Reverse-engineering the HG

[falkor2k15]

I've finally glimpsed the HG and now know what form it takes!!! 

This topic is dedicated to RouletteGhost... 

Firstly I'll try to describe it then later I'll show you the steps I took in the process of reverse-engineering it that lead to this new interpretation and understanding - though this is only the beginning of the journey and there's still a lot that's not fully understood.

You remember the Fractal example?

• Certain outcomes get locked out at certain times
• Some outcomes cannot immediately follow other outcomes
• Some areas are hit more than others despite outcomes being equally likely
• NEW: some paths are traveled more than others

What I found out is that when you chart random numbers through a non-random cycles framework you get to peer inside the "order-out-of-chaos" that is reminiscent of Dyksexlik's philosophical example of sunset and sunrise being the same event - but viewed from different perspectives.

Imagine some kind of nuclear reactor where many chemical reactions are taking place inside at the core. You can get a view of what's taking place in 320 x 240 resolution or even 640 x 480 - depending on what cycles framework you choose. I certainly don't have a 4K view of it yet - call it magic spectacles if you will.

So here's what's happening inside: every parallel stream you include in your cycles framework is orbiting around the same sequence of events that choose different paths - but some streams represent a better measure than others at different times throughout the sequence of events, contributing to our low resolution visual.


All parallel streams get "filtered" onto roughly the same set of paths - some more prominent than others.

The more streams you have the more cheaper or profitable you are able to transform the path that would otherwise be more expensive if traversed via a single stream that has no special properties. 

All paths start at the same place = X stream, spin 1; Y stream; spin 1; Z stream, spin 1, etc. Due to the fractal nature of these paths (see bullet points above), most lead off towards quick wins and quick recoveries via negative progression (have yet to test through positive progressions). But a few specific paths can lead off into big losses and break the bank; however, with more streams and better information/visual framework of the core you are able to travel further along these most desolate of paths. It remains to be determined whether the few undesirable pathways can be overcome - or whether they end up in the abyss - but you have control over which paths you take.

Combine each spin of Dozen Cycles + Line Cycles... Did you know that while some paths are more dominant over others, 5 outcomes are completely locked out and never cross each other:
D2 + LCL1
D3 + LCL1
D3 + LCL2
DCL1 + L5
DCL1 + L6

[Herby]

some kind of nuclear reactor where many chemical reactions are taking place inside at the core

Surely you meant nuclear reactions are taking place inside at the core.

The difference between gunpowder and the nuclear bomb. 

[falkor2k15]

First stage of reverse-engineering:

No stream/group is necessarily better than another stream/group per se. Regardless of whether you play dozens or numbers you are still expected to break even in the long run and ultimately lose the house edge depending on how many zeroes are in place.

The most important thing is to gain profit. If we were to play a single spin in our lifetime and hope for the best of coming away with some kind of profit then we would bet 34 numbers and hope to get a +1!

So that means we should concentrate on most likely events = MLE.

A single stream can offer us a single MLE target over one spin, such as 66% for 2 dozens.

A cycle can offer us similar MLE targets - but over the course of multiple spins.

When playing cycles each group starts off with different MLEs that reduce as more uniques show.
Dozen 1... bet 2+3 = 66%
Number 1... bet 35 numbers = 98%
Number 1,2... bet 34 numbers = 95% maybe? (=reduced MLE)

Once passing the average cycle length the MLEs start to grow again - but we cannot be sure which opportunities we will be presented with "on the way back" so to speak because the repeat can happen any time. The earlier the repeat comes the less MLE opportunities we get.

If we had about 18 unique numbers show then we can bet all 18 with a similar MLE of about 98% towards the end of the cycle - opposite to the start of the cycle, etc.

More later...

[falkor2k15]

Here I am comparing single bets on several numbers excl. zero vs. cycle bets at different stages based on MLE:



Initially we have to bet on uniques before switching to repeats once passing the average cycle length of 8 spins for number cycles.

If you bet 18 numbers normally then you only get 50/50 odds; however, if you bet 18 numbers upon naturally reaching CL18 then you have a 99.8% chance of winning!

As long as you re-track on a repeat and carry over only the last number then the above stats will hold. If you take all the previous uniques and carry them over at the end of each cycle then the CL18 will become more common and the stats will change.

You can bet 18 numbers any time you like - but you cannot force an opportunity on CL18.

A long cycle of 18 spins could be viewed as disadvantageous based on a negative progression - but perhaps with a positive progression we could use longer cycles to our advantage.

[falkor2k15]

Betting on Behalf

EDIT: I refer to unhits as uniques - but "uniques" is probably the wrong terminology.

Reaching CL18 with your bankroll still intact - or winning most number cycles could be considered the HG in it's own right. CL25 would be the longest that one could expect to possibly encounter during a lifetime.

This brings me onto the concept of "betting on behalf" (of, say, a number cycle). Betting 18 numbers is like-for-like betting on an EC. If we were chasing losses using a negative progression then it wouldn't matter if we bet 18 numbers to repeat or 18 units on a single half-EC that overlapped with those numbers.

However, if our BR was reset to zero from hitting a unique then when it came to repeats we would only need to bet 1 unit on an EC to make a profit instead of risking 18 units to make an excessive profit - for our goal in mind is MLE - not sudden gains or LLE. Therefore, betting an EC half instead of numbers (or betting on behalf) suddenly becomes more appealing for keeping a stable BR, in light of MLE.

Besides switching from uniques to repeats we could be betting repeats with a "net" that unintentionally catches a unique, say, resetting our BR - but the number cycle still remains open; therefore, we can once again opt for an EC instead of, say, dozens to continue betting on behalf of the numbers to repeat.

Another reason to bet 1 unit on an EC instead of 18 units on individual numbers: when we parlay and stitch winnings as part of a positive progression (incidentally, this concept is incompatible with negative progressions) then we either take the total parlayed winnings over X spins or we lose the units that were wagered on just the first bet. Now, if the first bet was only 1 unit then that is a lot better than having to lose 18 units every time.

So to summarise we can bet:
1) Like-for-like, i.e. 1 dozen = 2 lines precisely.
2) Net, i.e. 1 EC that covers 13-17 numbers in the hope of a repeat - potentially helped a long by an unexpected hit on a unique.

So how streams overlap each other during a cycle is quite crucial for positive progressions, aiding parlays, and ultimately surviving long cycles and advancing to near-100% MLEs.

Remember: if you get to CL18 then you can start calling the shots! And Roulette is not even about 36 numbers, so you could in fact parachute onto a custom 72-number Roulette following a long number cycle. Again, it's all about MLE and advancing to the next stage.

Up next: partially betting on behalf and finding a cheaper investment.

[Blood Angel]

Betting on Behalf

EDIT: I refer to unhits as uniques - but "uniques" is probably the wrong terminology.

Reaching CL18 with your bankroll still intact - or winning most number cycles could be considered the HG in it's own right. CL25 would be the longest that one could expect to possibly encounter during a lifetime.

This brings me onto the concept of "betting on behalf" (of, say, a number cycle). Betting 18 numbers is like-for-like betting on an EC. If we were chasing losses using a negative progression then it wouldn't matter if we bet 18 numbers to repeat or 18 units on a single half-EC that overlapped with those numbers.

However, if our BR was reset to zero from hitting a unique then when it came to repeats we would only need to bet 1 unit on an EC to make a profit instead of risking 18 units to make an excessive profit - for our goal in mind is MLE - not sudden gains or LLE. Therefore, betting an EC half instead of numbers (or betting on behalf) suddenly becomes more appealing for keeping a stable BR, in light of MLE.

Besides switching from uniques to repeats we could be betting repeats with a "net" that unintentionally catches a unique, say, resetting our BR - but the number cycle still remains open; therefore, we can once again opt for an EC instead of, say, dozens to continue betting on behalf of the numbers to repeat.

Another reason to bet 1 unit on an EC instead of 18 units on individual numbers: when we parlay and stitch winnings as part of a positive progression (incidentally, this concept is incompatible with negative progressions) then we either take the total parlayed winnings over X spins or we lose the units that were wagered on just the first bet. Now, if the first bet was only 1 unit then that is a lot better than having to lose 18 units every time.

So to summarise we can bet:
1) Like-for-like, i.e. 1 dozen = 2 lines precisely.
2) Net, i.e. 1 EC that covers 13-17 numbers in the hope of a repeat - potentially helped a long by an unexpected hit on a unique.

So how streams overlap each other during a cycle is quite crucial for positive progressions, aiding parlays, and ultimately surviving long cycles and advancing to near-100% MLEs.

Remember: if you get to CL18 then you can start calling the shots! And Roulette is not even about 36 numbers, so you could in fact parachute onto a custom 72-number Roulette following a long number cycle. Again, it's all about MLE and advancing to the next stage.

Up next: partially betting on behalf and finding a cheaper investment.

Hi,

Thanks for taking the time to post your findings. I’ve been following the whole MoneyT101,Priyanka, rrbb and falkor2k15 posts/threads. It’s great to see your ideas.

[falkor2k15]

np - this is where it gets interesting!

So far we are not trying to quickly close off a cycle - but to let them naturally flow to their limits to the point where the repeat becomes more certain. This involves targeting uniques first or netting a mixture of the two before concentrating on the repeats exclusively to the point where random is forced to shut the trap door in an instant. Usually we don't know when we are due for a win - but a cycles framework sure gives us an indication - providing we can reach the outer zone intact. Too much crap happens around spin 1 - the juicy stuff happens when the higher cycle lengths present themselves.

The name of the game is to pick multiple streams and then concentrate on which provide the best MLE opportunities, betting on behalf for a cheap investment, and trying to progress up the ladder so to speak.



Streams in parallel possess dependency on the same spin - as you know from previous topics of this nature. Let's take dozens + lines...

On spin 1 Lines offer us the best MLE opportunity for the moment - requiring a 5 line bet:
2... bet 1+3+4+5+6
83%   LCL2-6 

However, DCL2-3 (=D2) is highly dependent, offering us a cheaper alternative to partially bet on behalf of the LCL2-6 event:
D2 + L2   170046
DCL1 + L2   42365
DCL1 + LCL1   42157

So instead of a 5 line bet we can use a 2 dozen bet.

If Dozen Cycles and Line Cycles both go to spin 2 then we have a choice of MLEs:
56%   LCL3-6
78%   DCL1-2

DCL2 actually provides us a better opportunity at this stage, and we have a choice of dependent bets:
DCL2 + LCL2   56773
D3 + L3   56765
DCL2 + L3   56508
D3 + LCL3   843

LCL2 and L3 are both equal - but LCL2 is cheaper to play than L3! Note: we aren't playing for D3 because it's not MLE, so we ignore those two out of the above four choices.

Instead of a 2 dozen bet then we now have a 2 line bet to partially cover the 2 dozens with dependency.

Likewise if we wanted to play LCL3 or LCL4 then it turns out that a single dozen bet is more closely related than other options, based on the synchronization of the cycles/streams at a given moment.

Therefore, by adding a second stream (Dozens alongside Lines) we can improve our survival rate:


Though it's still not perfect as certain bets are not available - and while testing under negative progression I encountered a permutation from hell comprising a series of least likely events (LLEs):


It lasted about 7 cycles before breaking the bank - but if it were just single stream lines then it would have lasted only 5 cycles!

We could certainly overcome this negative progression stress test by introducing an EC stream to bet on behalf of dozens and lines!

Incidentally, using negative progression it's only possible to break the bank on spin 1 - never at the higher cycle lengths. But we'll get more into that next time...

So far this reverse-engineering process is telling us that MLE is more important than LLE - since our lifetime is finite and all we want is to finish on a profit come retirement. Negative progression has also shown to be incompatible - positive being the more natural choice made for MLE. I'm sure they go hand-in-hand; many systems have probably failed because the right ideas were used with the wrong type of progression. Of course a flat-betting method may be possible - but I think testing first has to go through positive or negative before adding the zero back in and further refining it for flat-betting.

[mickavelli]

Interesting mate - In the past, i thought SUNRISE (7) and SUNSET (6) was pigeonhole for REPEATS and UNIQUE (opposites) numbersets played simultaneously using positional stream. Good to come across new ideas

[falkor2k15]

Interesting mate - In the past, i thought SUNRISE (7) and SUNSET (6) was pigeonhole for REPEATS and UNIQUE (opposites) numbersets played simultaneously using positional stream. Good to come across new ideas

Well, positions are just like order on a cycle-per-cycle basis. For example, with dozen cycles the order and position are equal counterparts of each other:


Red said that the repeat is more likely to happen on the starting partition = front runner = order 1.
11
121
1231

Hence he is using positions within cycles, but as order.

So the repeats stream may look like this:
1... bet 1
12... bet 1
123... bet 1
1231... win

He said when there's no repeat then there's more chance that it will be the opposite of the starting partition - but also on a different stream, such as EC.

So for uniques you might bet something like:
H... bet L
HL... bet L
HLH... bet L

So together it would be
Bet 1+L, bet 1+L, bet 1+L...

Perhaps the cat's cradle could lead on from there depending on what happens each cycle?

[mickavelli]

I don't know mate that looks too much like a guessing game to me i believe the only randomly drawn order you would not want to encounter is a perfectly drawn order from start to finish or vica verca in relation to your beginning sequence.
For example 123456 or 654321 drawn ramdomly in those orders exactly. Highly unlikely - and so in all other instances pigeonhole kicks in and a position must repeat. So unless you are drawn a sequence in perfect order never can your positional sequence ever reach 6 uniques numbers.
Well that's the basic takeaway i get from outside the box thread. I know Priy said something along the lines of as you go up and up with streets, splits etc the chances of the repeat coming on the lower half gets higher and higher but I feel there is more to it than just playing for a repeat. There is a remainder. How to make use of this?

[mickavelli]

A repeat in 1 stream means a unique in another stream. And a unique in 1 stream means another may repeat

[Herby]

So unless you are drawn a sequence in perfect order never can your positional sequence ever reach 6 uniques numbers.

Hi mickavelli,
trying to follow your thougths:
so for example the sequence 4,6,2,3,5,1 (one out of 6! = 720) is for you as well a sequence in perfect order ?

[mickavelli]

so for example the sequence 4,6,2,3,5,1

Hi mate. Sorry not too sure i'm good at explaining. All I was saying was a positional stream can never go the distance without a Repeat - UNLESS , it comes out in perfect order in relation to the sequence you start with..
So if you start with for example 123456
Of course those 6 unique numbers can be drawn without a Repeat
For example the six numbers you have suggested 462351
But never can you get 6 unique positions UNLESS they are drawn in the perfectly same or perfectly reversed order of your starting sequence (123456)

So starting with seq. 123456 - your results 462351 in ordinal stream are 464516.

But playing for a Repeat is not the way!

[Herby]

not too sure i'm good at explaining

Thanks for answering.
Your explaining is superb.
My problem is: the lower half I don't understand, the other half is for me too high and the remaining 27.3% joke I don't get due to false preassumptions.

Starting with 462351 in ordinal stream I get 464566. Maybe my pencil was quicker than position checking.

But playing for a Repeat is not the way !

At positions 3 XOR 4 we have a probability for a repeat of 27.78 % (0 not considered), but you don't like it ? 

[mickavelli]

Starting with 462351 in ordinal stream I get 464566.

Sorry mate my bad.. Your spot on !