Winning Structurally

[Blueprint]

I'm fascinated with this idea of winning structurally.

Hopefully, we can have some cool conversations around this. 

No, I don't have no stinkin' HG but I do believe the possibilities are endless with structure and balance.

[6th-sense]

give me an hour to think on this...i think i can put a basic idea together for you

[number25]

I'm fascinated with this idea of winning structurally.

Hopefully, we can have some cool conversations around this. 

No, I don't have no stinkin' HG but I do believe the possibilities are endless with structure and balance.

What wheel do you play on? American or European? 

[Blueprint]

What wheel do you play on? American or European?

Both.

[gianfrancopierino]

give me an hour to think on this...i think i can put a basic idea together for you

blueprint I really hope you understood, structurally I mean...

[Blueprint]

It may be helpful to explore the following:

What is structure... what is not structure?

[Roulettebeater]

after many years studying this game I can honestly say that in order to win you should have a good knowledge of risk management, what I exactly mean is that you should weigh the risk associated with the possible award, in short:

Use the smallest risk possible ( lower bankroll ) with the determination to win huge

And never use the highest risk ( higher bankroll ) with the determination to win small

[TRD]

I'vebeen working last two months exactly on this,
much improving on my existing system now version 5.1

In addition to stop-loss I've completely abolished bs,
making it completely bs irrelevant =mechanical last outcome;
using the principle of building a trap, guard, hedging positive-neg progression, & wide~focused coverage bets in an alternating current.

Thus all works completely mechanically bs is thereof structural.


Works wonders.

[6th-sense]

i would say first off for the structure you would need a completely new constructive mm....years ago i put up a simple  mm idea on someone's thread...

lets take an example of an ec bet.....there are  2 sides to the coin of an ec bet..

the simple mm idea i gave was structured for longer play...

each stage is 5 spins to get an offset balance 11 spins is also an option and so forth..etc....though there could be a tie when zero comes out...

the loss on one side is the the amount you bet after 5 spins or more spins etc...

example h/l

two sides of coin h on left l on right

w  l
w  l
l  w 
l  w
l  w

high side of coin only wins twice...low side of coin wins 3

difference is between win and loss is 1...

1 unit is bet on high for 5 spins....so lets carry on..

hi and lo

w  l
w  l
w  l
l   w
w  l

high is won..at this stage we are still at 1 unit as its not got above 1 unit bet as of yet ..but lo is down 3 units...

at this stage its a 3 unit bet on lo...the opposite side of the coin because it lost....

at any point its breakeven drop to 1 unit......if low lost again in next round the units would be added to it again for the round after...this is my opinion is the a structural controlled method....the distance of a round has to be offset be it 5..11..or more etc....

the key question is a pretty random not far out ec count from each other to match this mm method....i,ll come up with a randomised later....an ec can be made from a variety of things...3 lots of ds for example... 

[Blueprint]

I'vebeen working last two months exactly on this,
much improving on my existing system now version 5.1

In addition to stop-loss I've completely abolished bs,
making it completely bs irrelevant =mechanical last outcome;
using the principle of building a trap, guard, hedging positive-neg progression, & wide~focused coverage bets in an alternating current.

Thus all works completely mechanically bs is thereof structural.


Works wonders.

Great, what would you say you have learned?

[Blueprint]

i would say first off for the structure you would need a completely new constructive mm....years ago i put up a simple  mm idea on someone's thread...

lets take an example of an ec bet.....there are  2 sides to the coin of an ec bet..

the simple mm idea i gave was structured for longer play...

each stage is 5 spins to get an offset balance 11 spins is also an option and so forth..etc....though there could be a tie when zero comes out...

the loss on one side is the the amount you bet after 5 spins or more spins etc...

example h/l

two sides of coin h on left l on right

w  l
w  l
l  w 
l  w
l  w

high side of coin only wins twice...low side of coin wins 3

difference is between win and loss is 1...

1 unit is bet on high for 5 spins....so lets carry on..

hi and lo

w  l
w  l
w  l
l   w
w  l

high is won..at this stage we are still at 1 unit as its not got above 1 unit bet as of yet ..but lo is down 3 units...

at this stage its a 3 unit bet on lo...the opposite side of the coin because it lost....

at any point its breakeven drop to 1 unit......if low lost again in next round the units would be added to it again for the round after...this is my opinion is the a structural controlled method....the distance of a round has to be offset be it 5..11..or more etc....

the key question is a pretty random not far out ec count from each other to match this mm method....i,ll come up with a randomised later....an ec can be made from a variety of things...3 lots of ds for example...

Nice simple example of balance.  And there are so many ways to count.

[TRD]

Great, what would you say you have learned?

That its been confirmed that relying on bs to consistently win is a sef-incurred delusion (unless using advanced technology -- may that be physical as computers, or psychic), although it definitely may work in your favor as in enhancing the performance results, but due to the next point I prefer to keep it purely mechanical = last outcome.


Doing such will facilitate a somewhat locked system template, or if you prefer anchored at some points, perhaps better parameters. Thereof when you test simulate or actually play gathering all the data diligently -- focus on the extreme game or bottlenecks that might h=do not fall within the acceptable system performance parameters (u/spin profit, individual game length till +, max drawdowns â†' bankroll requirement).

Key thing is to further manually examine that type of games, making them win. With this, you firstly get an in-depth insight into system works, & secondly improving on the template you enrich system repertoire, resourcefulness -- as in you learn more refined ways to tackle the problems & as well thusnew ways may only address the scope of that particular game alone & nothing further, but collecting enough of them suddenly a time comes when advancely & logically merged + refined (removing everything unnecessary as the first step) constitute congruence, a congruent approach that works across the whole board of situations.

In short, the somewhat locked template gets further & further narrowed till the variance can;t do anything to you anymore.  Chemists &or alchemists would recognize this as the purifying of a metal (eg. iron) purging the elements till only the purest remain forged (as eg. steel).


& the third, always persist endure with utter determination.


Most importantly, challenge everything you believe in.

[6th-sense]

trd nice reply

[6th-sense]

ok i gave a lot of thought to this concerning a bet selection to my mm above....so for basic necessity lets take blue angels method of using bigrobens  gaps and distance tracker...which by the way blue angels idea has a lot to be desired...

an ec bet needs to be not overly out of sync with the count of hitting with each other....of course you can lose 10 in a row even with this tracker but it,ll  not be too far out at the end after of many spins..
this is basically using a complete random ds selection from the gaps and distance cw..ccw..and distance spun...

if those distances show in the numbers indicated but transferred to actual  ds numbers instead of the distances and show an alternative 3 unique 3 ds ..that is your bet for the count...any numbers of cw cww and number distance that show in the alternative ds bet as 2 ds is a no bet.....this is a completely random bet as it does not follow table....but is a steady not too far out of sync bet...

as for the rrbb tracker if 3 separate ds are out that would be your bet for a repeat.....either on the position side or main side ..again both have two sides to the coin...and again bets are bypassed if only two ds are shown....

mm is correct but can be adjusted depending on bet style....for trd...and your pursuit of the talos betrand this is the way you should be looking

any more members want to throw a mm idea and betting strategy in here feel free



 

[6th-sense]

just want to say this is a basic structural reply of how a structural bet n my mind is constructed...though its not gospel...it,s right off the top of my head....just thinking a bit differently to get blueprints thread going...