So you wanna be a gambler!

[ego]

Binomial probability where you can play a spread of numbers in any combination and be equal an even money bet with 50% chance to hit.
You can pick numbers random, individual or use sectors.

EC has a 50% chance to win once within one attempt.
Dozen has a 50% chance to win once within two attempts.
A line has a 50% chance to win once within four attempts.
A corner has a 50% chance to win once within six attempts.
A street has a 50% chance to win once within eight attempts.
A split has a 50% chance to win once within twelve attempts.
A single nr has a 50% chance to win once within twenty-five attempts.

Now you can add math and probability calculations - STDV - into the prediction.

Here is one example with a 50% threshold/benchmark - 14 events versus 2 events are 3.0 STDV - and it does not matter wish one is a Loss/Win.
Let's say you have 14 loses and 2 wins playing corners - then you would have one sector with four numbers that have won 2 times within six attempts cycle and 14 times loss with six attempts cycle. That is how you would calculate a sleeper and wait for awaking hits before betting.

Same situation but with bias/hot. - 14 events versus 2 events are 3.0 STDV - and it does not matter wish one is a Loss/Win.
Let's say you have 14 wins and 2 loss playing corners - then you would have one sector with four numbers that have loss 2 times within six attempts cycle and 14 times win within six attempts cycle. That is how you would calculate a bias.

The reason you would use this would be the simplicity to calculate in real-time in the casino.
For example, lest say you use a signature and get a strong 2.5 STDV - that is a window with 12 events versus 2 events.
Let's say you play LINES and you get 12 cycles with 4 attempts hitting 12 times with 2 losing cycles with 4 attempts.

Is pretty easy to memorize, just pick windows with strong STDV combination and memorize them.
For example 12 versus 2 and 14 versus 2 that is 2.5 and 3.0 STDV.
No matter if you play with or against.

Then if you have 12 versus 2 with 2.5 STDV then half would be 6 versus 1 and 1.25 STDV
Same with 14 versus 2 with 3.0 STDV then half would be 7 versus 1 and 1.5 STDV

How does this help you?

Well, 3.0 STDV is rare but happens.
Then you can decide to jump on the hot/bias trend based upon math and probability calculations and not guesswork.
So when you see a four number sector or combination hit 7 times within 6 attempts with 1 losing cycle with 6 attempts in any combination.
Then you have a strong and hot and medium bias with 1.5 STDV and can play that it will grow stronger.
One expectation could be to win at least - minimum - two times within the six comming future outcomes.
If more hits you are on a truly bias trend that continues to grow stronger.
If two hits you are on a medium expectation that did not come true as bias.
If you get less then two hits you hit a cold and weak trend that not become bias.

This you can do with any combination of numbers and use math and probability calculation in the casino with simplicity.

upload

This is the match formula:
The French word for STDV is ECART

First, you have to get the Absolute Ecart when you calculate.
So let's assume you have a sequence with 14 series alternating with two singles present.

Then you take 14 - 2 = 12

Now we want to get the statistical ecart so we continue with...

14 + 2 = 16

Now we take the sqr of 16 = 4

And finally, we divide the absolute ecart whit the sqr

12 sqr 4 = 3,00

The Statistical Ecart 3,00

Cheers

[ego]

Going to mention some reflections.

Many have read Brett Morton's book - Playing to win - with the chapter for even money he describes patterns of six that you can play with or against.
But there is no precise description of how he parlays his bets.

With the model above we can measure and make conclusion of the most common likelihood based upon math and probability with STDV.
6 versus 1 is around 2.11 STDV and has 1.5% probability to happen, this means that you have 98.5% probability that there will be a other pattern then the previous for the next 6 attempts and 1.5% probability that the past pattern will repeat once more.

With STDV you can say that the likelihood to reach 2.5 STDV or higher is very rare.
And 6 versus 2 is 2.5 STDV.
This indicate that you will get at least two different events than the previous six within the next six outcomes.
Most of the time two or more events in your favor.

This can be proven using STDV and regression towards the mean.
Also can be proven the other way around where the STDV grow stronger.

Other authors that also have a claim that can be proven using this model.
John Patrick in hes roulette book mentions that 9 blacks with one single or two reds are a strong trend.
The conclusion is that he speaks the truth.

For example, 9 blacks and 1 red is 2.58 STDV so the likelihood is very strong that you will get at least two or more blacks within the next 6 attempts where the STDV grow stronger, because a full regression towards the mean 100% with 9 reds and 1 black is less than 1.5% probability to happen.
This means that most of the time you will win following that kind of trend.

Just to clarify this is about the likelihood and not 100% absolute the truth.
Closer and this you can not come to predict the future.

CHeers

[Let Me Win]

Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future.

[Serendipity]

The problem is how do you pick these 6 numbers... and when? I mean randomly or based on previous numbers?

[ego]

The problem is how do you pick these 6 numbers... and when? I mean randomly or based on previous numbers?

I made a simple test, pick-six random numbers and bet four times (one cycle) and win twice within six cycles.
Pick a sector with the same results.
This means you can build any matrix or selection process, the expectation is the same for any way you pick your numbers.

Cheers

[Serendipity]

I feel that this pattern breaker could be something very close to win more than lose. Can you give me an example for ec bets, please.

[ego]

I feel that this pattern breaker could be something very close to win more than lose. Can you give me an example for ec bets, please.

I already mention the math and probability using STDV and is up to each individual to use his own skills as a gambler to implement the information.

Cheers

[Kav]

Very interesting topic ego. Now I miss someone like Mr. Ore to chime in.

[Serendipity]

Very useful, this topic should continue!

[Steve]

Does any of this change the odds of future winning numbers?

If not, then how is it better than random betting?

[ego]

It improves everything.

Very clear when to hold and to continue betting.
Many situations have an expectation with more than one single win.
You know when to raise and lower your bets accordingly.
The comparison with even money selections indicates a bias/hot or cold series of events or sequence with clear view and understanding.
Give you better odds than using regular odds, for example, why would someone chase a street for 12 attempts when you have less than 50% to hit after 8 attempts.

Cheers

[Steve]

Give you better odds than using regular odds, for example, why would someone chase a street for 12 attempts when you have less than 50% to hit after 8 attempts.

This is the misunderstanding. No matter what hit previously, the odds haven't changed for future spins. So you changed nothing.

[Serendipity]

Then tell us more, Steve. We should then go for random numbers, colors, etc and of course next to a progression? There is no such thing as Bet Selection I assume and as a consequence how can you win using flat bets when odds are against us all the time. Are we wasting our time here?

[luckyfella]

Are we wasting our time here?

Steve, caleb and the mathboyz will tell you YES.

This is not about roulette. It's a math problem. And the mathboyz are right about random spins. The manufacturers invest millions of dollars for technology to ensure the wheel spits out random spins.

[Steve]

How many times should I explain it? And im not the only one explaining it.

This is not about roulette. It's a math problem. And the mathboyz are right. It's a fact.

Math is an expression of reality. Its not a math problem. Its a reality problem, or more specifically the understanding of reality thats the problem.

Are we wasting our time here?

If you continue to try what has been tried and proven to fail since the beginning of gambling, yes.

So try something new. It doesnt need to be advantage play. Start by learning what has already been tried countless times, why it fails, then try something new. People aren't even recognizing when something is the same thing.

Sounds reasonable? Or should be retry the same old stuff?

Its really not complicated.