Thanks a lot for this explanation Bayes

Well yes those 10 reds was just taken as a simplest example of severe deviation.

So I am pretty sure now I do it pretty much right and that it makes reasonable sense what I do. Like superman confused me a bit. Not some fallacies interfered Nobody wants to believe in fallacies 

Todays sessions went smooth as silk again about 15 units all together with highest bet 6 units. I know there will be time when I ll maybe need to bet a bit more units then this, even with so slow and cautious play, but my MM and I are ready for it anyway

Well roulette sequence can be mathematically correctly observed through 3 aspects like RBRBRBRBRBRB for example as a sequence all together and each side or each bet in sequence independently, meaning only reds or only blacks in that sequence.

And that is how I am observing it. Plus as I am most of the time looking to place a bet when two different betselections "point" to the same EC and they are at same or similar STD value.

Anyhow today I have been honoured by random to see full strength of it. I have seen 72 spins without double win  IF only one loss more I would suspect something is not right.. But that resulted with 3 wins in a row for me after trend emerged.

Find opportunity, try to snap it (but not for too long if it doesn't burst at first 2-3 shots), search another one, rinse and repeat.

Don't raise stakes to fast, be gentle with it and patient, and you should swim out eventually even if some cramp gets you.

That is the recipe


Best

Drazen

 

Quote from: Superman on May 23, 2013, 03:50:54 PM
If it works for you then keep going that way, I didn't see any noticeable advantage to it. I've played from spin 2 now for over 7 months and probably made around 20 thousand units so it appears to work my way too.

Well  to be honest not sure what should I think about this... What is absolute truth in this?

What if we would wait 10 reds in a row (or more) and played only once or X times after that? Then letting it go and searching same trigger like that?

I asked you this have you ever done some simulation around this but never got straight answer about that...

Would such way of playing result noticeable different in any mathematical way then playing one side continuously or FTL for example? If it can be, I know it will only resulting lower variance as we know in the longterm must be 50:50 minus 2.7, but lower variance is all we need. We can't win flat bet.

I would really like if Bayes could say something about this.
He said many times that waiting for strong deviations can be effective if played in a certain way, but is that provable with some simulation?

You say you don't see any advantage, so why does he as statistician (almost graduated) is using that too and says that all you can look for to "beat" random is to rely on statistics because actually there is only thing that is there ?

Drazen

Quote from: Superman on May 23, 2013, 01:42:51 PM
 
Ah the achillies heel, do you play the same MM over and over or does it depend on what you see/think/feel is best for that specific moment, I still don't do the same thing over and over, I did find I was doing something over and over but depending on the losses I was juggling it a bit so it ended up different each time a bad session was forming.

I would say I play it same all the time in terms of the way I increase the bets. But it is different when I cut stakes or taking few steps in back on higher chip size. If I am at higher chip size I will go back as soon as possible onto first previous level, but if not so high I take it like that until new plus.

But one thing I don't understand in your case?

Last thing you said you don't use statistics in your play anymore if I am not wrong? You just play FTL or DBL and try to "read" on your own personal judgment what is happening?

May I ask why? Are deviations as BS a fallacy?

Well Bayes is telling it is better to rely on deviation after some point then not.. And for now it seems to me it is so of course.

Drazen

Thanks Grampa

Well I don't need to "beat" the game. Only make consistent profits without too much stress and bankroll stretch.. So far very good. I hope I got the right way. I am using advices from people who are doing this successfully for years. I hope I got it right. I tested it and make enough efforts around MM of course and it worked good. Now time will tell. I was saying all the time, everyone has to find its own way. I am of an opinion that there is no only one strategy or way of play that can be be successful.

I know many different successfull players and they all use different approaches but still are more or less equally successful.

That on my avatar is Einstein actually. It is cool  funny caricature of him 

Here it is in larger size:


[attachimg=1]

Best

Drazen

Quote from: zabbot on May 23, 2013, 10:50:19 AM
Drasen, how you play this?

Well mate explanation is not simple and straight as you would probably like to hear but I ll try.

What I do in general is betting against already severe deviation (like 3.0 STD or above). So when I see 3.0 I start  from that point to bet that it won't grow much more straight...

But I am not relying on the probability of one single event or sequence or pattern, because if you seek strong deviations you will find them for sure and no matter how strong deviation is, after it raises, it still doesn't mean underrepresented events must correct and equalize in the short term, and that you should be going in chase for that until you catch it. That is most dangerous thing to do.

Instead of that I track few different events and betslections at the same time and if after trigger one doesn't hit in 2-3 bets I let it go and search another opportunity like that.

Because it is less likely that already rare events will go even worse straight away and in successive trials at the same time.

All that should give you lower variance and you have better chance for fighting with it and profit with MM and progressions.

MM and progressions are also very important subject in this. Still without good MM it isn't guaranteed you will win in the end.

In my case I developed good MM with which I can actually beat Bays-es 7 out of 11 horror sessions with betting 80 units max, and that is worst out of worst and with raw variance. I though I found HG when I beat first 3 in a row lol. Anyway still it is a hell of achieve I say.

Maybe I can do even better but I don't have time for trying to make it better now. And it seems to me that for this way I play, better MM then that is far away from needed anyway. I am very well pleased for now.

My prime goal is to keep bets low as much as I can. That requires a lot of patience and more time for play but for me it is worth and it gives less stress.

Nothing is guaranteed in this game but, maybe I am in some fallacy lol but my results show there is actually something in this way of playing...

Almost all that I owe to Bayes, because I built my play on his advices and practical knowledge, through the time trying and annoying him with questions 

He is a true gentleman and I am big fan of his.

There are other people too who had great part in this like Marigny De Grilleau, superman and GLC who also helped me in one or another way but I don't have time nor it is necessary to write detailed explanations now.

That would be answer to your question with all what needs to be said from my aspect at the moment.

Best

Drazen

Outside EC-s

Just doubled 25$ with 0.10 chip and highest bet was 1$

How can one not to love those EC-s? La Partage rule. It is nice to see how you actualy get chips when you lose at the same time LOL     

Drazen

I bet this is the craziest party you have ever seen 

Video is, well, at least interesting and music will give you some sort of boost be sure about that.

Works for the ones with 7 and 77 also lol

Cheers

Drazen

Gladiators (Rémi Gaillard)

Quote from: marvin on May 22, 2013, 08:35:07 PM
i don't like this    +250 in paddy.
moving to dublinbet

I don't get what is your problem with winning mate 
Is it bad when vacuum cleaner really "sucks"? 

Drazen

Quote from: Rouletta on May 19, 2013, 12:09:49 PM
No Risk, No gain.......

But at the same time no stupid risk no pain 

Quote from: PatternAnalys on May 19, 2013, 09:25:50 AM
Hi, Tell u what sir,John Legend,
I think your system a legendary!
U said that the loss never exceed 2 in a row,
Then just be PATIENT and wait for a ONE or TWO complete loss to occur, and BINGO, that's HOLY GRAIL 99.9% winning!!!
Am I right???

Very wise conclusion If I may say. 

Even wiser would be to leave it just at that. Now you have 100% HG 

Drazen

Poor Benfica.

First championship few days ago in stoppage time, now Europa league same way 

Quote from: GreatGrampa on May 10, 2013, 11:26:52 PM
A powerful progression by the name of dalembert. 

D Alembert in its purest form isn't powerfull progression at all...

It becomes very inefficient if you hit longer stretched sequence.

Drazen

Gents I have a question regarding graphing in RX software.

I wonder can graph show on x axis number of placed bets instead of number of spins?

If I track something for x spins and I want graph to record only placed bets after that trigger. So only placed bets. Not all spins while tracking too.

Is that possible to make here?

Drazen

Quote from: Bayes on May 03, 2013, 06:32:35 AM
I use 128 EC bet selections. 

Only??

Well it is a big difference concering your old published software in the past which was tracking 3072 EC bet selections.

Would you mind at least telling what precisely are you tracking in those 128 BS-s?

Thanks

Drazen

Hm but Albalaha if things don't behave similar in the short run (at least to some point) then they can't accumulate on the long run as they should.

But doing this like I said is something else. Not placing all eggs in one basket. It is called diversification and in economics it has firmly provable grounds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversification_%28finance%29

Drazen