Quote from: Gizmotron on January 09, 2013, 10:30:27 PM
Just look at this. There is a domination of columns 1 and 2, while at the same time there is a domination of the black. And if you check the numbers hit you can quickly see that the (6, 15, 24, 33) black numbers in column 3 only hit once. This is obviously a great example of one set reinforcing confirmation in the other.


| A B C | 1 2 3 |  | B  R | L  H | O  E | -- ## -- Line
|---------------------------------------|  - 00 --  1
|   X   | X     |  | X    | X    | X    | -- 13 --  2
| X     |   X   |  | X    | X    |    X | --  8 --  3
| X     |     X |  | X    | X    |    X | --  6 --  4
| X     |   X   |  | X    | X    |    X | --  2 --  5
| X     | X     |  |    X | X    | X    | --  1 --  6
|   X   | X     |  | X    | X    | X    | -- 13 --  7
| X     |   X   |  | X    | X    | X    | -- 11 --  8
|   X   | X     |  | X    |    X |    X | -- 22 --  9
|---------------------------------------|  - 00 -- 10
|     X |     X |  |    X |    X | X    | -- 27 -- 11
|   X   |   X   |  | X    |    X |    X | -- 20 -- 12
| X     | X     |  | X    | X    |    X | -- 10 -- 13
| X     |   X   |  | X    | X    |    X | --  8 -- 14
|   X   | X     |  | X    |    X |    X | -- 22 -- 15
|---------------------------------------|  -  0 -- 16
|   X   | X     |  | X    | X    | X    | -- 13 -- 17
| X     | X     |  |    X | X    | X    | --  7 -- 18
| X     |   X   |  | X    | X    |    X | --  2 -- 19
|     X |   X   |  | X    |    X | X    | -- 35 -- 20

1  X
2  XX
3 
4 
5 
6  X
7  X
8  XX
9 
10  X
11  X
12 
13  XXX
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20  X
21 
22  XX
23 
24 
25 
26 
27  X
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35  X
36 
0  X
00  XX

So the way i understand YOU play, you would now bet all black numbers in col 1&2, for greater profits?

Quote from: Juiced91 on January 10, 2013, 07:51:22 AM

So the way i understand YOU play, you would now bet all black numbers in col 1&2, for greater profits?

I would use the evidence in the streak of blacks to go ahead and make the bet selection on columns 1 & 2. It occurred to me that a sleeping column three  also suggests a strong likelihood that black was heavily overweight. You will notice that the 4 black numbers in column three only hit once. 

As far as a collision bet goes. In this case it is 14 numbers. I would also bet them.

Coming out of this is Clumping Theory.

I want to thank Vic for drawing our attention to this. The discussion on the development of the clumping  and then the identification of the target clump ( lets call it cluster it's a bit prettier) through triggers and then filters is a fantastic zone of interest for me. Then combining that work with the cycles of 37 spins,or more or less, on a spin by spin review, reveals treasure I am certain.


Outstanding.

You want to thank Vic for it? Good think I started the topic, posted the graphs and a story of a possible winner. Thanks Vic.

Quote from: Juiced91 on January 11, 2013, 03:29:03 AMGood thing I started the topic, posted the graphs and a story of a possible winner.

Thanks Juiced 

We're a TEAM in here

Quote from: XXVV on January 10, 2013, 11:49:50 PMComing out of this is Clumping Theory.

The solution to the short-term, long-term dichotomy is simple and well known:

- The short-term is all about imbalance.

- The long-term is all about balance.

Take for instance the splitting in 37-spin cycles. There will be around 24 numbers in most samples, there will be gaps with unhit numbers on the wheel unique to each cycle... but when you superpose all cycles, you get an evened-out picture of a wheel with no discernible pattern. All samples of 1,000,000 spins should be somewhat the same. There shall not be an skewed gap in such an amount of sets.

The skewed 37-spin sample is what the player plays.

The evened-out overall sample is what the casino plays.

The punter plays in the short term. Hence it's the short term which he has to beat. The smart punter catches the events unfolding within a time-frame he can cope with realistically, within the boundaries of his session bankroll.

The probability of beating the "long term for the casino" is: 0.

But on the other hand, there is a possibility of beating the short term imbalances, riding them as they unfold.

Then it comes the paradox-like scenario: beating the short terms we would be beating the long term. The sum of enough winning trams necessarily means a winning overall balance.

This looks like a paradox on its own, but it isn't.

The reason is simple, because no matter how many spins we play in our lifetime it is still "short term"; everything we win in life is scheduled to "even-out in the long term". But there's a chance we won't be there as meek ​​lambs. Imagine you catch -say- a 30 series of red with a positive progression. You are "scheduled" to give it all back "in the future": in fact, by means of the game remaining faithfully even in the long term, a series of 30 blacks is scheduled to appear, which should be certain to take it away... if you play like a robot for the rest of your whole life backing RED. In real-life we don't act that way. In fact, the smart bettor wise enough to catch such a long series of Red as it unfolded would also catch the series of 30 Blacks as it unfolds too. Paradox or not, mind you!.

Vic, Just wanted to be a nuisance! It looks like the only way to do well in this game is to follow what is happening as the game unfolds. Something I haven't paid much attention to. Although it seems we lost track of the initial post, would this all be programmable to a certain degree?

QuoteIt looks like the only way to do well in this game is to follow what is happening as the game unfolds. Something I haven't paid much attention to

Something MOST haven't paid much attention too, I'm convinced it's the only way forward too.

Quotewould this all be programmable to a certain degree

Probably BUT it wouldn't work programmed as you should/would be using too many different bet sizes at different points of the game, you, that's YOU not a bot, need to be thinking while you play, free spinning past bad clumps, deciding when it looks good to dive in etc etc etc

Quote from: Superman on January 11, 2013, 08:37:17 AM
Probably BUT it wouldn't work programmed as you should/would be using too many different bet sizes at different points of the game, you, that's YOU not a bot, need to be thinking while you play, free spinning past bad clumps, deciding when it looks good to dive in etc etc etc

But that's then what im saying. A method was apparently found where it could be PROGRAMMED for a million+ spins. So did he program it to foolow the game or work of triggers. that's the question

Quote from: Juiced91 on January 11, 2013, 10:07:11 AM
But that's then what im saying. A method was apparently found where it could be PROGRAMMED for a million+ spins. So did he program it to foolow the game or work of triggers. that's the question

I guess you need to see a common roadmap of how to do this. It's a program. It's best to seek a well defined result. I actually started mapping this thing out yesterday.   My conclusion was to have the software look for sleeping columns in col2 & col3 and to correlate them, when found, with dominance or pure streaks in the respective reds or respective blacks. Then I would have a chart of spins that include correlation in the form of yes or no to the combination situations. That's exactly what I would be looking for at this point. The program could tell me how often the two conditions combine. This is because it might be an interesting result. The percentage for yes might turn out to be higher than the expected value.

OK, I did some sim work on this. It probably correlates along the same conditions for other trend based bet selections. The same type of three states work about the same for these combinations. So there is no secret to be discovered, just because there are 8/4 differences for red or black in column 2 & 3 of the table layout.

It is my belief that the programmer never moved to Reno or quit his job.

@Clumping Theory , ie sub set of Cluster Theory

It is fascinating and very rewarding that some excellent principles have arisen from this thread, and yes I really should thank Juiced91 as well as Vic.

The desire to make a program for long term overview analysis or predictive value in roulette is a red herring here and Gizmo is probably right to suggest the programmer never quit his day job. What is needed is a signal to note temporary imbalances in the very short term beyond a certain level to trigger action. These can be dozens, columns, EC outcomes and wheel and table outcomes.

Again and again we see in roulette the need to deal with the short cycles and temporary skews that can offer easy access and short term profit. Note the recent mention of Holloway playing all three EC positions when triggered.

My thesis is that short cycle gains can be strung together, like pearls on a thread, so as to link islets of opportunity into a consistent winning strategy. There may be clusters of player action, then significant pauses, just as with cycles of outcome data.

Vic has provided us with so many leads here.

The dominant hemisphere and the emergence within that of a seed clumping effect leading to a larger and larger formation as a small cluster, with incremental growth accessed for us see by use of triggers and filters.

Now the short term imbalance can be measured and can be visualised through a program set to monitor the accretion (like grains of sand becoming attached to an underwater magnet) spin by spin. If you can imagine this, and in colour ( for coding), then you can perhaps build a model and test these short cycles within larger cycles, spiraling perhaps in cycles of 37 or less or more.

Given that you can model this, and test repeatedly through live result play data, initially in small samples, then later expanding, you can observe the 'clumping' characteristics, and possibly develop a suitable bet to take advantage of this ongoing phenomenon.

This could be a prototype for formation of a new bet type; one that is interactive and responsive to short cycles, and which consists of a series of short series coups linked together in the formation and eventual decay of a cluster of action energy.

My suggestion would be for the bet overview to consist of three coups with the opportunity to expand and extend if the cluster formation warranted the attention.

Observation is now required on samples using a trial and error methodology.

Will report soon.  XXVV

Cluster is there, has always been, and will be, that's a good way to  use in gaming.

Quote from: XXVV on January 14, 2013, 05:18:03 PM
@Clumping Theory , ie sub set of Cluster Theory

One thing is to observe what is formed every 37-spin clusters (overall effect for the cycle), and another thing to study how they clump (pre-effect -but not cause!, It's the study of how the effect unfolds, the study of how a moving target starts to "move" and its properties such as direction, signal strength, etc. i.e. the study of the very moving condition(s)).

I'd say correlating it to the wheel as a physical object should be the very first choice to learn it.

More "ethereal" scenarios can be derived; but at first, having a physical object can help on comprehending it. i.e. a loaded area on the wheel is clearly related to the side where the ball strikes the most for current cycle, hence it's very easy to grasp.


Clumping Theory deserves its own thread