Stitching bets in a Non-Random game

[Blood Angel]

It's in the topic called "I think I finally cracked it".

Cheers

[falkor2k15]

OK let's move on then...

Just like betting front runners, CL2 also has multiple ways of playing. In fact, like CL3, CL2 also offers two different ways of playing the same target: to stitch or not to stitch - that is the question, as the old saying goes.

So now let's bring Martingale back in again so we can get a better idea of extreme situations - strictly for the purpose of testing of course:

Without Stitching


With Stitching


What do you notice...?

[Person S]

Did you call Hamlet?
What we see, we see that we are drowning at a higher speed in the second example.
And this is understandable, you have more bets there. You used CL2, but what did you want from them? To play only in CL2 and become a winner, I think it is naive ... This cycle is part of the other two, it cannot work alone, but you yourself perfectly understand. Such thoughts ...

[falkor2k15]

True: 2nd example has accelerated losses - but this wouldn't be too detectable if we played flat-betting.

That's right: we can win just playing CL2 without changing our bet selection since we are using stitching!

It may seem naive, but what it reveals is the crux of exploiting statistical dependency:
*When to bet or when not to bet
*When to bet normal or when to bet opposite
*When to stitch or when not to stitch
*When to bet one Cycle Length or when to bet another Cycle Length
*When to bet one Cycle Length constant or another
*When to bet a unique or a repeat
*When to bet one dozen or another dozen.

By default all the above are individually break even in the long run.

This cycle is part of the other two, it cannot work alone

Not quite the obvious observation I had in mind, but you're getting there, mate!

So if we must traverse the losing zone from CL2 to CL2, is the first cycle stitched or not stitched...?

[Person S]

Not quite the obvious observation I had in mind, but you're getting there, mate!

Falcor sounds like Priyanka
I do not understand the line the first cycle is stitched or not. What do you mean?
What does this design look like?
Cycle 1-2 is not so difficult to use, everything breaks when it comes 3. So - I suppose the schedule will not smoothly go up, even if there is a method how to play it right.
So, as distortions in the distribution is a very real thing. We should have something finite, relying on a parallel game - which unfortunately has not been disclosed ...

[falkor2k15]

 

When I say the first cycle I mean cycle 1/12 in the following example:




What's the tipping point?

[Person S]

I can not catch ...
If you join (sew) to cycles - this is how to sew positions. CL1 + CL2 - 1 item
CL2 + CL2 - 2 items
CL1 + CL1 - 3 items

There is confusion.
Since your 1-2-3 increases difficulty. This only complicates the situation, you can mathematically prove that this approach is correct. If absolutely all probabilities are determined from these data, will it make sense? Your method - how to determine all the probabilities?
We need a foundation - the MATHEMATICAL BASIS, and not Russian dolls, otherwise a deviation from the goal will again arise ...

The turning point is that we risk 54 chips in the HOPE of winning only one)

[falkor2k15]

We are not using probabilities here, we are using dependency, stitching and the tipping point to "go with the flow" based on the variance. We aren't stitching pairs of cycle - but choosing whether to play CL2 with stitching or without stitching.



CL1 = 5; CL3 = 5
= 50%/50%



CL1 = 8; CL3 = 3
= 73%/27%

Here's how I worked out the tipping point:
CL1: 33 = 33%
CL2: 45 = 45%
CL3: 22 = 22%
Total = 100

CL1: 33 = 60%
CL3: 22 = 40%
Total = 55

[Person S]

Ehhh, falkor ...
This tipping point, what is it?
Probability - our absolute everything rests on it, take the birthday paradox, why it works - because with each appearance of a new result, the probability is to move up, so it works ...
What about the tipping point? I do not know such a definition, as I think other people.

[Person S]

Dyslexic, talking about his method. What I wrote - now the CHANCE, make it so high that not one computer in the world is able to calculate them. Odds, not addiction and not the crest of a dispersion wave, but only the odds.

[Person S]

Traps of the mind, artful enough to please them.

[falkor2k15]

Priyanka's quote - remember...?

[19:48][Priyanka]: so you essentially try to find this tipping point
[19:48][Priyanka]: now not every day we will find this tipping point
[19:51][Priyanka]: now coming back to tipping point
[19:52][Priyanka]: you were arranging them in such a manner that it gives you that tipping point of different different diff diff diff
[19:52][Priyanka]: one set reaching 10 is your tipping point
[19:58][Priyanka]: and play only same when tipping point happens
[20:07][Priyanka]: yes.. and the tipping point is on a higher scale there 55% same and 45% different.. so you cant play like what i described above..
[20:08][Priyanka]: and within that find a better tipping point

Search for "tipping point" here too:
link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=15938.90

[Person S]

Probably these are the features of speech

How we can enter the dozen game when that imbalance is in our favour and most likely to result in a positive expectation is the riddle that you need to crack.

The search for this is likely our goal. But pay attention that this is not 100%, but as they say most likely ...
And I do not have this collection of quotes)

[falkor2k15]

Right, so when will you bet and when will you not bet; or when will you stitch and when will you not stitch?

[Person S]

One of the videos has a similar CL2 strategy.
It looks good (but you have to remember about 0). Sometimes I examine the green sheet with dozens, and it looks like chess, only the opponent sometimes goes crazy)