The 'consensus' method

[Bayes]

'Consensus' : agreement in the judgment or opinion reached by a group as a
whole

This is more of a concept or principle than a system, because the basic idea can be used to generate many systems or methods, however the method I will outline is a system in its own right, although in its present state there is some subjectivity involved - I'm still researching the stats which will hopefully make it more or less mechanical, hence its inclusion in this section.

Because the method is fairly complex the best way to explain it is with a simple example, just keep in mind that it can easily be extended, although you'll likely need some help in the form of a spreadsheet or tracker software if you're going to do this.

You need to mark off all possible patterns of a given length in the even chances as they arise. In this example, I'll use 2 sets of patterns; those with length 2 and length 3. For R/B they are:

RB
BR
BB
RR

BBB
BBR
BRB
BRR
RBB
RBR
RRB
RRR

Write down the bet number as the spins come in, that way you only have to look at the current number to see whether it's a multiple of 2 or 3 and you can add a tally mark next to the corresponding group, like this:

1  (R)
2  (R)  -- at this point you are ready to put a check against the 'RR' pattern in first group.
3  (B)  -- now you add a check alongside the 'RRB' pattern in the second group.
4  (R)  -- because it's an even number, you now have another mark to add to first group (BR).
5  (R)  -- no marking necessary because 5 is neither an even number nor a multiple of 3.
6  (B)  -- number 6 is both an even number and a multiple of 3 - check against RRB

Now, this is a good point at which to stop and explain how you select your bets. The idea is that a decision is made as to what to bet only on spin numbers which are both multiples of 2 and multiples of 3. This is where the concept of 'consensus' arises, for the bet (R or B) is chosen depending on the pattern of tally marks in both groups and when they 'agree', according to some criteria. It's probably far from clear what I mean by this, so suppose after some spins you have the following pattern of tally marks against your groups:

RB /
BR ////
BB /////
RR //

BBB /
BBR /
BRB
BRR //
RBB
RBR /
RRB /
RRR //

Meaning that the pattern 'BB' has hit 5 times, the pattern 'BRR' has hit twice, etc. Now suppose that 29 numbers have come in so 30 is the next bet number. 30 is a multiple of 2 and 3 so you are looking for a consensus.

But what is the criteria I mentioned earlier? this is where the subjectivity comes in (and where I need to do more research). As most of you are aware, there are 2 schools of thought when it comes to selecting your bets; there is 'maturity of chances' and 'follow the trend'.

Let's say you prefer to bet on sleepers waking up ('maturity of chances'). Looking at the tally marks for both groups we see that 'RB' and 'RR' are sleepers in the doubles group (relative to the other patterns) and 'BRB' and 'RBB' are sleepers in the triples group.

You now need to look at the last 1 and 2 spins which came out. Suppose the last out was Red, this means that you can exclude the patterns BR and BB from the doubles (because the first spin in the next completed double has to be Red). The spin before the last was Black, so looking at the triplets group you know that the next triplet pattern will be either BRB or BRR.

Since your preferred bet selection is on sleepers, you now look for the sleepers in both groups, and based on your limited choices from each (RR or RB from the doubles and BRB or BRR from the triples) you have only once choice of bet - that of Black.

The idea is that you only bet when the 'planets are aligned', so to speak. There are a lot of options in the ways that you can play this, but that will be for a future post.

[VLS]

Welcome back dear Bayes!

So nice to see you around & many thanks for sharing your method

Vic

[albertojonas]

i have been looking at something like this because of a subject on bollinger bands by the member Ego.

Pleaze bayes check it out, i think tose are converging ideas.

i also feel this is a very clever way to go. This means to me not putting any kind of order in chaos but instead surfing it with profit from observation.

Great thread, i hope some more ppl gets in this boat.

thank you B.

[Bayes]

@ albertojonas,

Thanks for the feedback. I doubt whether this thread will generate much interest, which is ok and to be expected because the method is fairly complex and abstract. I think it has a lot of potential though, particular if you use more patterns, but a software tracker will be essential (and something I'm working on).

I'll check out Ego's thread - he has some good ideas although not always easy to understand.