TOPIC 1

This is deep and advance gambling theory about bet selections based upon math and probability.
It does not get any better then this.


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

I start with one mehtod 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 don't 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 don't 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 always 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

Simple,,,
If you understand it all from scratch.
I don't think every one know that singles and series of three cancel each other out when you aim for strikes.

One of the smartest things I ever read on here.  I Said (1) of, not the only.

-

RTM = Regression towards the mean - does it exist?
I will answear that!
This topic is about the truth and nothing else.

So how does it look like to catch strikes and how is it done?
I will answear that!

But first i need to build a playing model based upon the principals above.

1) Window of 14 singles contra 2 series of three is 3.0 STD.
This mean that the random flows bell curve hit 3.0 STD.

I can bet against a window of events will hit 3.0 STD.
I can cut the numbers into half.

For example so can i have 7 singles and 1 series of three.
That would be 1.5 STD and from that moment i start my observations.
This mean i will be at least 1.5 STD on the bell curve.

This is how i would explain the bet selection.
Then the imbalance can continue to grow stronger and i would then continue to observe - it could hit 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 STD and so on.
Then the imbalance can stop growing and i will continue to observe.
Then the imbalance can start to go the other direction and i attack to ride the wave of regression towards the mean.

2) I will attack in two different ways to catch regression towards the mean.
You can call it march or algorithm.

a) I will bet after the sequense start to show regression and try to ride the first present series of three that appears in that situation.
If i loss i will attack the next series of two that appears present in that situation.
If i loss i will attack again the next series of two that appears present in that situation.

b) I will bet after the sequense start to show regression and try to ride the first present series of three that appears in that situation.
If i loss i will attack after a virtual win that appears present.
If i loss again i will attack after a virtual win that appears present.

This way you can make up your own opinion.
Does the result look like any other results playing even money bets or is there a slight difference.