Quote from: Bayes on November 30, 2012, 08:38:12 AM
Do you have any numbers or ranges within which you classify something as dominant and when it is no longer dominant?

Exacly.

DEFINE what are you seeing and we will be able to code it and automate it.

...i don't really get the GUT approach... gut feeling is only how your brain analyses what it sees basing on past observations of similar events.

not saying that this is gut .... but seeing what is dominant can also be defined.

Quote from: Ophis on November 30, 2012, 02:01:08 PM
Exacly.

DEFINE what are you seeing and we will be able to code it and automate it.

...i don't really get the GUT approach... gut feeling is only how your brain analyses what it sees basing on past observations of similar events.

not saying that this is gut .... but seeing what is dominant can also be defined.

The human brain is hard coded! 

Quote from: Ophis on November 30, 2012, 02:01:08 PM
Exacly.

DEFINE what are you seeing and we will be able to code it and automate it.

Then you will need to write a set of classes that duplicate visual dexterity & pattern recognition. I could have done this years ago. I know all the basic forms of characteristics found and that have the capacity to continue. That includes their absence too. You can bet on the absence of singles, no matter how cluttered the chart might be with varying sizes of repeats. One thing will always be true. You can bet for the absence of the single to continue.

Regarding when I give up on a continuing dominance in the EC's, it depends. Most of the times there's a better trend, but if not I'll back a 70% dominance. I will drop back to minimum sized bets and wait. Where I play I have to place a bet on every spin if I want to keep my seat. Thems the rules.

I guess the need for a complete list of characteristics is the next step.

 

Quote from: Gizmotron on November 30, 2012, 08:45:17 PM
I guess the need for a complete list of characteristics is the next step.

That would be great to see.

On every spin I check to see if a new characteristic is forming or that any existing ones are changing. So I scan the chart. I can see a characteristic in approximately one third of a second.

Look for sleepers in the dozens and columns.
Look for singles, then doubles, triples, and larger in the dozens and columns.
Look for global effects for all this.
Look for perfect and almost perfect patterns in the dozens and columns.
Look for a perfect or almost perfect dominance in the dozens and columns.
Look for dominance in all of the even chance bets.
Look for sequences of singles, doubles, and triples and above in the even chance bets.
Look for perfect patterns in the even chance bets.
Look for sleeping zeros and wide awake zeros.
Look for any active attack bet ending.
Evaluate the effectiveness of the current state.
Repeat this process after every spin and before every bet.

Quote from: Gizmotron on November 30, 2012, 10:53:47 PM
On every spin I check to see if a new characteristic is forming or that any existing ones are changing. So I scan the chart. I can see a characteristic in approximately one third of a second.

Look for sleepers in the dozens and columns.
Look for singles, then doubles, triples, and larger in the dozens and columns.
Look for global effects for all this.
Look for perfect and almost perfect patterns in the dozens and columns.
Look for a perfect or almost perfect dominance in the dozens and columns.
Look for dominance in all of the even chance bets.
Look for sequences of singles, doubles, and triples and above in the even chance bets.
Look for perfect patterns in the even chance bets.
Look for sleeping zeros and wide awake zeros.
Look for any active attack bet ending.
Evaluate the effectiveness of the current state.
Repeat this process after every spin and before every bet.

Hi Giz,


So if you had afew of those going on at any one time, would you have an order of attack for example? A preference per se?

Quote from: Blood Angel on November 30, 2012, 11:19:49 PM
So if you had afew of those going on at any one time, would you have an order of attack for example? A preference per se?

Yes. I favor bets on the dozens and columns. I also depend on the effectiveness of the session. Some sessions are better than others. Having situations that continue also have moments where everything changes on each first or second attacking bet. You can still get a perfect streak of losses even though you have real quality trends for bet selection. So I always favor watching the trend line for effectiveness. At no time do I continue on blindly.

Here is what to do if the effectiveness falls off a cliff. You can use the positive bet selection that is currently failing and bet the opposite.

You can also look for the absence of characteristics. You then deduce what would happen if a certain condition where not to exist and that that feature of it not existing were to also continue. For instance, there could be chaos in the red & blacks. So you could ask yourself if there was an absence of consistent singles as well as an absence of consistent repeats then what would happen next if that were to continue. It's possible to follow the absence of characteristics.

These are results of just watching the three dozens. Each test stops at 15 sleepers in a row.

19,29,15,33,31,26,7,33,3,6,27,8,4,12,36,34,28,26 - d2 at spin - 280
19,10,18,5,8,1,32,6,3,8,25,7,7,26,28,5,30,7 - d2 at spin - 89
5,27,19,4,29,2,2,9,30,26,26,11,10,27,34,10,4,27 - d2 at spin - 141
36,28,29,15,6,13,3,22,1,23,11,14,17,20,4,18,14,20 - d3 at spin - 289
9,21,10,28,14,25,24,33,29,18,36,19,25,34,29,24,33,17 - d1 at spin - 179
36,37,35,18,2,6,24,12,1,21,1,18,8,19,7,13,18,8 - d3 at spin - 234
3,29,15,12,4,33,28,34,2,34,3,36,33,3,26,1,8,5 - d2 at spin - 79
35,5,23,28,2,33,1,3,7,36,25,7,36,1,8,26,29,32 - d2 at spin - 53
17,24,36,16,16,1,17,17,22,1,16,17,16,12,24,19,3,23 - d3 at spin - 32
2,30,11,23,32,25,29,22,33,27,29,36,31,13,32,36,31,25 - d1 at spin - 108
13,27,4,36,32,25,26,22,17,28,24,17,35,35,35,17,19,23 - d1 at spin - 113
35,31,32,14,15,17,10,2,20,1,9,4,22,21,13,11,17,23 - d3 at spin - 95
4,34,25,4,20,23,4,1,7,4,23,24,14,22,13,4,8,23 - d3 at spin - 82
7,25,7,16,20,24,19,31,21,23,19,32,27,22,28,29,16,19 - d1 at spin - 294
13,35,26,4,11,14,8,15,19,13,3,8,23,6,18,8,3,11 - d3 at spin - 282
17,22,9,17,13,32,26,18,22,20,30,19,21,19,20,27,23,18 - d1 at spin - 160

Quote from: Gizmotron on November 30, 2012, 10:53:47 PM
Look for global effects for all this.

Gizmo, you could clarify what you mean by a "global effect", maybe using a concrete example?

Thanks. 

Quote from: Bayes on December 02, 2012, 05:32:07 PM
Gizmo, you could clarify what you mean by a "global effect", maybe using a concrete example?

Yes. I've come to that same conclusion.  I might have to come up with a metaphor first, as that might make the point. And then actual charts that validate these conditions. I'll work on it.

Can you see an over all continuing theme in this:

++^^^++++^^+++^^^++^^++++^^^+++^^^^+++^^++++^^^^^+++++^^+++^^^++

Wait for + then bet for +,reset and repeat after ^ ?

Quote from: dino246 on December 02, 2012, 07:41:48 PM
Wait for + then bet for +,reset and repeat after ^ ?

That looks like it would work but you are missing the bigger picture.

Quote from: Gizmotron on December 02, 2012, 07:48:43 PM
Had anyone come across this commonly occurring phenomenon by the ninth occurrence they would still had twelve more chances to treat the casino as a personal ATM machine. If people can sit around all day for two or three units, placing bets blindly, because the rules say to bet that way, then at $500 per bet this sequence would have net $6,000 flat betting. This sequence is not a once in a lifetime occurrence. These kinds of things happen day in and day out. You can confirm all this by searching actual spins.