**This is deep and advance gambling theory about bet selections based upon math and probability.**

It does not get any better then this.

- **The Truth, The Whole Truth, and Nothing But The Truth **-

Every thing i write in this topic is based upon experiments.

I start with one method based upon Marigny de Grilleau.

The method is based upon singles contra larger series.

This mean that you have a benchmark or a window of events that reach a big imbalance of singles.

Then your expectation is that larger series will start to show after that.

The window of events (singles) should reach 3.0 STD.

After that you wait for triggers or indications before you attack for larger series.

The french word for STD is Ecart

First you have to get the Absolute Ecart when you calculate.

So lets assume you have an sequence with 14 series alternating with two singles present.

Then you take 14 - 2 = 12

Now we want to get the statistical ecart so we continue with...

14 + 2 = 16

Now we take the sqr of 16 = 4

And finally we divide the absolute ecart whit the sqr

12 sqr 4 = 3,00

The Statistical Ecart 3,00

- - - - - - - - - -

This is the values for singles contra series:

Singles has the value of 1

Series of two has the value of 0

Series of three has the value of 1

Series of four has the value of 2

Series of five has the value of 3

Series of six has the value of 4

And so it continues

Lets for example say you have 14 singles and alot of series of two and no series of three or any larger series present.

Then when the first series of three show, then the imblance stop to grow.

That is not a trigger or indication that we getting regression twoards the mean.

The only thing that happen is that the imbalance stop to grow, after that the imbalance could continue to grow stronger.

So if we would have bet then we would have been chasing for regression.

If we get more singles and series of three, then we have a bumpy ride where the balance and imbalance alternating.

So that is also no trigger or indication for a bet.

But i am not sure if we should avoid this kind of wave, we could bet on it and win, even if we dont strike larger series.

But if we get a series of four, then we get more then a stop growing as i mention above.

Then we have a tiny regression towards the mean, that is a indication and a trigger.

Because then the regression has started to show and are present.

But that should only be valid if you measuring a window of 3.0 STD (having a window with overrepresented events).

This means i can back track the random flow and see how it behave based upon this playing model.

This without measuring a window of 3.0 STD.

This means we let the random flow unfold like a flower and show us the truth of balance and imbalance and strikes.

I just put a win for each series of three that show and more wins for all the larger series that show.

That way i can see how common or not common strikes is using this playing model based upon math and proabability.

I can see how ofthen i get tiny, medium or large windows of imbalance.

I can see how ofthen i get tiny, medium or large strikes.

I can see how chaotic the random flow is, the true nature.

So the only thing left is to see what kind of indication some one would chose.

If you want to catch tiny strikes you might need to chasing for events.

If you want to catch medium or large strikes you might need a window of 3.0 STD.

I dont have the solution for that.

Lets take a look at the random flow and see how it unfold...

Here you can see how common there is with tiny, medium and large strikes:

WL

WWL

WL

WL

WWWWL

WWL

WL

WWWWWL

WL

WWWL

WL

WWWWWL

WL

WL

WWL

WWL

WL

WWL

WL

WL

WWL

WL

WWWL

WWL

WL

WL

WWL

WL

WL

WWWWL

WL

WWL

WWWWL

WL

WWWL

WWL

WWWWWL

WWL

WWL

WWL

WWWL

WL

So next time you read that Asian players at the baccarat table allways follow a trend and not bet against it.

Then now you understand the playing model to catch larger series and can make your own observations base upon strikes.

Cheers