Sleeping sectors

[BlueAngel]

Are there any records for missing sectors??
For example we know more or less about how many times a dozen or a column or red or black...could ''sleep'',but how about ''tiers'',''orphalins'',''voisin''

Tier for example is a sector with 12 numbers, if a dozen could sleep for 40 spins,is it the same for tier?
Both bets (dozen or column and tier du cylindre) are including twelve numbers but tier have them together,while dozens and columns have them scattered around the wheel.

Perhaps the different positions are significant in order to experience different outcomes.
User Pal told me that ''voisins du zero'' are big sector (17 numbers) and he would be surprised if he could see it ''sleep'' as long as an EC (high/low,even/odd,black/red)
So how long a sector can sleep?

Have you ever notice that columns are changing more frequently than dozens?
Or it's just my impression?

[Reyth]

Kewl post. 

Unless there is a physical wheel anomaly, the designation of the pockets makes no difference and unless you want to grind the data from live spins, simulated spins would have to answer the question which is that there is no difference in expectation regardless of the sector classification.

Dobble will say that regardless of live spin data, the statistics remain the same.  So unless you thoroughly discount virtual spins statistics (some do), there is no difference and if you do, then you must work very hard to grind to get your answer which will be that there is no difference.

[BlueAngel]

Kewl post. 

Unless there is a physical wheel anomaly, the designation of the pockets makes no difference and unless you want to grind the data from live spins, simulated spins would have to answer the question which is that there is no difference in expectation regardless of the sector classification.

Dobble will say that regardless of live spin data, the statistics remain the same.  So unless you thoroughly discount virtual spins statistics (some do), there is no difference and if you do, then you must work very hard to grind to get your answer which will be that there is no difference.

Thanks,I always was under the impression that you are from the ''Silver_thorn publications'' school of roulette...

[Reyth]

LOL.  The one the Fisher wasn't actually bad but every other one of them was real crap with maybe some hidden gems in the commentary section which was just filler anyway.

[BlueAngel]

So if it doesn't make any difference then consider the following:

While a dozen or column is very rare to sleep for 37 consecutive outcomes, almost on each and every set of 37 results, 12 or a bit more numbers are missing!

The idea of a sleeping dozen is not so attractive but if we could combine a ''hot'' dozen during the last 37 spins together with all ''sleepers'' (singles) could be more efficient,don't you think?

An alternative way is to bet only the sleepers which belong in the hottest column and/or dozen.
For detectives when are looking for clues they cross-reference information in order to find the degree of validity.

In roulette you may compare different sectors over a number of spins and when a ''clue'' is found on all or on most of those sectors, then that is what you should follow.
You can ask me for details or express your objections.

[BlueAngel]

LOL.  The one the Fisher wasn't actually bad but every other one of them was real crap with maybe some hidden gems in the commentary section which was just filler anyway.

I agree:-D

[Reyth]

So if it doesn't make any difference then consider the following:

While a dozen or column is very rare to sleep for 37 consecutive outcomes, almost on each and every set of 37 results, 12 or a bit more numbers are missing!

The idea of a sleeping dozen is not so attractive but if we could combine a ''hot'' dozen during the last 37 spins together with all ''sleepers'' (singles) could be more efficient,don't you think?

An alternative way is to bet only the sleepers which belong in the hottest column and/or dozen.
For detectives when are looking for clues they cross-reference information in order to find the degree of validity.

In roulette you may compare different sectors over a number of spins and when a ''clue'' is found on all or on most of those sectors, then that is what you should follow.
You can ask me for details or express your objections.

No I think this is really kewl except for the fact that columns are outside bets and pay like crap.  I would prefer placing chips within the column on a flat bet and break it off after a series of losses to raise it the next time.  I like the idea of using two categories to hunt from.

This thread reminds me of this guy that is selling his system where he combines straight up bets & splits with column bets and EC (red or black).  He determines what to bet based on the last 10 spins (I am assuming).  He never explains his betting criteria but he shows a series of large winnings.

I think he has found some clues that work for him.

[BlueAngel]

By hunting down two sectors simultaneously you are becoming more flexible while you could increase winning rate and profits.

Some folks confuse that by doing so you get less back, but not necessarily true because those two sectors could posses common wins and/or conclude their independent progressions on different time, therefore double profit eventually, plus coverage when one of these doesn't go well.

For example let's say that these two sextours are the 2nd dozen and the 2nd column.
When I win either my profit would be +1 net, when I win both my profit would be +4 net, when I lose both my bankroll is getting depleted by 2 units.

Meanwhile an independent progression on 0 could run in the background,the possibilities are endless!

[Reyth]

So with that scenario I would prefer flat bets on 14,17,20,23?

Or at least DS 3,4 and flat bets on 2,5,8,11, 26,29,32,35?

Or how about DS 1,2,5,6 and flat bets on 14,17,20,23?

[BlueAngel]

How about this?
Reminds me the ''iron cross'', a system for craps were you wait for 7 to roll two times in the row and then betting everything but seven, you collect the profits and wait for a new pair of sevens.
If the seven has 6 combinations out of 36 possible,then that's why is relevant with laying a six-line which hit twice in a row.

If and when a loss occurs, you wait for NEW consecutive repeat of a six-line and continue the progression from there.

[Reyth]

Wow that can be reduced to a DS & two splits! : D

[Real]

you wait for 7 to roll two times in the row and then betting everything but seven,

Why wait?  How could waiting possibly change the probability of winning?
What is the purpose of waiting for anything to sleep???

[BlueAngel]

you wait for 7 to roll two times in the row and then betting everything but seven,

Why wait?  How could waiting possibly change the probability of winning?
What is the purpose of waiting for anything to sleep???

You don't expect something to go on indefinitely, don't you?!

[Reyth]

you wait for 7 to roll two times in the row and then betting everything but seven,

Why wait?  How could waiting possibly change the probability of winning?
What is the purpose of waiting for anything to sleep???

You don't expect something to go on indefinitely, don't you?!

Yes! 1+1=1 indefinitely!  The total is always the same!

[Real]

You don't expect something to go on indefinitely, don't you?!

What's your point? 

Are you implying that if something happens more frequently than normal during some period, it will happen less frequently in the future?