Nothing beats this random walk no matter what bet selection you use.

[ZeroBlue]

This is the fixed probability 1:8, so we can not change it!

as for the trend, I mean any trend of numbers coming out - unless the wheel is biased, we can not identify any.

no you can not. you are wright. i will stay away from the discussion on bias.

The point here being made is how to achieve 1/8 odds of loosing instead of 1/2.
Can you add to that?

[Playborne]

If I knew that I'd have nothing to do here LOL

[Bayes]

If I had to make a choice, I would go with Gizmo rather than ego.

Trends do occur, regardless of the cause. This has to happen (and can be proved mathematically), the only issue is knowing when they will begin and end. 

On the other hand, how can a 'random walk' give an advantage when played against another random walk? I just don't see the connection.

[ZeroBlue]

If I knew that I'd have nothing to do here LoL

C'mon man!!!
it is not a fight it is an healthy exchange of ideas. do not fall back as "everyone is invited".
please...

[ZeroBlue]

If I had to make a choice, I would go with Gizmo rather than ego.

Trends do occur, regardless of the cause. This has to happen (and can be proved mathematically), the only issue is knowing when they will begin and end. 

On the other hand, how can a 'random walk' give an advantage when played against another random walk? I just don't see the connection.

Good point Bayes.
two things:

1st: May you explain how to achieve 1/8 odds?
2nd: Assuming trends occur, how to denny
that a random pattern given by the comparison against its previous outcomes (in the example 3)
is hard to repeat exactly in the next 3 spins?

[Playborne]

we never know when they will occur, so it doesn't change anything .. We can never beat roulette in the long run, so why not just get used to it ?

As for the fight I just joked , it'd be better if you called for some humor mate

[Bayes]

Good point Bayes.
two things:

1st: May you explain how to achieve 1/8 odds?
2nd: Assuming trends occur, how to denny
that a random pattern given by the comparison against its previous outcomes (in the example 3)
is hard to repeat exactly in the next 3 spins?

1st: I don't understand the question, ego has already shown how to do it: bet against the last 3 outcomes.
2nd: It may be hard to repeat, but it's no harder than any other pattern of 3.

[Bayes]

We never know when they will occur, so it doesn't change anything

Not quite. You can tip the odds slightly in your favour and take advantage of the clumping effect. I don't like having to admit this, but it's not what you'd call a 'mechanical' method, although in principle it could be.

[ZeroBlue]

2nd: It may be hard to repeat, but it's no harder than any other pattern of 3.

OK
the matter is whether it will repeat itself inside a window or not.
how can one perform an analyses in that conditions?

[flukey luke]

You can tip the odds slightly in your favour and take advantage of the clumping effect. 

I agree 100% with this.

Trends do occur, regardless of the cause. This has to happen (and can be proved mathematically), the only issue is knowing when they will begin and end. 

That will always be the $64 dollar question! Gizmotron talks about the three states.

1) Something is working well.
2) It is treading water.
3) It is not working.

I find this to be a good way of looking at things. It just means sitting out spins when it is obvious to me that something is not firing on all cylinders.

[ZeroBlue]

I post this as I know there is nothing that beats this random walk.
It is as close you can get towards educated guessing.

Pick any outcome or previos three to illustrate this.

There is 8 combinations.
If you play same as the previos three you have 1/8 to lose.
If you play oppisite as the previos three you have 1/8 to lose.

So no matter what your first bet is oppisite or same - so if you first bet lose you should allways aim for the oppisite to what your first be was or we could put it like this - getting a secound chance having the odds of 1/8 - twice.

Cheers

i am sorry things went slightly off-topic on my last post. this is indeed a subject that lurks my attention.

@ Ego,
For having the odds of 1/8
one must make 3 consecutive bets
2X2X2
It wasn't clear what you suggested.

THIS
(odd/even)
[reveal]

36 36 28 6 17 33 13 24 25 6 8 23 17

27 36 23 36 32 34 29 23 33 7 30 10 34

29 5 20 20 17 23 8 12 10 33 11 23 7

S   O   S S   O   O  -->Bet Other (O) and Loose Then Bet Same (S) and Win (stop) S   O   S  -->Bet Other (O) and Loose Then Bet Same (S) and Win (stop) O   S   O  -->Bet Other (O) and Win (stop) S   S   S  -->Bet Other and Win (stop) S   O   O  -->Bet Other and Loose, then bet Same and Loose, then bet Other and Win O   S   S  -->Bet Other and Win (stop) O   S   S  -->Bet Other (O) and Loose Then Bet Same (S) and Win (stop) O   S   O  -->Bet Other (O) and Loose Then Bet Same (S) and Win (stop) S   O   S  -->Bet Other and Win (stop) O   S   S  -->Bet Other and Win (stop) S   S   S  -->Bet Other and Win (stop)

[/reveal]

OR THIS:

[reveal]

36 36 28 6 17 33 13 24 25 6 8 23 17

27 36 23 36 32 34 29 23 33 7 30 10 34

29 5 20 20 17 23 8 12 10 33 11 23 7

S   O   S S   O   O  -->it is Same as above so bet Against and Loose, bet Against again and Win S   O   S  -->it is Same as above so bet Against and Loose, bet Against again and Win O   S   O  -->it is Opposite as above so bet Same as above and Loose, bet Same again and Loose S   S   S S   O   O O   S   S O   S   S O   S   O S   O   S O   S   S S   S   S

[/reveal]

[Colbster]

When we wait for the first spin to show us either same or opposite of the past 3 spins, our first result is cast in stone.  We now only have 1/4 chance of losing (1/2)^2, or 1/8th twice like you said.  The odds have not changed in our favor, we are just betting for or against a shorter pattern.  This doesn't stop me from enjoying playing like this sometimes, but it doesn't have a mathmatical edge.

[ZeroBlue]

When we wait for the first spin to show us either same or opposite of the past 3 spins, our first result is cast in stone.  We now only have 1/4 chance of losing (1/2)^2, or 1/8th twice like you said.  The odds have not changed in our favor, we are just betting for or against a shorter pattern.  This doesn't stop me from enjoying playing like this sometimes, but it doesn't have a mathmatical edge.

dear Colbster,


There is a nice discussion on this mathematical edge running on this thread:


link:://rouletteforum.cc/general-discussion/probability-question/msg62309/#msg62309


it would be nice to have your contribution.