Out-Of-The-Box Look at Law of the Third

[ScoobyDoo]

Hi Guys,
I was reading the PDF about the DNA of Roulette and a thought occurred to me, so I will present the thought to you and see what you think.

The Law of the Third has proved that within 37 spins (European Wheel) of the wheel, approximately 1/3 of the numbers will not show up. So the following question popped into my mind:

What if the number of slots on a wheel contained more than 37 numbers, such as 74 separate numbers. Would the Law of Third still apply? Does it apply, no matter how many  numbers are on the wheel as long as you spin the total number of times that there are numbers?

What about a wheel with only 12 numbers on it? After 12 spins will there be approximately four unhit numbers or is there some Specific amount of numbers where the Law of the Third no longer applies?

Food for thought....Maybe the Math guys can answer this with some valid explanations.

Regards,
Scooby Doo

[TwoCatSam]

think about a wheel with 3 pockets

[VLS]

Hey Scooby, yes, the "observation" of the Thirds Runs throughout the game.

It obviously isn't a law since deviations account for making it unusable!

With streets you have a 12-number roulette and yes, the proportionality is respected, expecting 4 streets not to show, 4 to show once, 4 to repeat -in average- per 12-spin cycle.

Regards!

[flukey luke]

Hello Scooby,

I spent a lot of time studying this 'law of the third' and I can tell you that it runs all the way through the game in all kinds of ways.
My own experiences tell me that this 'law' can not beat the game on its own. However, it can be one component of several that can help you in lowering the variance of the game. This can be very helpful in itself.
I will show you a few examples of how this 'law' does indeed run throughout the game.  

[VLS]

Think about a wheel with 3 pockets

1 not to show.
1 to show once.
1 to repeat.

[flukey luke]

Look at the following numbers.

26
---
25
10
20
35
30
16
10
6
12
28
22
3
27
34
10
28
23
4
30
5
17
30
13
21
5
14
25
31
25
10

There are 30 numbers there excluding the first number (26) You would expect to see about 20/30 original numbers taking the 'law' into account. In this example, there are 21/30.
Now let's start from the top of these numbers using the 26 and count the pocket distance that the ball travels clockwise on each of the subsequent numbers.

8
11
6
10
18
6
34
29
23
36
33
7
13
35
9
14
22
24
11
4
26
7
34
30
14
6
19
19
18
11
Just to explain what I am doing a bit more clearly. The 26 went number 25, this is a movement of 8 pockets on the roulette wheel. Then the 25 went to number 10, this is a movement of 11 pockets and so on. Now let's see if the law holds up on our second set of numbers. Once again, we have 21 out of 30 original numbers. So it is fair to say that the 'law' holds up over both sets of numbers.
Maybe this will give you some ideas of your own. What I tried to do with the 'law' was  attempt to shrink the game using various sets of numbers and hoped that this in turn would reduce the volatile nature of roulette.
It is just a single component like I say, but not enough in itself to defeat the game.

[chrisbis]

................and a wheel with two sockets? 

[chrisbis]

I can "view" in my minds eye the movement of the ball, but how are U compensating for the movement, when in a real wheel, U have clockwise, and counter-clockwise wheel rotation?

Or REV'S as Jordan would say!!??!!

[VLS]

................and a wheel with two sockets? 

Hehe, I guess the "law of the two's" (whatever that is) then! 

Kidding bro. For "thirds" to be effective, they have to be multiple of 3.

Regards.

[flukey luke]

The casino I play in Chris, (gala) only spin in the one direction nowadays. They have just brought in these new wheels and since then don't alternate the spins anymore.
However to answer your question, I could break it all up and chart for anticlockwise as well at casinos that do alternate spins.
Personally, I don't think it makes much difference. The wheel is just a random number generator, I think if you get too technical, it just makes more work and is not necessarily any more effective as regards the end result.

[ScoobyDoo]

@Victor,

So you are saying that even if there are 74 numbers on the wheel, after 74 spins there will be approximately 26 numbers that are not hit?

In regards to your statement that the "Law of the Third" is not really a law because of the minimal fluctuation of hit numbers, then you are saying that it is a "Fuzzy" law, meaning that the fluctuations in hits after 37 spins is just enough to throw off any useable way of using it to form a solid basis to win with?

Regards,
Scooby Doo

[chrisbis]

Shall i update that then , and say.............."and for a wheel with 4 sockets?"

By the way folks, a few casino's (RNG only) have a wheel with 12 sockets on them- Mini Roulette I remember its called.
Testing maybe for the "LAW of The Sockets"


Ans, as a side issue, does the "LAW" also encompass other games, sports and such like where the outcome is a mathematical division of the total number of possible outcome, divided by the real world outcome in 'X' number of spins?

[chrisbis]

@Victor,

................saying that it is a "Fuzzy" law, meaning that ................
Scooby Doo

So if it a Fuzzy law, can we construct a system to bet/better than average it
with "Fuzzy Logic".?

[VLS]

@Scooby

Divide ANY multiple of 3 and that's your "law"/observation of the thirds for the cycle

Simple as that.



@Chris

does the "LAW" also encompass other game

Independent trial games. Not with card games and others where the probabilities change according to possible items being removed!



This "Law" is just a mathematical curiosity guys.

[ScoobyDoo]

@ Chrisbis,

yeah...That's kind of what I was thinking when I labeled it "Fuzzy". I have no knowledge about fuzzy logic but who knows...it might have some relevance.

Scooby Doo