Author Topic: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN  (Read 35421 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Thanked: 500 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #375 on: April 13, 2017, 11:21:06 AM »
Okay, I went through my last 20 games, again, and THIS time I looked for all triggers of XYY, in which the previous 3 spins did NOT include an X. Here are the results:

Wins =  53
Loses = 15


I am certain that besides the higher hit rate of this trigger under the conditions of no X's prior to the XYY, it is very rare to run into back to back trigger losses. Where counting all triggers, sometimes 2 back to back trigger losses are possible, in this case they become even more rarer.
 
The following users thanked this post: Harryj, pip29, Reyth

kav

  • www.Roulette30.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1937
  • Thanked: 926 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #376 on: April 13, 2017, 12:07:36 PM »
The normal hit rate if we bet a dozen 3 times is 70%
The 53/68, if it is any indication, is a 77% hit rate.

So after all the suggested trigger is after XYY bet X if there was no X before X?

YYXYY is a trigger?
 

TERMINATOR

  • Search YouTube for MANDELA EFFECT
  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 263
  • Thanked: 321 times
  • Gender: Male
  • MANDELA EFFECT
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #377 on: April 13, 2017, 06:26:44 PM »
Bayes asked:
Quote
TERM, do you mean just bet the missing dozen in the last 3 spins?

No, I'm not saying this. See below.

Kav asked:
Quote
So after all the suggested trigger is after XYY bet X if there was no X before X?
YYXYY is a trigger?

Not exactly. Your example is only looking at the last TWO previous spins (YY) BEFORE the XYY trigger; whereas I'm looking at the last THREE spins prior to the XYY trigger.

This is what I'm doing. As Reyth pointed out in an earlier post:
Quote
Have you noticed a difference between triggers:

1) YXX
2) XYX
3) XXY

I would expect that trigger #1 would perform the best, followed by 2 and with 3 performing the worst.

The statistical differences as far as streaks are concerned are:

1) 85.92% (2 buffer + 3 bets = 5 streak)
2) 79.16% (1 buffer + 3 bets = 4 streak)
3) 69.16% (0 buffer + 3 bets = 3 streak)

This is a 16.76% difference between trigger 1 and trigger 3!

So, the YXX trigger is the most likely to hit of the 3 different triggers.

However, as Palestis pointed out, there may be ways to make even THIS more likely...IF we look at the PREVIOUS THREE SPINS before that XYY trigger.


This is what I did in my tests:
Of all the occurrences of the XYY trigger that I wagered on in my last 4000 spins, I went back and LOOKED at the previous THREE spins BEFORE the XYY trigger. If there was NO "X" in those three spins, then I would record if that XYY trigger WON or LOST. That's it.

It turns out that it won 57% above the expected outcome.

Hope this clarifies your questions?

Kav wrote:
Quote
The normal hit rate if we bet a dozen 3 times is 70%
The 53/68, if it is any indication, is a 77% hit rate.

It wasn't a 53/68 win/loss rate. It was a 53/15 win/loss rate.

If the hit rate is 70%, that means for every 3 losses, we get 7 wins.
Therefore, let's take the 15 losses I got. The expected wins are 35. But instead of 35 wins, I got 53 wins instead! This is 57% above expectation. Over a course of 4,000 roulette spins.

« Last Edit: April 13, 2017, 08:16:07 PM by TERMINATOR »
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

TERMINATOR

  • Search YouTube for MANDELA EFFECT
  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 263
  • Thanked: 321 times
  • Gender: Male
  • MANDELA EFFECT
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #378 on: April 13, 2017, 06:54:16 PM »
I think a good way to take advantage of this is during a bad losing streak.

For example, if the progression level reaches a certain level and we lose, to cut down the chances of losing even MORE, we can now be MORE SELECTIVE of our trigger selection. The next time we look for a trigger, ONLY look for an XYY trigger. Once that XYY trigger is found, THEN do one more step.

Look at the previous 3 spins BEFORE that XYY trigger. If the "X" appear in those 3 previous spins, do not bet. If it does NOT appear in those 3 previous spins, then you bet.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2017, 07:09:53 PM by TERMINATOR »
 

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3974
  • Thanked: 1280 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #379 on: April 13, 2017, 06:57:48 PM »
LOL!  You guys ready!?

http://imgur.com/syUDdFm

I think I know what Pales and Harry were thinking regarding this trigger!  Its like horse racing where each of the Dozens are in a race and we don't back the sleeper, nor do we back the front runner but we back the NORMALLY APPEARING number instead!

So for me its a battle between spin by spin statistics, analyzed by series and LOTT analyzed by groups of 37 spins.

I must say though, that I seem to want to hold to spin by spin statistics! O_o o_O
« Last Edit: April 13, 2017, 07:07:31 PM by Reyth »
 
The following users thanked this post: Harryj, TERMINATOR

kav

  • www.Roulette30.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1937
  • Thanked: 926 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #380 on: April 13, 2017, 09:04:24 PM »
Kav wrote:
Quote
The normal hit rate if we bet a dozen 3 times is 70%
The 53/68, if it is any indication, is a 77% hit rate.

It wasn't a 53/68 win/loss rate. It was a 53/15 win/loss rate.

If the hit rate is 70%, that means for every 3 losses, we get 7 wins.
Therefore, let's take the 15 losses I got. The expected wins are 35. But instead of 35 wins, I got 53 wins instead! This is 57% above expectation. Over a course of 4,000 roulette spins.

Term,

I never said it was a 53/68 win/loss rate. i said it was a 53/68 win rate. In 68 attacks you won the 53.
This is 53x100/68 =78% win rate (77,9% to be exact)
This means that (if the stats of your test hold long term), in every 100 attacks, you will win the 78.
Without any triggers one should on average win 69 (69,2 to be exact) times out of 100 when betting a dozen 3 times.

In 68 attacks, betting on dozens 3 times without trigger one expects 47 wins and 21 losses, instead of your 53 wins and 15 losses.

In 50 attacks your trigger will produce 39 wins 11 losses. Without trigger we will have 35 wins 15 losses.

I think that the win/loss rate is misleading.
Anyway this is it:  3,5 wins per loss with the trigger, 2,3 wins per loss without the trigger.

With the disclaimer that we are not sure that your preliminary test will hold true in the long run.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2017, 09:10:55 PM by kav »
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth, TERMINATOR

TERMINATOR

  • Search YouTube for MANDELA EFFECT
  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 263
  • Thanked: 321 times
  • Gender: Male
  • MANDELA EFFECT
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #381 on: April 13, 2017, 09:20:52 PM »
Thanks for clarifying that, Kav. I misunderstood.
 
The following users thanked this post: kav

kav

  • www.Roulette30.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1937
  • Thanked: 926 times
  • Gender: Male
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #382 on: April 13, 2017, 09:32:24 PM »
You are welcome Term.

Your point that with the trigger we have 50% more wins per loss is true.

The big question is if these stats will hold long term. Need to test more spins.
 

palestis

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 668
  • Thanked: 500 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #383 on: April 13, 2017, 10:13:05 PM »
That's  the whole idea behind an effective trigger. 
To ensure that the target can be hit with at least its statistical expectation rate in one of the intended series of bets.
While at the same time it does not allow enough consecutive losses that can neutralize the higher hit rate.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2017, 10:58:20 PM by palestis »
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth, TERMINATOR

TERMINATOR

  • Search YouTube for MANDELA EFFECT
  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 263
  • Thanked: 321 times
  • Gender: Male
  • MANDELA EFFECT
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #384 on: April 14, 2017, 04:13:04 AM »
The big question is if these stats will hold long term. Need to test more spins.

Yes. Hopefully those who are either testing or playing this method can verify and post their results on XYY in this thread as well. The more testing from everyone the better!
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, Reyth

ShadowBlue

  • New
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Thanked: 34 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #385 on: April 14, 2017, 12:20:44 PM »
Good idea Terminator. I will also post results for XYY and other triggers...

 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth, TERMINATOR

Bayes

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 688
  • Thanked: 558 times
  • roulettician.com
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #386 on: April 14, 2017, 12:29:12 PM »
This is what I did in my tests:
Of all the occurrences of the XYY trigger that I wagered on in my last 4000 spins, I went back and LOOKED at the previous THREE spins BEFORE the XYY trigger. If there was NO "X" in those three spins, then I would record if that XYY trigger WON or LOST. That's it.

TERM, were you ignoring the "red flag" rules in your tests of this?
 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth, TERMINATOR

Bayes

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 688
  • Thanked: 558 times
  • roulettician.com
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #387 on: April 14, 2017, 03:52:35 PM »
Worst session yet encountered. At spin 28 (on the Dozens) there were 4 losses in a row, followed by 2 wins, another loss, a win, then another 3 losses in a row. This took the stake to the maximum of 27u. It did eventually recover flat betting at the max stake and made the target profit of 42 units at spin 336.

This was a negative 3 stdev event.  :P
 
The following users thanked this post: palestis, Reyth

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3974
  • Thanked: 1280 times
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #388 on: April 14, 2017, 04:37:54 PM »
Very nice!
 

TERMINATOR

  • Search YouTube for MANDELA EFFECT
  • Mature Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 263
  • Thanked: 321 times
  • Gender: Male
  • MANDELA EFFECT
Re: NEW SYSTEM: SINGLE DOZEN
« Reply #389 on: April 14, 2017, 04:53:44 PM »
TERM, were you ignoring the "red flag" rules in your tests of this?

Good question, Bayes! Let me explain. I used ALL of the Red Flag rules while I actually played the game itself. HOWEVER, when I went back to see the previous 3 spins PRIOR to the XYY, it WAS necessary to ignore Rule #3, when we only bet TWICE instead of THREE TIMES.

I will give you some examples (XYY trigger is in bold blue):

Example #1:

H                            (This HLH is the 3 spins before THE MLL TRIGGER)
L
H
M
L
L
                             (I bet for M starting next bet)
L                             (Bet 1 unit, lose)
L                             (Bet 1 unit lose)
H                             (STOP BETTING because the two L's above appeared in the dominant dozen of the trigger)

In the above case, I would COUNT that last "H" as part of the 3 attempts, and this is recorded as a LOSS. That way, the sequence of 3 is complete, otherwise, if we only take into consideration the TWO spins that I bet, this will mess up the expected 70% win rate of using a sequence of 3 for this XYY test. We CANNOT use the NEXT bet from the NEXT trigger (even though that's where we actually bet the third time), because the next trigger is a DIFFERENT trigger.

-

Example #2:

H                            (This HLH is the 3 spins before THE MLL TRIGGER)
L
H
M
L
L
                             (I bet for M starting next bet)
L                             (Bet 1 unit, lose)
L                             (Bet 1 unit lose)
M                           (STOP BETTING because the two L's above appeared in the dominant dozen of the trigger)

-

In the above case, I would COUNT that last "M" as part of the 3 attempts, and this is recorded as a WIN. Even though we DID NOT bet this spin in the actual game. Otherwise, the stats would be thrown off.

-

Also, if one of the 3 previous spins were a ZERO, that zero IS part of the previous 3 spins, so I would count it. For example:

Example #3:

M                            (This M does NOT count as part of the 3 spins prior to the trigger)
H                            (This H0H is the 3 spins before THE MLL TRIGGER)
0                            (A ZERO was spun in the 3 spins prior to the XYY trigger)
H
M
L
L
                             (I bet for M starting next bet)
L                             (Bet 1 unit, lose)
H                            (Bet 1 unit lose)
M                           (Bet 2 units, win.)

The ZERO does COUNT when looking at the prior 3 spins, BECAUSE this is a spin where the Target Dozen did NOT appear. And this is recorded as a WIN. FYI, when I play my games, I ALSO ignore the zeros, since several people have confirmed that there is NOT much of a difference whether or not we SKIP the zero's.

Hope this clarifies your question.

« Last Edit: April 14, 2017, 05:05:31 PM by TERMINATOR »
 
The following users thanked this post: palestis, Bayes, Reyth