FIRST EXAMPLE
Lets say we have 3 wheels in front of us that each of them has spun 5 REDS in a row.

SECOND EXAMPLE
Lets say we have one other wheel that has  also spun 5 REDS in a row.

From your expirience what is more likely to happen?


In the first example the majority of the wheels( 2 of 3 or all 3 wheels) to spun a BLACK?

Or in the second example the one wheel with the 5 REDS to spin a BLACK?

If you think that there is a difference,then this would be the start of a great system.

Quote" From your expirience what is more likely to happen?"

My experience tells me that it doesn't matter what happens. I'm only concerned with one or another thing. Did the trend (following the trend to continue), did it continue and result in "A" a win? Or did the trend (following the trend to continue), did it not continue and result in "B" a loss?  I divorce myself from the bet selection process and the single track of results. I do this because of A & B decisions that can result in win or loss streaks. I use many possibilities and opportunities to make these bet selection from. By separating the selection process from the stream of results frees me up to react to one single set of data. From the current conditions of that results  track I can make bet level decisions. In extremely strong losing streaks I can use anti-trend bet selections to reverse the loss streak to a win streak. My method simplifies down to a single aspect. I search for anything that continues. If any situation, be it a trend or a streak continues then I attack it for as long as it continues.

THIS IS KIND OF FUNNY. Nobody ever asks me how I make adjustments as things change. Not one single person asks me for a step by step example of how to react with different conditions. Not in all of the past seven years. I think they are all overwhelmed in the trend stage of learning. I've been waiting years for that first inquisitive response. The absence of questions has puzzled me for years. I can only guess, but I must have failed to make an impression that would cause a proper dialog to occur. Can it be that people can't get past the bet selection stage? Maybe that alone is a brick wall.

Quote from: Gizmotron on March 03, 2013, 01:20:52 PM

Can it be that people can't get past the bet selection stage? Maybe that alone is a brick wall.

Thanks for the reply.
But if I understood your concept correctly, you are also making bet selections.
Not by sleeping bets selections,not by repeating bets selections ,but with both of them whenever you feel like.(according to your data)
So correct me if I am wrong but you are also making bet selections.

I would like to add that with your method if things go like trend continue-trend stop-trend continue-trend stop

And this is because with every bet selection or trend or whatever there is a flow that WILL make us lose soon or later.

If i have misunderstood something in your method then you can elaborate more if you like.

Everyone makes betselections, except those who close the eyes, and throw a random amount against the table. If we do any decision we have a selection.

Well i been doing and are still doing some heavy testing and come to one simple conclusion ...
Each new spin is 50/50 no matter if you had 5 past with same colour.

But i would bet on dominance, that it would continue ...
And if it become six and i won my first bet, then i could not lose with that attack, because i would lower my bet for second time i put money on the table ...

If i had to pick to base my game upon one principal of betting against the wheel or follow the wheel, i would pick the last option.

Ok so everyone's opinion is to follow the trend.
Thank you.

 
Well Razor, you can practice ...
Here is some sessions using FTL and stop playing when the table getting erratic ...
You can practice with RX and you see how well or bad it can go when you aim for dominance ...
Just aim for 20% and use regression, so if you not hitting with your first bet you lower it for next try ...
If you win you also lower it for next bet ... then go up and pull to capitilaze on dominance ...
Staking plan can look like this 20 10 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 or after you hit two or Three in a row you just bet 10 5 10 5 10 5 10 5 when you Catch dominance ...
8
2
2
-6
2
3
2
7
2
-6

10 sessions
plus 28 units
minus 12 units
total plus 16 units

It is not so much about how you play, even if you need some skills and understanding, so does good MM more then half the job for you, when you try to win two out of Three sessions or four out of five sessions ...

I would read up on Brett Morton's MM and John Patrick ...

It is my belief that you should stick with what is happening.

Look at this pic...

[attachimg=1]

Each number should have roughly appeared 3 times by now.

10 of the numbers which are circled have either come 0 times or 1 time.

That's nearly a third of the numbers.

And yet the 7 and 8 combined have appeared 17 times.

This runs throughout the game and not just on the surface like in the pic.

This is why most people lose. It is the variance and unseen variance which kills us.

Only a very few locations are performing better than average when taking different factors into account. This is not a bad thing because it means you don't have to scatter lots of chips around the table. Of course there are no guarantees, however you don't need to hit every spin playing just a few locations and just a small winning run is enough to take you into a healthy profit most times.

So diluting the whole game to a few spots which are performing well is far better in my opinion than playing 18-24 spots which are displaying sleeping tendencies in one form or another.

cheers

I see.
Thanks.

An other question is being born from your concept .
IF this concept  was indeed a winning concept , then wouldn t we all be winners if we would just bet the last Ec?
But we have tested this and it s losing with the same rate as anythng else.

QuoteDon't follow the last, follow the trend, unless the last ends the trend
then don't bet, or the last starts the new trend, then follow the last, which is
the new trend.

Exactly ...

And who say you can not jump on one random walk and bet the trends when the walk stop working, change direction ...
Lets say i bet follow the last RRR BB RRRRRRR BBB RRR BB then it gets choppy/erratic R B R B R B R where i stop after two loses ... now comes the question what you do next ?

If i play follow the last and lose then i bet what ? what is the trend or the probability to happen next ?
If i play it will be choppy/erratic strike with my next bet then i have bet that one of the two last present state to show again ?

That is a trend, that two present states or dozen can continue for 32 times in a row ! dominance !
So what did i do when i made up my mind following the wheel, i bet against that three present state would not show.
Same as three dozen to show.

That is one simple way among more complex ways for trending for dominance ...