*PATTERN BREAKER*

[D1]

Because "basic probability" doesn't work in Roulette. You all don't take into consideration human factor.

Can I then please ask you how does the human factor affect the result of what the roulette wheel gives out ?

D1.

[Bayes]

Not sure what you mean by 'doesn't work'. It's really just a question of counting the number of times each sequence occurs. Probability theory "predicts" that they'll hit an equal number of times in the long run, and they do.

[Ruprekht]

Not sure what you mean by 'doesn't work'. It's really just a question of counting the number of times each sequence occurs. Probability theory "predicts" that they'll hit an equal number of times in the long run, and they do.

Do you understand difference between "equal number of times" and sequence of their hit? Did you often see the sequence of, for example, 1-2-3 on winning numbers board?

[Ruprekht]

Let us guys concentrate on inventing winning systems instead of pointless debates...

[vundarosa]

Let us guys concentrate on inventing winning systems instead of pointless debates...

------------------------

you know Ruprekht, these debates might not be as pointeless as you think......
for the fun of it, i tested betting against the first line (line 1) after a number from that line had come out (going by your argument that 1-2-3 don't come that often)....flat bet....so if 1 or 2 or 3 came out, i'd bet all other lines except line 1.
In 65000 spins it ended at +296u......only thing is i don't think its pratical to seat 30-90 spins without placing a bet 
vundarosa

[Bayes]

Do you understand difference between "equal number of times" and sequence of their hit? Did you often see the sequence of, for example, 1-2-3 on winning numbers board?

You can't judge by what you see in a small sample, or happen to remember. Certain patterns stand out to us more than others. You have to use logic; patterns of the same length will occur the same number of times because the wheel has no memory and (assuming you have no evidence to the contrary) all numbers are equally likely to hit. So after 1 hits the next number is just as likely to be any of the 37 numbers - why should it NOT be 2? and if 2 hits why should the next number NOT be 3?. And because the wheel has no memory the same logic applies no matter what numbers have gone before.

Some people who play the lottery would never pick the numbers 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 because they think it's extremely unlikely that this sequence will come up. It is, but no MORE unlikely than any other 'random' looking sequence like 3,7,16,25,29,32,47.

[Ruprekht]

------------------------

if 1 or 2 or 3 came out, i'd bet all other lines except line 1.

vundarosa

Not 1 or 2 or 3!!!! But 1, then 2, then 3. In this strict order.

[Robeenhuut]

Because "basic probability" doesn't work in Roulette. You all don't take into consideration human factor.
[/quote
Hehe Ruprekht

its 101 of probability.  You have to go back to school.

Regards

[vundarosa]

Not 1 or 2 or 3!!!! But 1, then 2, then 3. In this strict order.

-------------
i understand what you said...but to be true 123, 231, 312, etc are all equally likely to come out...no matter how rare those event might be.......i just showing one can exploit these rare events to our advantage

vundarosa

[downthehatch]

Here I just want to confirm that the system, both ways played is a 87% winner. 
played with propper progression after losing a pattern, 100% winner.

Legend.  What do u think will happen if everyone how wents to casino to win plays this system??

the vast majority of players will never be psychologically able to play one game then clear off for a while and come back again!! they just wont have the discipline or belief to do it. or generally do what JL appears to do, playing numerous quick games throughout the day,
we get many different sensations from gambling not just winning, if that 'buzz' isnt there they (the vast majority roulette players/gamblers) wont do it, whatever the system or its results.

[GLC]

the vast majority of players will never be psychologically able to play one game then clear off for a while and come back again!! they just won't have the discipline or belief to do it. or generally do what JL appears to do, playing numerous quick games throughout the day,
we get many different sensations from gambling not just winning, if that 'buzz' isnt there they (the vast majority roulette players/gamblers) won't do it, whatever the system or its results.

Bingo!!

[XXVV]

There has been much interesting debate and clever comments on this thread.
I would like to play the 'Devil's Advocate' here though for a short while.
Once I had a brilliant teacher and mentor,  the late and great Mark Sarris, a brilliant businessman, public listed company board member, professional statistician, and exciting roulette player. He came from Austria but in later years was based in Sydney and Brisbane/ Gold Coast in Australia.
As a strict mathematician and statistician he surprised me with his comments on the 'memory threads' of the wheel outcomes.
He had developed a method which was very clever but required spin behaviour that operated within certain range of performance in statistical behaviour. The method failed when there was an excess of repeat numbers. As you know such behaviour clusters, or not.
It seems that in short trends, say 10-50 spin cycles or more, a phase of play can exhibit extraordinary shimmering, mirroring behaviour. To such an extent does this occur that I have a method(s) that under certain (strict) conditions takes advantage of this hot/ warm fuzzy behaviour.
Now such phases would beat Sarris temporarily, but he used the 'memory' of the wheel to know that in due course, again under certain conditions, and about 92% of the time, the statistical aberration would correct and this he called, as many will groan, his 'recovery phase'.
Can repeats be an aspect of 'memory' as they cluster. Can the eventual 'balancing up' be an aspect of a bigger memory. Or are we labelling such random events with human mental characteristics. Is this yet another aspect of our imperfect mental frailty?
However is there such a concrete barrier between our mental patterns and the wheel outcomes. Some believe, and they are not fools, that the mental activity at the wheel can influence outcomes.
Very grey and very fuzzy but is that not the truer nature of life in the random world which is so unknown. It might be foolish to be so certain about anything.
In the thread "New Ideas" I am also exploring some of the frailties of current human thinking as identified by Kahneman.
I personally identify memory traces and wheel outcomes, and do not agree at all that outcomes have no reference to prior outcomes.
Many will disagree I am sure but I would love to hear some debate on this touchy subject.

[downthehatch]

Post you are doing what I KNEW ,people will do. It can't be continuos, you play a game of PB and you get ONE SHOT the VERY FIRST PATTERN FORMED. You will bet it doesn't form as the fourth. GAME OVER. But you have to start a fresh game 30, 40 spins later not keep, betting one after the other [b]ALL 2600 of my recorded games are sessions played apart[/b].

Do you understand this?

JL that is incredible dedication and discipline!!!

Could i ever do that?
Dth

[IronSteel]

With all the due respect to JL and all the other community members who have been testing JL's system. I've read almost the whole content of this thread, it began quite interesting until the whole "pattern breaking" strategy turned 180° degrees to now play the missing pattern due to somebody else's comment.

In my honest opinion, I don't think random actually has a pattern. If random had a pattern, it wouldn't be "random" anymore. Playing under random's rules mean there is no logic, that anything can happen, and that there's no such thing as a pattern. I tested this system with my spins records of this month and losses exceeded winnings largely. I believe that playing under random's rules is what the house wants us to do.

Although I play a different system (which I already shared in these forums a couple days ago), I will think about new possibilites and variants to this system in order to see some opinions of people that may use this system.

I want to thank all of you guys for keeping this forum as a great place to discuss and share our knowledge in order to reach our common goal.

[downthehatch]

With all the due respect to JL and all the other community members who have been testing JL's system. I've read almost the whole content of this thread, it began quite interesting until the whole "pattern breaking" strategy turned 180° degrees to now play the missing pattern due to somebody else's comment.

In my honest opinion, I don't think random actually has a pattern. If random had a pattern, it wouldn't be "random" anymore. Playing under random's rules mean there is no logic, that anything can happen, and that there's no such thing as a pattern. I tested this system with my spins records of this month and losses exceeded winnings largely. I believe that playing under random's rules is what the house wants us to do.

Although I play a different system (which I already shared in these forums a couple days ago), I will think about new possibilites and variants to this system in order to see some opinions of people that may use this system.

I want to thank all of you guys for keeping this forum as a great place to discuss and share our knowledge in order to reach our common goal.

Hi
ive just started using this system and have noticed several times what i think may be other opportunities to bet whilst waiting for the normal 7 patterns to leave one remaining pattern to bet against.

i have actually already bet after patterns have repeated, today HLH HLH HLH, I bet against it appearing a 4th time.

also take this running pattern   HHL  LHL LLL LLL HLL,  what are the chances that this 15 spin (or for that matter any 15 spin pattern) pattern will reappear exactly? Could some sort of progression win you some easy money, (any suggestions please!!!)  given that waiting for that elusive 7th pattern can sometimes be quite a wait!

Dth