounded / Unbounded

[Blueprint]

link:s://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounded_set

Can this be used? 

[The General]

link:s://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounded_set

Can this be used?

Nope.  It's no more effective than a...

[Steve]

You have to consider what does that have to do with where the ball lands? Ask that question for every system or bet selection method. Almost nobody asks the question. Almost every system fails. Coincidence??

[Steve]

Some brainiacs might even say it's not all about where the ball lands, because there are "other" ways of beating roulette. It's the same as saying AP isn't the only way. AP just means ways to improve odds.

[Blueprint]

Again, the point is way over your head. 

You clearly don’t know how to think for yourself but just keep repeating old news.  I don’t need a physical ball or wheel. 

[Steve]

Sorry. Roulette is all about the wheel and ball. How is it not? Teach me. Unlike most players, I actually consider facts to be facts when they are verifiable. I don't believe in fairies. I've seen no proof of them.

[Firefox]

This is all about the non-random idea. A lot of the mathematics such as Van der Waerden is recognised theory but unfortunately the application in advantage bet selection at roulette is useless.

The non random gurus claim they "know the way to win" yet I notice they are still desperately scrabbling around in long threads "testing" and "seeking the right application". They come up against similar problems  to the Marty addicts.

Yes there are cycles, and the pigeons will eventually come home, but non of this is exploitable. EIther you don't know which dozen or colour will complete the cycle or you don't know when the cycle will end. The same with repeaters. You know there will be repeaters in a column, but you don't know when and which ones. In the end you are no further forward for advantage bet selection.

If they had the answers, they wouldn't still be asking questions. Priyanka talked a good game, but was still full of questions and equivocation.

So to conclude, as much use as a potato.

[Let Me Win]

What do you think of this Mr Firefox?

Start in the top left corner on zero.
If result is red go across or if result is black go down.

Bet amount shown in the grid depending where you are.

Keep following the grid until you fall off either by going across or down.

When you fall off you will have won 20 units or lost 100 units.

The only way to lose 100 units is for exactly ten reds and ten blacks to appear within 20 spins.

[Firefox]

Probabilty of 10 reds and 10 blacks is

20!/(20-10)!10! / (2^20) = 0.176

Probability of anything else is

1-0.176 = 0.824

Expected win/loss = -0.176 x100  + 0.824x20 = 16.48 - 17.6 = minus 1.12 units. (Assuming your figures are correct for 100/20 loss/win).

Does not look a very good idea.

There's no way to win using a staking system and numbers alone.

[Let Me Win]

The figures are correct.

If I find myself up a few units after a few spins I can end the session there without allowing the balance to occur.

[Firefox]

I should add that since we are neglecting zero, the above should sum to zero.

The house only gets a rake when zero comes up.

But your figures of 20 and 100 may be suspect. For example in the top line, if we go right across with no blacks we win 21 units, not 20.

Check my calculation of the probability and see if it is correct.

[6th-sense]

link:s://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounded_set

Can this be used?

Is this directly connected to what you know? 
Or is it just a general question to point in the direction on the other thread

[Blueprint]

Is this directly connected to what you know? 
Or is it just a general question to point in the direction on the other thread

Hi 6th, I clearly don’t know anything according to the experts so take it with a grain of salt

Here’s one thing I do know.  Dependence creates a bias. 

This is not my assumption but a FACT.

[6th-sense]

Only listening to you here buddy..is this the best example to look at in your opinion

[Loc]

Sorry for off topic question, but how can i send private messages here? Can't find the option.