+ Register

[Gizmotron]

How to see and attack the basic occurrences of dominations.

It is not uncommon to see 45 reds and 15 blacks in 60 consecutive spins. If you just flat bet red you are going to win at a three to one rate. The unit result is +30. If you have a properly formed chart you can look at it and see the dominance of red numbers in less than 1 second. If you can't see that then you are using the wrong kind of charts.

You should be able to detect the beginnings of a well formed dominance within 7 to 10 spins. So you begin to bet the dominant even-chance occurring opportunity found in your chart. As long as it continues, You get further ahead.

Dominances are very seldom the same. Sometimes the weak side is peppered with singles and sometimes the weak side is peppered with an absence of singles. You can attack this absence of singles while also sticking to your win streak on the dominant side. 

Are there any questions yet?

[Bally6354]

Gizmo

I just took a quick snapshot of results so far at spielbank wiesbaden on table 4.

You can plainly see Red is dominant and the Second Dozen and Second Column are very weak as well.

Is this the sort of thing you would be looking to attack?

[attach=1]

[Gizmotron]

This is exactly the conditions that you attack. It's easy to see this in the red/black chart. Its not easy to see the trends in the doz/col chart here. I keep a chart for every section of the outside bets. They look the same as the red/black chart here. You can see patterns, singles, dominance, and sleepers easily.

[Bayes]

I think there's some merit in betting for the dominance to continue even if it's very strong and after say 20 spins or more (say 5 or less blacks in 20 spins). Reason being, you'd only get hurt if the dominance immediately swung back the other way to the same extent, and that would be very rare indeed. Normally either the dominance of red continues, albeit more mildly, or you get a choppy sequence.

[Bally6354]

ok, so here is what it looks like now.

[attach=1]

The interesting thing for me which I notice a lot is how it tries to correct itself but Red then goes on another long winning streak.

They call it the 'dealers bet' in America. A lot of old time gamblers swear by it.

You might see RRRRRRB and then it switches back to R again.

[Bally6354]

Here is where it is at now and this is where I think the Red will break down.

The Black clumps are gradually taking over the smaller Red clumps.

I would be keeping an eye out here for a healthy string of Black and jumping on it.

[attach=1]

[Gizmotron]

I'd look for that too. I also look for absence of singles,  or a global effect where dominance goes on a trend of swapping dominances. Try to pick up on any patterns occurring. Look for sleeping zeros. Try to find trends.

[Gizmotron]

That first picture of spins, 3,0,12,8,6,12,16,20,3,12,5,27,30,3,33,19,28, there's an 11 spin sleeper in the 1'st column. There's a 9 spin sleeper in the high dozen. There's an incredibly awesome dominance of the top column. It even includes a seven in a row. You can kill that with a side bet on a let-it-ride. An in depth betting method makes for interesting reading. It's all about knowing when to attack with different techniques that best fit the conditions you see.

[Bally6354]

I agree. You are only limited in this game by what you can't see.

[Gizmotron]

The very best way to attack a possible seven in a row is to place a bet for the fourth spin. That bet needs to pay you in full for the rest that is left behind for the let it ride bets. You need a bet for each step. So you pull off the payer bet that makes the rest of the bets free. That is at step four in a row. that means you will pull off a bet that one twice, three times, and four times if you reach all seven in a row. After that first win it's all profit. So the remaining bets get pulled one at a time for each step. The last one rides for four full steps if it makes it.

[monaco]

Quote from: Bayes on Yesterday at 03:58:35 PM



[/color]I think there's some merit in betting for the dominance to continue even if it's very strong and after say 20 spins or more (say 5 or less blacks in 20 spins). Reason being, you'd only get hurt if the dominance immediately swung back the other way to the same extent, and that would be very rare indeed. Normally either the dominance of red continues, albeit more mildly, or you get a choppy sequence.




It is also cool to observe when there is an indication that the underrepresented event will catch up. And then again, one may catch a small medium or large catch up.

I find when trying to capture the underrepresented event catching-up, it is easy to be triggered too soon - what can happen is you will basically commence playing in the choppy sequence that can connect 2 imbalanced, but correcting periods.

If you do jump early on the correction, a little bit of money management in that period can see you through until the expected correction arrives, & even see you profit without needing the swing back the other way, as a result of the lower variance.


Collecting firstly on the dominance growing, then collecting on the correction would be very nice.

[Gizmotron]

Attacking the possible seven way on a single doz/col.

If you see three in a row:
Bet 60 units for the repeat. On win take off 90 - net 30+
Variation on this is to also bet 30 on one of the other doz/col.
at this point all next bets are already paid.
On fifth repeat take off 90
On sixth repeat take off 270
On seventh repeat take off 810

[Gizmotron]

I have not attempted to master imbalance correction. I went another direction from the very start. I watched 12 numbers, on the inside, almost go to sleep for 4 1/2 hours on four different tables. My instincts were to bet for a correction. I lost my pay check that night. This, and one other momentous event, while playing Roulette, put me on to the discovery of randomness. That was twenty years ago. I just had my first taste of the global effect. It comes in big and small sizes. It can give you evidence that there is also a trend that acts like a bigger picture. Like a force that has an over all effect, all be it, a temporary effect. These global effect trends can work for you because they help you to see deeper into a second layer of things that just happen to be continuing. When they are present, balance correction is almost impossible. It is for that reason that I prefer to look at randomness without regards to when statistical balance occurs.

[Bayes]

You should be able to detect the beginnings of a well formed dominance within 7 to 10 spins. So you begin to bet the dominant even-chance occurring opportunity found in your chart. As long as it continues, You get further ahead.

Are there any questions yet?

Gizmo, here's my question: So you see a dominance of say 8 reds in the first 10 spins, and bet red. At what point do you break off if the dominance collapses and you lose? Say you lost the first bet (black hit), so you now have 11 spins - 8 red and 3 black. Red is still dominant, do you continue to bet until red is no longer dominant, and when exactly is that?

Not criticizing, but it all seems a bit vague. Do you have any numbers or ranges within which you classify something as dominant and when it is no longer dominant?

[Gizmotron]

Bayes, I would never consider a question like that a criticism. I started this thread for the full purpose of having an intelligent conversation.

I always check to see if there is a global effect context that gives me a clue as to keep going or not. If I get that many reds in a row and then the next bet is black I want to know if this is the beginning of a change or is it just an anomaly.

If I was already at attack prices then I drop back to minimum bets until I know if a major change has occurred. I always react to the latest spin. I ask myself if it is a signal of change.