### Author Topic: Skips and series are more balanced?  (Read 719 times)

#### juice

• New
• Posts: 77
• Thanked: 103 times
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #45 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.

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

« Last Edit: March 20, 2017, 02:30:48 AM by juice »

The following users thanked this post: kav, Sputnik, Reyth

#### TERMINATOR

• New
• Posts: 71
• Thanked: 77 times
• Gender:
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #46 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.

The following users thanked this post: Reyth, juice

#### Sputnik

• Veteran Member
• Posts: 418
• Thanked: 338 times
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #47 on: March 20, 2017, 06:23:31 AM »

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

Cheers

The following users thanked this post: Reyth, juice

#### dobbelsteen

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1200
• Thanked: 258 times
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #48 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.

The following users thanked this post: juice

#### Bayes

• Veteran Member
• Posts: 570
• Thanked: 423 times
• roulettician.com
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #49 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.

The following users thanked this post: Sputnik, Reyth, juice

#### Reyth

• Global Moderator
• Hero Member
• Posts: 3005
• Thanked: 790 times
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #50 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.

The following users thanked this post: juice

#### juice

• New
• Posts: 77
• Thanked: 103 times
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #51 on: March 20, 2017, 11:27:11 PM »
Thanks to all who have offered to help me with my inadequate computer skills
I will be back from the casino in a couple days and work on this topic again then.

The following users thanked this post: kav, Reyth

#### Duncan

• New
• Posts: 61
• Thanked: 24 times
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #52 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.

The following users thanked this post: Reyth

#### Scarface

• New
• Posts: 34
• Thanked: 30 times
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #53 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

The following users thanked this post: Reyth

• New
• Posts: 59
• Thanked: 74 times
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #54 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.

The following users thanked this post: Reyth, juice

#### Sputnik

• Veteran Member
• Posts: 418
• Thanked: 338 times
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #55 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

The following users thanked this post: Reyth

#### Sputnik

• Veteran Member
• Posts: 418
• Thanked: 338 times
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #56 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]
`22 L1 W1 L2 W1 W1 L1 L11 L1 L1 2 W2 L2 L12 W1 W2 W2 L1 W2 W2 L2 L12 W1 W2 W1 W1 L2 W2 L2 L22 L2 L12 W1 W1 L1 L21 W2 W1 W2 W1 W1 L2 W1 W2 W1 W1 L2 W1 W1 L1 L11 L2 W1 W2 W1 W1 L2 W2 L2 L22 L1 W1 L2 W2 L1 W1 L2 W2 L1 W1 L2 W1 W2 W2 L2 L21 W1 L1 L21 W1 L1 L21 W2 W1 W2 W1 W1 L2 W2 L1 W2 W2 L2 L22 L1 W1 L2 W2 L2 L21 W2 W2 L2 L12 W1 W1 L2 W2 L2 L22 L1 W1 L2 W1 W1 L1 L22 L2 L21 W1 L1 L2 2 L2 L22 L1 W1 L2 W1 W2 W2 L2 L11 L1 L11 L1 L`
« Last Edit: March 23, 2017, 07:22:59 PM by Sputnik »

The following users thanked this post: kav, Bayes, Reyth

#### Reyth

• Global Moderator
• Hero Member
• Posts: 3005
• Thanked: 790 times
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #57 on: March 23, 2017, 08:21:55 PM »

Code: [Select]
`22 L 11 W 2 11 L2 W 3 21 W 4 31 L 51 L 611 L 71 L 81 2 W 9 42 L 102 L 1112 W 12 51 W 13 62 W 14 72 L 151 W 16 82 W 17 92 L 182 L 1912 W 20 101 W 21 112 W 22 121 W 23 131 L 242 W 25 142 L 262 L 2722 L 282 L 2912 W 30 151 W 31 161 L 321 L 3321 W 34 172 W 35 181 W 36 192 W 37 201 W 38 211 L 392 W 40 221 W 41 232 W 42 241 W 43 251 L 442 W 45 261 W 46 271 L 471 L 4811 L 492 W 50 281 W 51 292 W 52 301 W 53 311 L 542 W 55 322 L 562 L 5722 L 581 W 59 331 L 602 W 61 342 L 621 W 63 351 L 642 W 65 362 L 661 W 67 371 L 682 W 69 381 W 70 392 W 71 402 L 722 L 7321 W 74 411 L 751 L 7621 W 77 421 L 781 L 7921 W 80 432 W 81 441 W 82 452 W 83 461 W 84 471 L 852 W 86 482 L 871 W 88 492 W 89 502 L 902 L 9122 L 921 W 93 511 L 942 W 95 522 L 962 L 9721 W 98 532 W 99 542 L 1002 L 10112 W 102 551 W 103 561 L 1042 W 105 572 L 1062 L 10722 L 1081 W 109 581 L 1102 W 111 591 W 112 601 L 1131 L 11422 L 1152 L 11621 W 117 611 L 1181 L 1192 2 L 1202 L 12122 L 1221 W 123 621 L 1242 W 125 631 W 126 642 W 127 652 L 1282 L 12911 L 1301 L 13111 L 1321 L 133`

65:133

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

« Last Edit: March 23, 2017, 08:30:12 PM by Reyth »

#### Sputnik

• Veteran Member
• Posts: 418
• Thanked: 338 times
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #58 on: Yesterday at 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]
`22 L2 L11 L2 W2 L1 W2 W2 L2 L21 W WON2 W1 W2 W2 L2 L12 W WON1 W1 L2 W1 W1 L1 L12 W WON2 L1 W2 W2 L2 L22 L LOSS2 L LOSS11 L LOSS1 L LOSS22 L2 L11 L1 L21 W2 W1 W1 L1 L11 L LOSS2 W WON1 W2 W2 L1 W1 L1 L12 W WON1 W1 L1 L12 W WON1 W2 W1 W1 L2 W1 W1 L1 L12 W WON1 W1 L1 L22 L LOSS2 L LOSS22 L LOSS1 W WON2 W2 L1 W2 W2 L1 W1 L1 L12 W WON2 L1 W2 W2 L2 L12 W WON2 L2 L22 L LOSS2 L LOSS22 L LOSS1 W WON2 W1 W2 W2 L1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W1 L1 L11 L LOSS2 W WON1 W1 W2 W1 W1 L2 W2 L1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W1 L1 L12 W WON1 W2 W2 L2 L12 W WON2 L1 W2 W2 L2 L22 L LOSS2 L LOSS21 W WON1 L1 L11 L LOSS2 W WON1 W2 W2 L1 W1 L1 L22 L  LOSS1 W WON2 W2 L1 W1 L1 L21 W  WON1 L1 L21 W WON2 W1 W1 L1 L11 L LOSS2 W WON2 L1 W2 W1 W1 L1 L11 L LOSS2 W WON2 L2 L22 L LOSS2 L LOSS12 W WON2 L1 W2 W2 L1 W2 W2 L1 W2 W1 W1 L2 W1 W2 W1 W1 L2 W2 L2 L12 W WON1 W1 L2 W2 L1 W2 W1 W1 L1 L11 L LOSS1 L LOSS11 L LOSS2 W WON1 W2 W2 L2 L11 L LOSS2 W WON2 L2 L12 W WON2 L2 L11 L LOSS1 L LOSS11 L LOSS2 W WON1 W1 L2 W1 W1 L2 W2 L1 W2 W1 W1 L2 W1 W1 L2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W2 L2 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.

#### Sputnik

• Veteran Member
• Posts: 418
• Thanked: 338 times
##### Re: Skips and series are more balanced?
« Reply #59 on: Yesterday at 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]
`22 L21 W1 L22 L LOSS12 W WON2 L22 L LOSS12 W WON1 W2 W2 L21 W WON2 W1 W1 L21 W WON1 L11 L LOSS22 L LOSS12 W WON2 L22 L   LOSS22 L LOSS11 L LOSS12 W2 L21 W WON1 L12 W WON1 W2 W1 W1 L11 L LOSS12 W WON1 W2 W2 L11 L LOSS11 L LOSS21 W WON1 L11 L LOSS21 W WON2 W1 W1 L21 W WON1 L11 L LOSS21 W WON1 L12 W WON2 L22 L LOSS21 W WON2 W2 L12 W WON2 L11 L  LOSS11 L LOSS22 L  LOSS12 W   2 L21 W WON2 W2 L22 L LOSS22 L LOSS22 L LOSS12 W1 W2 W2 L12 W WON1 W2 W1 W1 L11 L LOSS12 W WON1 W1 L21 W WON1 L22 L LOSS12 W WON1 W2 W1 W1 L11 L LOSS21 W WON2 W2 L21 W WON2 W2 L12 W WON2 L22 L LOSS22 L LOSS21 W WON1 L11 L LOSS12 W WON1 W2 W2 L11 L LOSS12 W WON2 L12 W WON2 L11 L LOSS12 W WON1 W1 L12 W WON1 W2 W1 W1 L11 L LOSS12 W WON2 L12 W WON1 W1 L`
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 10:11:01 AM by Sputnik »

The following users thanked this post: Bayes