+ Register

[Sputnik]

 

The problem with this, is the number of potential losing bets you have to withstand before you hit your single winning bet.  Doesn't work using "pairs", I've tested "triplets", strike rate is just as poor.

I don't agree - for me strike ratio looks pretty good when repeats chop.
And the odds are great.
Here below is two examples with out any kind of trigger - just following the random flow.

If some one want to get a more tight LW-Registry - then you can do as Eirescott and start from a sequense of 4 uniq patterns or even 6.
What i notice is that you only get 1 or 2 loses when you get 4 uniq patterns and then a win and at rare momements 4 loses or above.

2015 07 16
LLWLLWWWWLWWLWLLLWLLWWLWLLWWLLWWWLWLLWWWWLLLWW

2015 07 15
LLLWLWLWWWWWLLWWLWWWWLWWWWLWLWLWWLWWLLW

[Tomla]

I have been following this thread---I understand several ways of playing it that I looked at here and at rf.cc , but am not sure exactly how sputnik is placing his bets

[gr8player]

My advice would be to simply let it go, Tomla, for there is nothing to see here.  I don't agree with Johno too often, but he is correct in his assessment as well, for there is no advantage to be had in betting for triplets.  I've already mentioned that to Sputnik in another thread, but it seems as if some players simply insist on learning things the "hard way"; my intention is to spare you or others the same fate.

Take care.

[Big EZ]

Rolex....

Where can I find where Bayes talks about this?

[Big EZ]

Those sequences all lose the 4 bets if talking about the pairs sequence.

1. I would consider this streaky, FLD is positive. If FLD is positive its usually a streaky shoe

2. Streaky . FLD positive here

3. Choppy. OLD is strong, If OLD is strong its usually a  choppy shoe

4. Neutral

[Sputnik]

Hello John ...

I have been taking a pause - i will get back later ...

Cheers

[HunchBacShrimp]

um, why the deleted posts?

HBS