Variance control vs. Edge from flat-betting

[falkor2k15]

I decided to modify the game of Roulette and dozen cycles just to get a better idea of how variance control works with equally-like outcomes such as dozens rather than a custom outcome:

1... only 1 or 3 can follow
2... only 1 or 2 can follow
3... only 2 or 3 can follow

The result is that repeats actually increase instead of uniques; however, cycle length 3 also increases, so the stats change from:

CL1: 33% to 50%
CL2: 44% to 25%
CL3: 22% to 25%

Also, some CL2-3 outcomes are not possible as per regular cycles, such as CL2o1 or CL3o2.

By betting only CL1 we get a steady amount of profit/edge (see attached) - yet each dozen still tallies up to 33%/33%/33% so if you only bet an individual dozen then you would break even instead of profit.



Only CL1 produces decent profit - unless we use this biased game to find out if there's a optimum time to bet a particular dozen based on the cycles?

Unfortunately, when it comes to creating our own custom game we run into some different problems, such unable to cover all pigeons at once.

Finally, this method of changing the variance must have an opposite, i.e. certain additional outcomes become possible in certain situations; how to construct those pigeons I wonder?

[donik7777]

Finally, this method of changing the variance must have an opposite, i.e. certain additional outcomes become possible in certain situations; how to construct those pigeons I wonder?

What if you will add new custom dozen for increasing amount of pigeons?
Red always saying that need at least 2-3 streams

[Kav]

Frankly speaking,
You add a tremendous amount of complexity in the game with no apparent benefit.
(Maybe you don't realize it because you are so much IN it, but it is hard to follow your thoughts.)
Maybe this is an indication that the "solution" (if there is one) is a simple one.
No need to reinvent the wheel (pun intended).

[gizmotron2]

Frankly speaking,
You add a tremendous amount of complexity in the game with no apparent benefit.
(Maybe you don't realize it because you are so much IN it, but it is hard to follow your thoughts.)
Maybe this is an indication that the "solution" (if there is one) is a simple one.
No need to reinvent the wheel (pun intended).

So now complexity is without benefit?

I gave up on single dozens and double dozens because of volatility in changes. I moved to Even Chance bets with Reading Randomness. But I have this very complex artificial intelligence app that demonstrates my bet selection and size process. It spits out telemetry so that the viewer can learn from the changes in bet selection and amounts that occur. This was provided so that what appears to be complex is actually the same thing only applied over 4 different groupings of dozens. And I uploaded it and made it available to anyone that wants to learn single and double dozen technique.

[precogmiles]

Computers can't predict random.

[gizmotron2]

Computers can't predict random.

Computers can recognize conditional characteristics based on coincidence and therefore demonstrate specific awareness. I should know. I programmed that sim mentioned above to do just that.  Prediction by sixth sense is subjective. Anyone can make blanket conjecture.

[precogmiles]

Computer = logic

Random =/= logic

Simple basic stuff.

Why is everyone so desperate to reinvent the wheel?

Humans have been predicting random events for millennia. Just learn from their experiences.

Instead of using AI and complex maths, focus on what has been proven to work for 1000s of years.

system junkies 

If you don't have a genuine edge progression just masks the problem.

[gizmotron2]

Computer = logic

Random =/= logic

Simple basic stuff.

Why is everyone so desperate to reinvent the wheel?

Humans have been predicting random events for millennia. Just learn from their experiences.

Instead of using AI and complex maths, focus on what has been proven to work for 1000s of years.

system junkies 

If you don't have a genuine edge progression just masks the problem.

How come your sixth sense doesn't clue you in on how AI works? If you task a computer to discover a situation and then to act on what it finds while the condition that the computer's selections are in at least a 70% working state, then a computer generated guess with a bet takes place, just like a human being with the same skill. This: "Random =/= logic" doesn't change and is fact irrelevant. What you are suggesting is that because the world contains random events the sky is blue.

[precogmiles]

How come your sixth sense doesn't clue you in on how AI works? If you task a computer to discover a situation and then to act on what it finds while the condition that the computer's selections are in at least a 70% working state, then a computer generated guess with a bet takes place, just like a human being with the same skill. This: "Random =/= logic" doesn't change and is fact irrelevant. What you are suggesting is that because the world contains random events the sky is blue.

AI can not predict random.
No matter have you approach a random game the results will be random. As long as you use a mechanical process, be it AI or maths it will not result in improving your result.

No matter how many fancy words or terminologies you use are guessing blind.

This is basic common sense.

You want to use a materialistic world view to give you answers about random. Foolish approach.

[gizmotron2]

AI can not predict random.
No matter have you approach a random game the results will be random. As long as you use a mechanical process, be it AI or maths it will not result in improving your result.

No matter how many fancy words or terminologies you use are guessing blind.

This is basic common sense.

You want to use a materialistic world view to give you answers about random. Foolish approach.

Humans and computer AI can not predict what will result from anything that is random. So what.  What's your hangup? I have never said it could predict outcomes based on past spins. But it can guess. I have tried for decades to tell you guys that Reading Randomness is not a claim of prediction. So when are you guys going to get that thru your heads? Always the very same lame argument. Guessing will not make your mother-in-law happy either. Past spins will not get you out of trouble with your mother-in-law. You should stop claiming that your mother-in-law can beat Roulette. BTW, your mother-in-law can't see into the future.

[precogmiles]

Why reinvent the wheel?

Predicting the future has already been done, for 1000s of years In every major civilization. Egypt, rome, China, etc... and among every culture by way of shamans.

There is nothing new about it. You have not discovered anything new. To make make it worse you want to use fancy words to describe so called patterns that are not even there.

You are guessing, it's that simple. Regardless of how much you think you have invented a way of seeing 'patterns'

My advice is stop wasting your time. That goes for you and the system junkies. You both need to get out of the dogmatic cult of materialism.

Using AI = materlist mindset
Math = materialist mindset

Computing using bits and bytes can not make you see beyond materialism.

[gizmotron2]

My advice is stop wasting your time. That goes for you and the system junkies. You both need to get out of the dogmatic cult of materialism.

Using AI = materlist mindset
Math = materialist mindset

Computing using bits and bytes can not make you see beyond materialism.

So let's see what we have here. You are some kind of saintly Winston Churchill pontificating the assumption that you are a spiritual savant and the now established "we" are not. Ego trip!

[gizmotron2]

To make make it worse you want to use fancy words to describe so called patterns that are not even there.

Yes, it's just despicable. "Singles on the weak side," as it relates to Even Chance bets.  I have chosen these words in order to impress people with my creative use of the words "weak side." I apologize for the implication that a few people here will be so offended by my dazzling intellect. I need to thank you for fixing the world. Do you let people polish your spandex and iron your cape?

[precogmiles]

Yes, it's just despicable. "Singles on the weak side," as it relates to Even Chance bets.  I have chosen these words in order to impress people with my creative use of the words "weak side." I apologize for the implication that a few people here will be so offended by my dazzling intellect. I need to thank you for fixing the world. Do you let people polish your spandex and iron your cape?

No cape here sorry, just common sense.
Enjoy reading patterns and finding the 'weak side'.

[gizmotron2]

No cape here sorry, just common sense.
Enjoy reading patterns and finding the 'weak side'.

Posted at the other site: "So I have been putting this to a test. I was getting killed on the live online tables because I was rushed and could not fill out my online charts and get an inside bet down in time. I messed around with Steve's MPR online app and won every session. So I quit that in a self destructive run. But I decided to try the American RNG game online that allows me to fill out my chart and take all the time that I want. It looks like it plays just like the MPR game. I had a slight uptick, then a ten spin losing streak, and then a grind back up to my first goal of $15+ per session win. I started out yesterday at $105 bankroll. This is better than waiting for the casinos to open back up. And it's real money. It will be fun to demonstrate Reading Randomness and the 3 lost sessions of -$35 each lost per session against the $15+ per session on a win."

I decided to do this where it counts. It has winning streaks and losing streaks. And I'm not having any difficulties seeing this. I'm using a grinding method so that even if there is targeting it's not as elaborate as I am. I will know eventually if the RNG is unfair or not. I'm looking into another place that allows for confirmation of spins using the hash method. But I'm doing fine with this. Real is much better than pretend.