Roulette Forum

Roulette Forum => Roulette Strategy Discussion => Topic started by: kav on March 17, 2017, 04:40:56 PM

Title: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: kav on March 17, 2017, 04:40:56 PM
I'm studying data. From NetEnt and other sources.

What strikes me as interesting is that skips seem to be less extreme than other stats. Please let me explain, because skips is not the right word.

This can be applied to various bets. Let's see some examples.
Take even chances.
The difference between B and R or H and L in absolute numbers can be quite high at times.  Also the type of streaks can vary very much seeing 20 spins with only two color changes (chops) or many changes (chops).

What I find to be less volatile than other stats is the difference between the 50% event RR and RB. Note that a RB event can be followed by many B (RBBBBBBBBB) or few B, but it is still a RB event. The RR event is finished after the second hit and another event will start with the second hit now as first hit. Next time R hits a new RR or RB event will start. We are basically looking for sequences with two R. These can be two consecutive RR or a R at the start and a R at the end with as many B in between. These events have a bit more steady rate of appearance than other simple chances.

I first discovered this not by looking at even chances but at other bets. I tend to use the transformation (mentioned by Bayes and Sheridan (http://forum.roulette30.com/index.php?topic=772.msg12536#msg12536)) and transform all kinds of bets into 50% even chances.

An example. Let's take the 4 numbers bet. The equivalent 50% even bet is one corner hit in 6 spins. Whenever we have a corner hit we record it as R and if hits within 6 spins we have a RR sequence. If the corner does not hit within 6 spins, no matter if it is after 10 or 20 spins, we have a RB event. Always after a hit we have a new sequence that can develop into a RR or RB type of event.

My point is that in all the extremities I have witnessed, these types of evens show a considerable consistency. While can see often 8 reds after another you can not see as often 8 RR or RB "events" after another, though both have a 50% chance.

Furthermore the skip events have an added benefit. Although typically a "losing" RB is the same with any other RB event, the length of the RB event (say having 9 losses or 19 losses of the corner) can offer valuable side information that can help us identify a possible correction. For example after 3 20-spin long RB events, our corner has only appeared 3 times in 60 spins, while after 3 10-spin long RB events out corner has hit 3 times in 30 spins. This is something that can be taken into consideration in our betting strategy.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: jekhb76 on March 17, 2017, 04:55:38 PM
Very good observation Kav. thanks. Maybe we can use it to our adventage in the near future.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Reyth on March 17, 2017, 05:03:48 PM
Yes, if we could boil this down (even with the help of a computer) to a SU selection method...

Or another approach: Monitor all the EC's and use it as an EC prediction method.

I think Sputnik has been doing things like this with the EC's.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Scarface on March 18, 2017, 12:33:18 AM
I've noticed something like this too with red/black.  May be a little different from what you're saying Kav, but same concept.  Consider the following sequence of red/blacks:

RRBBRRRBRBBRBRRBRB

There are 6 series of reds.  The odds of getting RR or RB are both 50%.  Maybe after 2 RR in a row, bet the opposite next time on the first bet.  Two RBs or two RRs in a row will be trigger to bet the opposite next time.

RRBBRRRBR (BET BLACKNEXT)
B - win

RBBRBR (2 RBs in a row, bet red next spin)
B (lose - don't bet again yet)
BBR (there are now 3 RBs in a row, so bet red again)

Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: kav on March 18, 2017, 01:05:25 AM
Yes, Scarface, that's the idea.

For something called personal permanence I prefer to be into the game at all times with a base bet. So after a loss one can just increase the bet of the next attacks. Also like I said it IS important if you loss was a RBBR or a RBBBBBBBBR . Maybe a short losing sequence should count as 1 point and a long as 2 points. And then based on the points you can adjust your bet.

I have seen even more balanced results when using it with other bets than simple chances. Say we take the double-street bet (line). It has a 50% chance of appearing within 4 spins. When it hits within 4 spins we record a W and if it goes beyond 4 spins without a hit we record a L. We bet the first 4 spins after a hit with increased bet and otherwise continue with our base bet.

It is possible to have LLWLLLLWLLWWL sequence. But because some of the L sequences will be pretty long with the street sleeping for quite some time, it is more rare to have a WWLLLLLLLLLL sequence that is quite common in simple chances.

Although I'm always in the game with a base bet, as I see it, long losing sequences are a good thing. If my street disappears for 20 spins then hits once and then disappears for another 20 spins, I may have lost 40 + 4x3=52 units if I bet  after a hit 4 units for the next 4 spins. The good news is that though the expected average is 1 hit in ~6 spins I only have 1 hit in 40 spins. This should somehow correct by producing more hits within the first 4 spins after a hit. So after the next hit I will bet 5 units for 4 spins. And if I still don't get an early hit, next time I can bet 6 units for 4 spins etc. Hope you get the idea.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: BlueAngel on March 18, 2017, 01:55:14 AM
I'm confirming that the deviations between series vs chops (intermittences) are milder than those of the EC pairs (black/red,even/odd,low/high).

Try to imagine results as an an acrobat walking on a tensed rope, in one hand holds a bucket of EC pairs, while on the other a bucket with series and chops, trying to keep the balance in all situations is not an easy thing...

Personal permanence is an absurd idea according my perspective and let me explain you why I believe so;
When you start a new session you never know what happened before you arrive there, also you never know what happens after you finish your session and leave.
By transferring old outcomes to new sessions and/or other casinos would not give you any insight about what's coming next.
The only ones who have the complete picture are the casinos which monitor tables 24/7.
But even if you had an insider would not be sufficient because the ''eye in the sky'' is not always the same person.

I apologise because I'm thinking out loud instead of telling you something you'd like to listen.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: kav on March 18, 2017, 02:07:19 AM
Personal permanence is based on probabilities:
A random combination of random sequences is probabilistic-aly equal to a long random sequence.
One's play, no matter where or when, can be combined to form a long random sequence (like the one produced if all the spins where on the same wheel).
I apologize, but the concept of Personal permanence is  mathematically sound. But this is another topic.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Scarface on March 18, 2017, 02:15:36 AM
Some good things to think about.  With the right bet selection and progression, I think this could work.  I'll see what I can come up with and post back soon
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: dobbelsteen on March 18, 2017, 09:36:33 AM
I analyse the random sequences for the different chances already for more than 20 years. The perfect method are analyses with simulations of the sequences. Especially the graphics can learn you alot

On the forum I see many many words but very less research. Buying simulation software with out the knowledge of their programs is not the right way to understand the features of the roulette.

 
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: MrPerfect. on March 18, 2017, 10:36:37 AM
Sequences are funny thing to calculate. Here are reasons:
   Whatever was on previous spin (b or r) has almost no affect on next spin result color.
  - it will show patterns, but these are unpredictable ( so unusable). We never know when they start and when will finish.
  - there is a " paradox" in probability due to " independance of results from each other. While previous result probability is always 100%, next spin result expectation is 18/ 37( for color).
        Probably there is a way to calculate exact probability of a color on next spin, but to be near reality, need to account probability of every number in current spin ( with bias, and inperfections. ..ets) , wich is not easy and do not bring real money either. It's because tiny advantage we may get is deluted by 18 numbers ( color).
    In general, mathematically game itself ( perfect wheel model) is unbeatable. It's made to be so by unfair payments adopted in the game practice. 
    Other thing about sequences,  when we look what ball does. We may pin point real math limits in hits distrebution.  So this thing of looking sequences may become profitable.... but it's all other story.
   
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Sputnik on March 18, 2017, 12:30:38 PM


There is a way to measuring when a state start and end - the bias is very clear when some one can distinct the three states from the chaotic state.
Some one can use the Z-Score to measuring and chart the strength behind the bias.

They come as small, medium and large imbalance states where they all are connected with each other.
So if you have the expectation that the next state will have a bias, then you can predict the future within three attempts.

So the conclusion is that if you master the EC and know how to explore the right way to tackle EC you can both tell when they start and end and predict the future.
But the hunch and expectation is based upon that there is present imbalance.

To get a better understanding some one can divide the permanence into sections for each bias state.
Then you can see two things to emerge.
So the bias state will have at least one repeat of two present events/outcomes and for that reason you know what will happen in the future - as the minimum section is three events and has at least one repeat among two present events/outcomes.

True that everything lose to something.
But i put my money on does events that can strike for 20 to 30% of a hole baccarat shoe.
That is 20 to 30 events going as direct winnings or break even results.

LWWWLWLWLWWLWWWWWLWWLWLWLWLWLW

It is the best of the best.
Each state end with two loses and each non bias state results with three loses.
No one can do better and that with any combination.

Cheers

Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Rinad on March 18, 2017, 01:17:19 PM
 
  I played systems based on events or "groups" for a long time.
series are for sure more balanced then single events. I looked at thousands of data and saw it.
the longer the serie, because it takes more "space" then single events bring more prediction.
in other words if you see a serie ; RRR-BBBB-RRRRR-BBB-RRRRRR,   you can make a pretty good bet and bet that you will have a group or serie of RR, OR BB. showing up very soon. the larger groups contribute to the probabilities that smaller groups are coming soon .
that is why as Kav mentioned making a bigger bet on a second B/OR R, when the first one shows up is like the "gate" as i call it to all other series.
the second R, or B, after long series of singletons is a gate bet.
because you simply cannot have series like RRR/BBBB/RRRRR/BBB,  without have a second, or double win FIRST.
 BECAUSE YOU HAVE AS MANY GROUPS OF BLACK AS YOU HAVE AS REDS SERIES ALWAYS HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE "DOUBLE" GROUP IN ORDER TO GET TO ALL OTHERS.
also you will never see long series, like a serie of 5 blacks,3 reds,4 blacls,ect...go lor more then 7 or 8 times without finaly go to singletons or doubletons.
and looking at data it was obvious to me that ,when comparing the deviation of "groups" of 2 or more,  to groups of "singles" following eachother, series BRING A MUCH MORE BALANCED GAMES THEN SINGLES.

hope that makes sens to someone, but these are actual facts that I verified or I would of not shared it.
God bless.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: juice on March 18, 2017, 02:46:03 PM
Kav, great start to a very important topic. Rinad, has a clear term to describe his observations with " gate " , very visual.
This is a clear and provable statistical topic.
One of my bread and butter plays on a daily basis and can be entered at any time is what I call ....
THE BOUND 2 and BEYOND. All of my data is based on a study across dozens of casinos spanning five decades, from all over the world. I have used sessions data that average 250 spins at a session. What I have found is so CONSISTANT, that you can set your watch to it. For example....
For the sake of explanation, I call a " bound" event somethings that stops at a certain number of times, so...
A BOUND 2 = r,r or b,b,. Using just this event, you can count on an average of 29 of these in 250 spins.
Yes I have seen as few as 19, which is rare, and as many as 40, also rare, but right around 25 to 30 is where I hang my hat. MORE IMPORTANTLY, you will witness that finding a condition where they do not appear to break up anything larger than an event of 3 and larger is very, very, rare.  (7) is a long sleeping event. (Average appearance is after 3 to 4 times)
An example= rrrr b r bbbbb rrr b r bbb ( rr ) b r b rrrr ( bb). 
Here you see that four series of BEYOND 3 occurred and was then broken by a BOUND 2.
I have CRAFTED my score sheets to take advantage of these events and have learned to hedge the,
BOUND 2, against the BOUND 3, AND the BOUND 3 AND BEYOND.
The BOUND 3 and BEYOND, puts you in all runs, and keeps you there winning, until they break.
This method of play is very safe and very profitable, when combined with virtual bets for entry and a very simple DIVISOR. I can not tell you the last time it has lost. Like all methods, it takes practice and patience to get it going.
I start at 10$ units, and use a very flat bet method, in series play. The entire style of this play revolves around a five hour session of 250 spins, on live dealer rapid roulette, found in just about every casino in the U.S.. I also will play it on a TALOS style inter block ORGANIX roulette machine.
Any new player can start with lower stakes, say 3$ units and win an easy 40 to 50$ an hour, with very little angst.
I combine this play with other methods at the same time, but that is another topic all together.
I also have a method where I incorporate a single parlay, after certain events within my divisor.
I should also mention that I use a " BEST OF" series style of play.
This topic has made me very happy to contribute to. I look forward to reading others experience on the topic!
       
                                    Thanks, juice

Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: kav on March 18, 2017, 03:08:07 PM
Guys these are some amazing posts you made here, thank you.
I understand that Sputnik, Rinard, Juice and other members are using systems based on this principle, but somehow the systems are not very clear to me. I don't understand how you play.
It would be great if you could give a more clear explanation of your system(s) in this or a new topic. Me and everyone else would be very interested in reading a clear description of a system based on the concept we are talking here.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Reyth on March 18, 2017, 03:33:03 PM
Same here.  I have been trying to understand how to do this foreva but have yet to be able to actually grasp the system and concept completely.

I like Sputnik's "3 minimum events" rule that aids in prediction but my understanding of it is sufficiently fuzzy to be still confused on what it exactly means.

Same thing with Juice & Rinad.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Bayes on March 18, 2017, 04:13:15 PM
This whole thread seems pretty fuzzy to me, I'm having trouble grasping what  you guys are trying to get across.  :o

@ Kav, your first post isn't clear to me, but I think what you mean by it is that if you divide spins into fixed "windows", then it's harder for a streak, or any given event, to "fit" exactly into that window (so that it begins when the window starts and ends when it ends). That's true because you're asking the random outcomes to comply with your predetermined divisions. I use this principle myself when playing, partly because it's an antidote to curve-fitting. You can look at the marquee (if betting R/B) and see all kinds of long streaks and patterns which disappear if the spins are divided into equally spaced blocks.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Reyth on March 18, 2017, 04:26:06 PM
you're asking the random outcomes to comply with your predetermined divisions. I use this principle myself when playing, partly because it's an antidote to curve-fitting.

O_o WAHUT!?

A cure for the Reverse Engineering Curse?   

A Pain-Free TriggerTM method!?

Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: juice on March 18, 2017, 04:48:14 PM
Kav and Reyth, I will try and expound on my style when I have a bit more time and I am at my pc.
I can not speak for anybody else as far as there method and forward thinking, but I want you to look at it this way....
Instead of trying to predict what is going to happen next, bet on what you know has a steady perpensity to always happen in a certain amount of spins.
I have tried to mention in other posts that I get my data from www.la (http://www.la) roulette.it. I am not trying to promote that site for any other reason. I go to the permanenze and click on any random casino data from any year. After that you can go to Rosso e Nero, black red in this case and look at the series break down. It will give you the stats on 2's, 3's, 4's.....and so on. You can also click on any condition you may want to study. At the bottom of each condition page I like to click on a tab that says detagglio Della permanenza. I am not able to do the high tech computer stuff Reyth and others can do so I feed my head the old fashion way, manually. I do not complicate my observations, I just count the average gaps in between certain events. This particular site makes it easier for ME. 
As far as playing and making money from this data, it is not hard when you set your triggers in a reasonable parameter.

All this data means nothing without a good method of score keeping. This is where the consistency begins.
I am not sure how to present an example score sheet, because I do not know how to put one up here on this site. If you want to help me though the process, I would be more than willing to do so, and give a sample session of the basics.
After which I am sure it will become more clear and you can see how elementary the play really is.

I hope I did not piss you off, Kav, by mentioning that data site! It is not my intent.....

Best Regards,   juice. 
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: juice on March 18, 2017, 04:55:06 PM
Actually, I think that Geoffrey and Terminator would really like this site due to their Trading skills.  Just a post script~
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Reyth on March 18, 2017, 04:55:49 PM
1) Open up a free account here: http://tinypic.com (http://tinypic.com)

Be sure to have your ad blockers/anti-virus softwares up and running because it has at least one popup.  If you sign up they will allow you to store your images in folders.

2) Scan an image of a real-life sheet onto your hard drive OR make a spreadsheet of a score sheet and take a screenshot of it.

3) Upload the image to Tiny Pic and copy the "link for direct layouts" link.

4) Post it here like so:

Code: [Select]
[img]imageurl.jpg[/img]
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: juice on March 18, 2017, 04:56:32 PM
as you can see my skills are a combination of Forrest Gump and Rain man . How bout I just email you the sheet and you post it?! Lol
Thanks Reyth
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Rinad on March 18, 2017, 05:10:39 PM


  triggers for the series tell you where you can start a mild progression.

as for example for a serie of 3 or more showing up.

if a  series of two's   have been missing 4 times because of 3s,or 4s,ect...  you can after seing the first 2 s, bet your first leg of a progression. but when you lose your bet you have to wait for another two's to show up before making a second bet to the negative progression, ect...up to 4 times is a good number. 1,2,4,8.
key is allready know the triggers of many you want to see absent befor the start.
for 2s, 3s, 4s,   a trigger of 4 times "no see", because of longer groups is a good start.

now for groups of singles, I would not touch any until I see 8 of them of the same type. black and reds I consider 2 different types.  because if you put them together you get a double wammy, like 14,18 singletons at once.  the perfect storm and it will empty your pockets in no times. so they have to be regarded as separate entity.
every serie should have its own progression. 3 blacks and followed by 3 reds to me is 2 different entities. you could play them as one but then get even more picky and wait for a higher number of missed like 6 times instead of 4.
great topic.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: juice on March 18, 2017, 05:20:24 PM
Rinad, great explanation! With the power of conditional play, I recommend for players to not even touch the singles ever again, no matter how tempting they are. If you set your play up correctly, you will be riding those streaks instead of trying to bet on when they will end.... Refreshing that I can talk the basics to someone that gets it! The betting style possibilities are endless, and can be tailored to an individual's skill level, risk tolerance, and bank roll.
It ain't rocket science....

Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Sputnik on March 18, 2017, 05:29:27 PM


 My perspective and methodology is not same and different so i can not give any further comments.
 But i note Bayes comment about determine sections to limit the permanence performance - i like that perspective.
 Also grasp Juice comment about the subject - for me he talk about most common and less common events.
 But i have hard time to understand Kav's first post.

 Cheers
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Reyth on March 18, 2017, 05:30:13 PM
So a series of 2's is:

RR BB RR BB <=== 4 in a row?

And 2's missing 4 times is like:

RRR B R BBB <=== 2's have not appeared 4 times in a row?

I just want to make sure I at least have the basics that you guys are referring to?
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: juice on March 18, 2017, 05:44:51 PM
Reyth do not count singles, just threes and beyond. Actually your first example is a home run within my parlay play to clear bank debt, I will explain more on that later. But..... rr bb rr bb rr bb, is a wonderful thing providing you are in on the play, if not, no harm done.
Actually two's have not appeared two times in your example, not four to make it more clear.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Reyth on March 18, 2017, 06:00:51 PM
Why don't the singles count?  Aren't they events?
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: juice on March 18, 2017, 06:26:41 PM
 no not in this case. You are betting bound 2's, so in that respect they are in play because you are betting on a change to create them, but their appearance in the case of this stratagy, would force you to bet too often, hence obscuring the math. Just look at any ec, that is three or more and count how many of them come out concurrently before a bound 2 shows up. It will make more sense then. Also, the further you can space out your attempts, the flatter your bet can remain before a divisor is employed. If you have the patience and disapline to wait on 2's not showing up for let's say 4 times after you see the 3's or beyond run concurrent, even with single in between, you can not be beat with a solid banking method. Do not get me wrong, I play the 2's in other ways also, cause they are just too strong to ignore!
The 2's are a necessary gateway to all other events, except for the stagger/ chop...brbrbrbrbrbr. Think about it.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Sputnik on March 18, 2017, 06:33:04 PM


Singles is important event as any other event - but if Juice is clustering or skip some events then hes games maybe start from series of two and higher - i don't know - but that is a possibility.

I can show you one example where you can win 30 to 50 events in a row with only two loses.
For example i get singles and series of two hitting 15 times as events and after that series of three or higher with singles for 20 times as events.

That is two states who is connected with past results into future results and you can take advantage out of that conditional situation and you just hold your bet once and the rest is winnings or break evens for the hole 35 events.

One person use a method based upon same principals and won 40 shoes in a row.
And that would not be possible if you don't explore the EC bias states.

Cheers
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: kav on March 18, 2017, 06:33:27 PM
Bayes,
I understand what you are saying, but it is not what I'm saying.

The confusion in my own post is maybe due to the fact that I don't really use the concept I describe for even chances. So for my part forget the simple chances. Let's take a corner bet (4 numbers).
The corner bet has a 50% chance of appearing within 6 spins. We count from hit to hit. When it hits within 6 spins we record a A and if it goes beyond 6 spins without a hit we record a B.
H: Hit
M: Miss
A: Hit within 6 spins
B: Hit after 6 spins

M M H (A) M M M H (A) M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M H (B) M M M H (A) M M H (A) M M M M M M M M H (B) etc.

We then have a sequence of AABAAB... etc.

So what I do is count the spins between hits. Dividing the sequences in A or B, each of which has a 50% chance. We have created some sort of even chance and we record the results. These results are less extreme than your common Red Black High Low etc. results.

A further characteristic of this approach is that you can have even more information. For example you know that in average (long term) the H will be ~1/9 of total spins. Because we bet 4 out of 37 numbers, 37/4 = 9,25. All B sequences are not the same. A very long B sequence (MMMMMMMMMMMMMMH) can draw the average too much away from the 1/9 and (so to speak) increases slightly the probability of a correction.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: juice on March 18, 2017, 06:41:33 PM
Sput, I agree with you about the single, but just not in this particular play. This is just one stratagy that I use to make guaranteed units, but as you know, many good strategies are needed to win, especially if you are patient, and waiting on event triggers. When I play perpetual the singles are a necessary part of my game.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Bayes on March 18, 2017, 07:01:51 PM
@ Kav, thanks. I get it now.  8)
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Rinad on March 18, 2017, 07:09:05 PM


   Juice
you are correct to said"dont bother with singles".
I was hesitant of even mentioning these little ones because of the risk they are.

something else that is a great way to play is to keep the bookeeping of series and play only "the most commun groups and following the trends", because we all have seen the "supernatural effect " of groups  of 3s following eachother."

the thing is to not go after "too many opportunities" i think, or only after much experience with this types of bets.
most important is to not believe that the impossible can NEVER OCCUR. so keeping progressions in a recovering maner is key. patience, have some because you need it with this method.
better to play bigger bets with shorter sessions. it never deviates that much. groups are very reliable source because of the variance being minimal.
refreshing way to play.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: juice on March 18, 2017, 08:44:15 PM
Rinad, Amen!  Everything you just said is true in my opinion. Furthermore , I see it as a guaranteed win! It's not if, but when....another reason I like 2's is because what most refer to as " terrible twos"' because they appear so often, I refer to as money in the bank.....picture this....
A PLAYER, has a solid method/ system, but needs a strong recovery trigger. Here you now have one, you can Waite and measure the average distance between normal appearances, and stretch it out even a little further, say, 6 times that a bound 2, did not appear to break up the flow of 3's and beyond. This is a very solid place to start an aggressive recovery. If it fails to appear, you can stay with this bet with little to worry about, it will be out in the next few attempts at most, and even in the worst case scenario, you can always put it through a new divisor and carry on from there.
I personally use a method that goes something like this.....
A best of 7 series was a complete loss, flat betting,
Debt = - 7 units
I now apply a divisor of 3.
Next bet I lay will still be a 1 unit base bet until I win. Only after a plus one (+1), do I employ a divisor.
If I hit the win at that level, I am now -3 overall, so I am at a fork in the road, I can ....
A) rebalance and carry on with base bet and new divisor of 1.5, or...
B) leave my divisor bet amount out there for the next betting opportunity along with my winnings and parlay the next available attempt at the terrific 2's. A pattern that is even more prevalent than even the 3's. On a win I am now,
Net 9 units, bringing my new balance from a -7, to a +3.

Of coarse on a loss of the divisor attempt at 3 units I record the result and carry on back to base bet of 1 unit.
I can assure you that you do not miss the parlay for any long length of time.
Your aggression can revolve around your bank balance at the time.
NOW, for the good stuff......
I hedge most of these basic conditions, with different conditional score sheets. It works well as long as you know that your play will always end in a loss in one of the conditions that are harmoniously making money together, unless you begin to close each one out slowly, as they each reach a plus one or more balance. It is not as tricky as my rambling makes it sound.
Damn, I love this game!             Best of luck, juice

Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Reyth on March 18, 2017, 09:03:16 PM
Hmmm, kind of like playing several EC's at once with the same method but you are playing 1 EC with several methods... Wow!

I think that when several methods CONVERGE on a single bet selection, there is a greater chance of that selection being correct?   Hahahah I have Bayes' support on this one so I'm safe; well OK he will say that chances don't increase but w/e  O_o
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: kav on March 18, 2017, 09:57:16 PM
Juice,
Quote
I can assure you that you do not miss the parlay for any long length of time.
If you gonna parlay, why look specific for series of twos? Any series is good for parlay, right?

Can you please explain your system in easy to follow rules?
(e.g. "I wait for 3 reds-then I bet once on black etc." this kind of simple)
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: juice on March 18, 2017, 10:02:17 PM
Yes Kav, heading out for the ol' st pattys dinner currently, and will attempt when I return all fat and bloated with corned beef and cabbage........
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Rinad on March 18, 2017, 10:55:38 PM
 
kav,  I dont mean to speak for Juice but I think what he means by twos is simply that after you get your first winning bet the second one (two's) will have to win because of the second win (two bets in a row) have to be won in order to get all other groups. which is what I call the "gate bet", because you cant go to all other groups unless you first win that second one. it probably should not be call two's because it does not stop after the second win necessarely but is just a parlay.
and once you had to wait until the parlay is won, because of statistical pressure, longer groups will materialise with formations of 3s, 4s, ect...
the won from the parlay is a important bet, as it can give almost a "time factor" for the rest of the groups to come.
again, you can win a parlay on RED, then it can go BBBBB, BUT because as Juice was saying you can go back to minimum and again wait for that parlay to show up.
I played something very close to that in blackjack for a very long time. there was a book written on winning without counting, and the experiment was condicted intensevely for thousands of hands, showing a very small but actual advantage to the player to place a bigger bet after that very first win.
the only cancelation I would said to abandon the parlay is when you see RBRBRBRB, this has always been a signal to me that it is a "parlay killer".
and I reviewed a lot of data and found out that, every time the parlay had a long stratch of not coming, was because of the BRBRBRB phenomenon. a very strong signal that you may not catch your twos,3s,ect...real soon.
groups as oposed to single wins and losses have less variances. interesting topic. I enjoy it.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Reyth on March 18, 2017, 11:15:56 PM
So when hunting series of 2-4, if a single is encountered, it is considered to be ignored, like it never happened?
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: BlueAngel on March 19, 2017, 03:59:09 AM
@ Reyth,

If you live in denial then yes!  ::)
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Rinad on March 19, 2017, 04:26:58 AM


  no Reyth, you need singles in order to become two's. they are groups just like any other groups, just groups of singles. it is just that they can stay "single" for a long time. you can see 10,12 blacks singleton very often, and if they intertwin with RED SINGLES, they can go 14,18 of them all at once. RBRBRBRBRBRBRB.
so when you are looking for the two's, you are hunting for groups like; RRRBBBBRRRRBBB, AND AT THAT POINT BET FOR TWOS NOT BECOMING 3s ,4s, ect...  the variance of large groups is LESS then the variance of 'singles"
hope that helps.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Reyth on March 19, 2017, 05:18:11 AM
Aha, yes I finally get it.  Singleton doesn't provide enough variance cushioning; we need a group of at least 2. ;)

Thanks! :D
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Sputnik on March 19, 2017, 08:28:32 AM


But how does that hold up - if you use series of two against series of three and higher.
No strategy for the EC should accept more then two to three loses maximum.

Anything beyond that destroy the ability to win on regular basis.

Cheers

Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: dobbelsteen on March 19, 2017, 09:44:59 AM

With an Excel analysis program you can study the features of the repeaters.

Here an example of the last spins with the enumeration of the repeaters.

The second image show the graphics of the 200 spins event.

The length of the up going lines are the High repeaters and the down going lines the repeaters of the low numbers
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 19, 2017, 11:58:16 PM
I am not sure how to present an example score sheet, because I do not know how to put one up here on this site. If you want to help me though the process, I would be more than willing to do so, and give a sample session of the basics.

Hi Juice, I'd be willing to help you do that. I'll PM you.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: juice on March 20, 2017, 02:14:55 AM
Kav, Here is the best I can do for now, I KNOW you will have questions, but perhaps this will close the gap a little bit. I am going to try and see if Reyth will help me put up some score sheets by allowing me to email him in private. If not, I have a rapport with others on this site I can private email them, if he is too busy.
Rinad, Thank you for your support and explanations to the other members on my behalf! and although we are not playing exactly the same, our methods overlap very nicely and I am looking forward to more of your input, for sure~
Dobbel, GREAT VISUAL! Graphs.

Here I am targeting the 2's (bb or rr) to appear in between runs of 3 or more. THE point being, that 2's do not sleep for more than "seven" time very often, when applied to this method, and usually have an appearance frequent enough to interrupt runs of three and larger, not letting them run concurrently more than 3 to 5 times. 7 times is unusually long, and "can" be seen approx. 1 time per 250 spins.
NOTE**** you can find runs longer than 7 but not too often, 11 is the most I have seen...once.

 **concurrent = runs of the same color, three +, and single events in between are not counted for the sake of an entry trigger.

ANY time we see two matching colors touch, we play for it to go NO FURTHER, code name......."BOUND 2's". After our trigger has appeared.

CasinĂ²: Bad Reichenhall
Data: 03/01/1984
first 108 results of a 241 spin session..

34 18 32 30 24 9 2 36 7 34 26 12 13 5 13 5 3 3 5 20 25 6 17 4 33 28 3 15 8 14 29 15 9 10 29 14 21 1 21 7 21 11 12 31 18 13 16 14 20 13 11 9 26 10 35 19 14 11 14 28 25 30 10 26 11 34 11 11 21 3 1 6 8 6 2 4 3 25 27 31 26 30 10 16 27 3 11 4 16 32 21 17 7 0 13 9 5 18 3 3 21 8 16 33 3 5 29 34

translation into b /r., by groups...

 #1        #2          #3       #4       *bet red* = win (also a great parlay spot, very common)
(rrrr)brb(rrr)brbrb(rrrr)br(bbbbb)r*(bb)*r(bb)r(bb)(rrrrrr)brbrb(rr)(bbb)r(bbb)(rr)brb(rr)(bbb)r(bb)(rrr)(bbbbb)(rrr)(bb)rb(rrr)(bb)(rrr)br0b(rrrrrr)brb(rr)br

The play is as follows:
 observe and wait for "4" sets, of bound three's and beyond, see example, from actual spins***
***  (rrrr),brb,(rrr),brbrb,(rrrr),br,(bbbbb)r...... BET NEXT TIME YOU SEE 2 OF THE SAME COLOR TOUCHING!!! TO STAY AT (BOUND 2'S).*(BB)* as seen above, NOW BET RED.
The point is, next to "singles", ie. rbrb, they are the heartiest and most prevalent singular condition that exist for the ec's, and to get to any other "bound" conditions such as 3's and beyond, they must exist.

So what I do, is create a sort of "battle or war" between the conditions and let them fight each other.
HERE IS THE BEST WAY TO "TRY" AND EXPLAIN..........
Unless you win every spin, and NOBODY does, you have to find a way to keep your bets as flat as possible. I use a "series" of flat bet attempts at "conditions", that I know statistically MUST HAPPEN in order for the other conditions to exist, for example.......
USING THE TERM "BOUND", we have the following list in order of numerical necessity for the next to EXIST. I will use (R)= red
RR,RRR,RRRR,RRRRR,RRRRRR,RRRRRRR AND SO ON AND SO ON...obvious right?                   NOW REVERSE IT..... YOU CAN'T HAVE 8'S WITHOUT 7'S AND 7'S WITHOUT 6'S AND 6'S WITHOUT 5'S AND ON AND ON AND ON....

So I set up my score sheets in a way to capitalize on these inevitable events.
I will need to scan a score sheet to illustrate because I just tried to give an example with my limited typing skills and I would have just confused you if I did not erase it. As If you are not confused already.

Basically you must play both colors at the same time,(a hedge), and I know this sounds ridiculous but it works, as long as you record your wins and losses and balance out your series.
a series consists of a "best of" 3,5,or 7, depending on my mood and target goal and unit size.
once I tally up a series of a specific condition, I will be either in (+ or -) units.
If in the (+), I lock in profit and begin again.
If in (-), depending on how much the condition is down, I decide to add a divisor, or carry on flat betting, or use a divisor combined with a one shot parlay, as I attempted to explain in my last post.
As the basic statistics for these events that I mentioned are so predictably accurate in a 250 spin cycle, all I am really doing is taking advantage of the propensity of their appearances.

Benefits of this style of play are:
1) you are always winning on something( you are playing both red and black at the same time for different reasons)
2) the bet comes to you, not you chasing the bet.
3) all conditions played are in a very methodical way, and all losses are normally proofed out to a win because of the normal appearance rate,(I always factor worst case, hence the predetermined amount of virtual bets, acting as my stop and go betting signals.)   
4) by playing"bound 2's' against "bound 3's", and "bound 3's" against "the runs of 3's or more", and also, the aforementioned condition and the meat of this post.......
The "bound 2's" against "the 3's and beyond", we are taking advantage of the most common events that are always present in the SHORT and LONG RUN. The game simply can not move forward without these thing attending the game, unless you believe in rbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbr.
AND the fact that you are in the game playing for things to go "further than three" as one of your conditions, you are enjoying riding every single event that takes off on a nice long run!
Let's face it folks, aside from winning, the game becomes all about how to safely manage your losses and turn them into winning positions with the data that does not vary far from their own norm.

WELL, I think that is about it for now, I could go on with different angle that splinter from this method, but, that would just start more rambling, and without seeing my score sheets would not be fair to the strategy.
One post script, I am sure anyone that is genuinely interested in understanding my methods further will ask many questions, and I will be happy to respond the best I can. I make money with these plays, steady, decent, income. I am not interested in discussions about defending my methods, and will have no reason to continue on with the topic if others begin to crap all over my style, just because they can't either: A) understand it, or  B) don't believe it. I am just not interested in a negative beat down~       Best Regards Always, The juice

                   

 

 
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: TERMINATOR on March 20, 2017, 06:15:52 AM
Thank you for sharing your method, Juice. I think this is AWESOME. Something I have never really heard before. I will wait until I see your score sheet before asking questions. But I have a much better idea of your thinking now thanks to your latest post.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Sputnik on March 20, 2017, 06:23:31 AM


 Thanks for sharing Juice - i fully understand your method ...

 Cheers
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: dobbelsteen on March 20, 2017, 10:06:08 AM
There is a problem when you want to past your images between the tekst.
I make images from my screen with the scissors program. These images can not be pasted but only attached. For the more interested members, who are familiar with Excel, the programs are free available. Please contact me rouletteplayersclub@hotmail.com.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Bayes on March 20, 2017, 11:33:44 AM
you're asking the random outcomes to comply with your predetermined divisions. I use this principle myself when playing, partly because it's an antidote to curve-fitting.

O_o WAHUT!?

A cure for the Reverse Engineering Curse?   

A Pain-Free TriggerTM method!?

Well I wouldn't say a cure exactly, but it helps. If you divide spins into fixed blocks and label them by numbers which repeat in cycles, the cycles will also have their own distribution. For example, there are 8 patterns of an EC taken 3 at a time:

 RRR
 RRB
 RBR
 RBR
 BRR
 BRB
 BBR
 BBB

Now if you divide the stream of outcomes into blocks of 3 and each block is identified by a number (1-8) consecutively (so that when you get to #8 you start labeling the blocks from #1 again), you have in effect 8 separate games going on at the same time, identified by block number. The stream as a whole has its own distribution, and also the games corresponding to a particular block number do too. However, these are not entirely independent of the stream as a whole. For example, if the outcomes are RBB RBB RBB (a pattern repeats twice) these correspond to "games" 1,2,and 3. These patterns may repeat later in the stream, but when the next cycle comes around (so you start from block #1 again) it's unlikely that they will repeat again at blocks 1,2, and 3. This predetermination is asking the outcomes to not only repeat the patterns exactly, but also at a particular point in the stream.

Of course the maths purist will counter this with "all patterns can occur at any time and in any 'place' ", but I've found that using this method does reduce the frequency and length of losing runs.

Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Reyth on March 20, 2017, 12:00:45 PM
You can message me in this forum and I will give you my email Juice.  That way I will be happy to attach your sheet to your post or paste it as an image. ;)
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: juice on March 20, 2017, 11:27:11 PM
Thanks to all who have offered to help me with my inadequate computer skills ;D
I will be back from the casino in a couple days and work on this topic again then.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Duncan on March 21, 2017, 01:40:04 PM
The RRRR and RBRB and RRBB are happening exactly the same.Been there done that...
There is no event like this that is happening less or more.
However if you look at it from a diff angle you can find events(s) that is/are happening less/more.

Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Scarface on March 22, 2017, 12:42:31 AM
Just tried a method out over 1000 spins that looks promising.  Half of all series will be a single, and the rest will be a double or more.

RRBRRRRBRB

So above, you will have a double (RR), single (B), double (RRRR),  single (B), single (R), single (B).

Ok, what I did was as soon as I see 3 consecutive singles or either 3 consecutive doubles, I'll wait for the trend to stop.  Let's say the next 3 spins were RRB.  RR, a double, broke the trend of 3 or more singles - so now I bet B for another double to follow.  If win, start over.  If loose bet again...if lose again stop and wait until the next trigger.

I did this on flatbet and was up 24 units
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Rinad on March 22, 2017, 06:02:34 AM


  good job Juice, you got it and what is important is that people got the basic of "groups/serie" play.

I am sure anyone will adopt their own style of betting. the biggest finding in this way of playing groups is to notice
how the variance is reduce as opose to ordinary ec going all over the place.

when i went through 50 000 spins of data 20 years ago and by hand I tediously wrote the length of each groups to see if they were something I could play after seen 3,4 groups of BBB HUNTING FOR THE BBR, the numbers of 3,4,5,6,ect...   looked so much shorter that yes it is a "real phenomenon", not just a opinion.

3 or 4 groups of 3s passing by like BBBB,RBR,BBBBB,RRR,BBB, you bet that the black start going to RBBR, and you got a small variance left to play and can use a negative progression as well. flat betting is great as well.

the reason why there is less variance with series is because they are using more space then singles and therefore there is a statistical pressure that pushes smaller groups to materialize.

there will always be a 50/50 number of groups between BLACK OR REDS. 
I consider a "single" to be a group of one. therefore there has to always be a group black after a group of red, there is just no other way.

take it further to orher plays like double streets, if you were to write down a - when losing a bet and a + when winning , those are groups as well. could look like ------+---++-------+----+  because of the odds creating longer losses. but still the numbers "groups always 50/50.= 4 losses/ 4 plus.

there is lot that be be said about the study of series, but the beauty is that they get you a fell for wins and losses.
anyhow, I hope I did not confused anyone but just wanted to explain a few things.  God bless.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Sputnik on March 22, 2017, 08:19:41 PM


I write one more comment here to find this post later. Because i will get back to talk about Bayes example that i have been experimenting with in the past with different clustering solutions.

Cheers
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Sputnik on March 23, 2017, 07:19:00 PM


This is how Bayes cycle look like when betting against any combination where one pattern repeats for three times.
Assume you see any outcome Black or Red then you bet against it for two attempts.

B
B L
B L

You lose and now wait for any outcome to show Black or Red and bet against it for two attempts

B
B L
B L

You lose and now wait for any outcome to show Black or Red and bet against it for two attempts

R
R L
R L

Now if you put them next to each other you get the principal of 1/3

BBR
BBR
BBR

And it would be same no matter what outcome show next when betting against it for two attempts

BRB
BRB
BRB

BRR
BRR
BRR

BBB
BBB
BBB

RRR
RRR
RRR

RBB
RBB
RBB

RBR
RBR
RBR

RRB
RRB
RRB

So you just wait for any outcome to show and bet against it - two attempts give Bayes example and you can see the cycle where you win between them
At some point the random bits will end with a losing pattern to emerge - the question is what you do between does cycles

Code: [Select]
2
2 L
1 W
1 L
2 W
1 W
1 L
1 L

1
1 L
1 L

1
2 W
2 L
2 L

1
2 W
1 W
2 W
2 L
1 W
2 W
2 L
2 L

1
2 W
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
2 W
2 L
2 L

2
2 L
2 L

1
2 W
1 W
1 L
1 L

2
1 W
2 W
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
2 W
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
2 W
1 W
1 L
1 L

1
1 L
2 W
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
2 W
2 L
2 L

2
2 L
1 W
1 L
2 W
2 L
1 W
1 L
2 W
2 L
1 W
1 L
2 W
1 W
2 W
2 L
2 L

2
1 W
1 L
1 L

2
1 W
1 L
1 L

2
1 W
2 W
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
2 W
2 L
1 W
2 W
2 L
2 L

2
2 L
1 W
1 L
2 W
2 L
2 L

2
1 W
2 W
2 L
2 L

1
2 W
1 W
1 L
2 W
2 L
2 L

2
2 L
1 W
1 L
2 W
1 W
1 L
1 L

2
2 L
2 L

2
1 W
1 L
1 L

2
2 L
2 L

2
2 L
1 W
1 L
2 W
1 W
2 W
2 L
2 L

1
1 L
1 L

1
1 L
1 L
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Reyth on March 23, 2017, 08:21:55 PM

Code: [Select]
2
2 L 1
1 W 2 1
1 L
2 W 3 2
1 W 4 3
1 L 5
1 L 6

1
1 L 7
1 L 8

1
2 W 9 4
2 L 10
2 L 11

1
2 W 12 5
1 W 13 6
2 W 14 7
2 L 15
1 W 16 8
2 W 17 9
2 L 18
2 L 19

1
2 W 20 10
1 W 21 11
2 W 22 12
1 W 23 13
1 L 24
2 W 25 14
2 L 26
2 L 27

2
2 L 28
2 L 29

1
2 W 30 15
1 W 31 16
1 L 32
1 L 33

2
1 W 34 17
2 W 35 18
1 W 36 19
2 W 37 20
1 W 38 21
1 L 39
2 W 40 22
1 W 41 23
2 W 42 24
1 W 43 25
1 L 44
2 W 45 26
1 W 46 27
1 L 47
1 L 48

1
1 L 49
2 W 50 28
1 W 51 29
2 W 52 30
1 W 53 31
1 L 54
2 W 55 32
2 L 56
2 L 57

2
2 L 58
1 W 59 33
1 L 60
2 W 61 34
2 L 62
1 W 63 35
1 L 64
2 W 65 36
2 L 66
1 W 67 37
1 L 68
2 W 69 38
1 W 70 39
2 W 71 40
2 L 72
2 L 73

2
1 W 74 41
1 L 75
1 L 76

2
1 W 77 42
1 L 78
1 L 79

2
1 W 80 43
2 W 81 44
1 W 82 45
2 W 83 46
1 W 84 47
1 L 85
2 W 86 48
2 L 87
1 W 88 49
2 W 89 50
2 L 90
2 L 91

2
2 L 92
1 W 93 51
1 L 94
2 W 95 52
2 L 96
2 L 97

2
1 W 98 53
2 W 99 54
2 L 100
2 L 101

1
2 W 102 55
1 W 103 56
1 L 104
2 W 105 57
2 L 106
2 L 107

2
2 L 108
1 W 109 58
1 L 110
2 W 111 59
1 W 112 60
1 L 113
1 L 114

2
2 L 115
2 L 116

2
1 W 117 61
1 L 118
1 L 119

2
2 L 120
2 L 121

2
2 L 122
1 W 123 62
1 L 124
2 W 125 63
1 W 126 64
2 W 127 65
2 L 128
2 L 129

1
1 L 130
1 L 131

1
1 L 132
1 L 133

65:133

Longest losing streak: 6 and which was not resolved in this history??

(https://media.giphy.com/media/6Dj7ZWBERpGU0/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Sputnik on March 24, 2017, 08:17:47 AM


Reyth it depends on how you see it - lets make some observations.

You betting against three series of three in any given combination on a rolling basis.
That way you force the random bits to create to emerge the losing pattern with three repeats.

But there is no need to start playing direct - we can start after a pattern lost with two loses WLWWLL
As each winning pattern will have two loses and that way we would only face four loses at most when the losing pattern/cycle emerge

Note that during the play between cycles you only lose at most three bets and win the others between.

I can show you a losing cycle and continue betting after that losing cycle as the probability to get two cycles with one pattern to repeat three times is very small.
So i can clearly see the advantage playing between cycles.

Same as a dice with eight sides - what is the probability that one side repeat three times twice - has to be very rare. And that is the point Bayes made with cycles.

Here can you see how the LW-Registry continue for ever after one cycle fail with four loses.
W W W L L L L L W W W W L L L W W W L L L W L W W W L L W L W L W W W L W L W L L W W L L L W L W W L L L W

Code: [Select]
2
2 L
2 L
1
1 L
2 W
2 L
1 W
2 W
2 L
2 L
2
1 W WON
2 W
1 W
2 W
2 L
2 L
1
2 W WON
1 W
1 L
2 W
1 W
1 L
1 L
1
2 W WON
2 L
1 W
2 W
2 L
2 L
2
2 L LOSS
2 L LOSS
1
1 L LOSS
1 L LOSS
2
2 L
2 L
1
1 L
1 L
2
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
1 L
1
1 L LOSS
2 W WON
1 W
2 W
2 L
1 W
1 L
1 L
1
2 W WON
1 W
1 L
1 L
1
2 W WON
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
2 W
1 W
1 L
1 L
1
2 W WON
1 W
1 L
1 L
2
2 L LOSS
2 L LOSS
2
2 L LOSS
1 W WON
2 W
2 L
1 W
2 W
2 L
1 W
1 L
1 L
1
2 W WON
2 L
1 W
2 W
2 L
2 L
1
2 W WON
2 L
2 L
2
2 L LOSS
2 L LOSS
2
2 L LOSS
1 W WON
2 W
1 W
2 W
2 L
1 W
2 W
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
1 L

1
1 L LOSS
2 W WON
1 W
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
2 W
2 L
1 W
2 W
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
1 L

1
2 W WON
1 W
2 W
2 L
2 L

1
2 W WON
2 L
1 W
2 W
2 L
2 L

2
2 L LOSS
2 L LOSS

2
1 W WON
1 L
1 L

1
1 L LOSS
2 W WON
1 W
2 W
2 L
1 W
1 L
1 L

2
2 L  LOSS
1 W WON
2 W
2 L
1 W
1 L
1 L

2
1 W  WON
1 L
1 L

2
1 W WON
2 W
1 W
1 L
1 L

1
1 L LOSS
2 W WON
2 L
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
1 L

1
1 L LOSS
2 W WON
2 L
2 L

2
2 L LOSS
2 L LOSS

1
2 W WON
2 L
1 W
2 W
2 L
1 W
2 W
2 L
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
2 W
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
2 W
2 L
2 L

1
2 W WON
1 W
1 L
2 W
2 L
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
1 L

1
1 L LOSS
1 L LOSS

1
1 L LOSS
2 W WON
1 W
2 W
2 L
2 L

1
1 L LOSS
2 W WON
2 L
2 L

1
2 W WON
2 L
2 L

1
1 L LOSS
1 L LOSS

1
1 L LOSS
2 W WON
1 W
1 L
2 W
1 W
1 L
2 W
2 L
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L
2 W
1 W
1 L
2 W
1 W
2 W
1 W
2 W
1 W
2 W
2 L
2 L


Note that i personally would not recommend this way of play - i just wanted to illustrate Bayes idea - four loses if for me to much and only accept three loses or less.
But i like the idea betting against repeats and cycles where you can take advantage between periodic events.
Title: Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
Post by: Sputnik on March 24, 2017, 08:41:25 AM


 Here is one example using three loses and betting against a patter of four not repeat once in any given combinations.

RBBR
RBBR in any given combination

As you can see so is that four series of two after each other ...
Here you also can see the cycles with three loses ...

L W L W W W L L W L L L W W L W L L W L W W L W W L W W L L L W L L L W L W W L W L W W W L L W L W L W W L W W L W W

I don't recommend this strategy.

Code: [Select]
2
2 L

2
1 W
1 L

2
2 L LOSS

1
2 W WON
2 L

2
2 L LOSS

1
2 W WON
1 W
2 W
2 L

2
1 W WON
2 W
1 W
1 L

2
1 W WON
1 L

1
1 L LOSS

2
2 L LOSS

1
2 W WON
2 L

2
2 L   LOSS

2
2 L LOSS

1
1 L LOSS

1
2 W
2 L

2
1 W WON
1 L

1
2 W WON
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L

1
1 L LOSS

1
2 W WON
1 W
2 W
2 L

1
1 L LOSS

1
1 L LOSS

2
1 W WON
1 L

1
1 L LOSS

2
1 W WON
2 W
1 W
1 L

2
1 W WON
1 L

1
1 L LOSS

2
1 W WON
1 L

1
2 W WON
2 L

2
2 L LOSS

2
1 W WON
2 W
2 L

1
2 W WON
2 L

1
1 L  LOSS

1
1 L LOSS

2
2 L  LOSS

1
2 W   
2 L

2
1 W WON
2 W
2 L

2
2 L LOSS

2
2 L LOSS

2
2 L LOSS

1
2 W
1 W
2 W
2 L

1
2 W WON
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L

1
1 L LOSS

1
2 W WON
1 W
1 L

2
1 W WON
1 L

2
2 L LOSS

1
2 W WON
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L

1
1 L LOSS

2
1 W WON
2 W
2 L

2
1 W WON
2 W
2 L

1
2 W WON
2 L

2
2 L LOSS

2
2 L LOSS

2
1 W WON
1 L

1
1 L LOSS

1
2 W WON
1 W
2 W
2 L

1
1 L LOSS

1
2 W WON
2 L

1
2 W WON
2 L

1
1 L LOSS

1
2 W WON
1 W
1 L

1
2 W WON
1 W
2 W
1 W
1 L

1
1 L LOSS

1
2 W WON
2 L

1
2 W WON
1 W
1 L