Quote from: AMK on January 02, 2013, 01:06:07 PM
Where can I find the charts etc and I will review them.

it's here:

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.

and here:

Quote from: Gizmotron on December 04, 2012, 12:04:28 AM
My Chart:

| 1 2 3 | L M H | | B  R | L  H | O  E | -- ##
|     X |   X   |  | X    |    X | X    | -- 29 --  1
|   X   | X     |  | X    | X    | X    | -- 13 --  2
|   X   |   X   |  | X    |    X |    X | -- 20 --  3
| X     | X     |  | X    | X    |    X | -- 10 --  4
| X     |     X |  |    X | X    |    X | -- 12 --  5
|     X |     X |  |    X |    X | X    | -- 27 --  6
|   X   | X     |  |    X |    X | X    | -- 19 --  7
|   X   | X     |  | X    | X    | X    | -- 13 --  8
|     X |   X   |  | X    |    X | X    | -- 29 --  9
|   X   |     X |  | X    | X    | X    | -- 15 -- 10
| X     |     X |  |    X | X    | X    | --  3 -- 11
|     X |   X   |  |    X |    X |    X | -- 32 -- 12
| X     | X     |  |    X | X    | X    | --  1 -- 13
|   X   | X     |  | X    |    X |    X | -- 22 -- 14
|   X   |     X |  |    X | X    |    X | -- 18 -- 15
|   X   | X     |  |    X | X    |    X | -- 16 -- 16
| X     |     X |  | X    | X    |    X | --  6 -- 17
| X     | X     |  |    X | X    | X    | --  7 -- 18
| X     | X     |  | X    | X    |    X | -- 10 -- 19
|     X |     X |  |    X |    X |    X | -- 36 -- 20
| X     |   X   |  | X    | X    |    X | --  2 -- 21
|   X   |     X |  |    X | X    |    X | -- 18 -- 22
| X     | X     |  |    X | X    | X    | --  1 -- 23
|     X |     X |  |    X |    X |    X | -- 30 -- 24
|     X | X     |  | X    |    X |    X | -- 28 -- 25
|   X   | X     |  | X    |    X |    X | -- 22 -- 26
|     X |   X   |  | X    |    X | X    | -- 35 -- 27
| X     |     X |  |    X | X    |    X | -- 12 -- 28
|     X |     X |  |    X |    X |    X | -- 30 -- 29
|   X   |     X |  | X    | X    | X    | -- 15 -- 30
| X     |   X   |  | X    | X    |    X | --  2 -- 31
| X     |     X |  |    X | X    | X    | --  9 -- 32
| X     |     X |  |    X | X    | X    | --  3 -- 33
| X     | X     |  |    X | X    | X    | --  1 -- 34
|   X   | X     |  | X    | X    | X    | -- 13 -- 35
|     X |   X   |  | X    |    X |    X | -- 26 -- 36
| X     |     X |  |    X | X    |    X | -- 12 -- 37
|     X |     X |  |    X |    X |    X | -- 30 -- 38
| X     |     X |  |    X | X    |    X | -- 12 -- 39
|------------------------------------| -  0 -- 40


[/font][/size]
[/quote]

Bayes, I'm just multiplying the fractions.

If you have a 50% chance of getting a heads then you have a 25% chance of getting two heads in a row.

.5 x .5 = .25 -- (notice the symmetry. can't screw this one up)

These are simple times-in-a-row of occurring results. The point is to deliberately miss the sleeping double street.  So you want to get the odds for missing them.

I noticed that the topic had split too. I didn't want to suggest it right away. These were Bryan's  first posts. I didn't want it to be tossed around right off the bat. I would like it split off in my software section. That way finding it will be easy.

Confession time. Byran, I'm only using the 12 outside bets and the colissions of about half of them to offer as a proof of concept demo. I believe it's enough to manipulate, conjure, or extrapolate the effectiveness track. In the end, the primary task is to win by allowing myself to win. Proving it will be this year's task.

Quote from: sqzbox on January 02, 2013, 05:27:57 AM
Fair enough.  I suppose, when you get right down to it, it is really just a bunch of rules anyway.

It is. It even includes a layer for subjective qualities. I'm including a layer for percentage of perfection and a layer for difficulty of session. It will compare these traits for the best qualifiers. In the end it is nothing more than a complicated set of rules. An agile set at that. Everything I have experienced in playing says this won't work. If I can catch a moving target with a simple computer sim then that will be amazing.

Example of extensible data structure:
// -- this could be held in a global variable

// -- contains object data set for the dozens set
// -- used for best trend selection

<dozSetData>
  // -- 30 spins deep
  <dozStream deep="30">3,13,20,12,34,0,5,12,16,...etc</dozStream>
 
  <dozSleeper dozOne="3" dozTwo="6" dozThree="2">2</dozSleeper>
  <dozSingles numSingles="3">yes</dozSingles>
 
  // -- global effect sleepers
  <dozGlobalSleeperGroup occur="yes">5</dozGlobalSleeperGroup>
  <dozGlobalSleeperD1>6</dozGlobalSleeperD1>
  <dozGlobalSleeperD2>4</dozGlobalSleeperD2>
  <dozGlobalSleeperD3>5</dozGlobalSleeperD3>
 
  // -- global effect singles
  <dozGlobalSinglesGroup occur="yes">5</dozGlobalSinglesGroup>
  <dozGlobalSingleD1>2</dozGlobalSingleD1>
  <dozGlobalSingleD2>7</dozGlobalSingleD2>
  <dozGlobalSingleD3>4</dozGlobalSingleD3>
 
</dozSetData>



// -- contains object data set for the dozens set
// -- used for best trend selection

<dozSetData>
  // -- 30 spins deep
  <dozStream deep="30">3,13,20,12,34,0,5,12,16,...etc</dozStream>
 
  <dozSleeper dozOne="3" dozTwo="6" dozThree="2">2</dozSleeper>
  <dozSingles numSingles="3">yes</dozSingles>
 
  // -- global effect sleepers
  <dozGlobalSleeperGroup occur="yes">5</dozGlobalSleeperGroup>
  <dozGlobalSleeperD1>6</dozGlobalSleeperD1>
  <dozGlobalSleeperD2>4</dozGlobalSleeperD2>
  <dozGlobalSleeperD3>5</dozGlobalSleeperD3>
 
  // -- global effect singles
  <dozGlobalSinglesGroup occur="yes">5</dozGlobalSinglesGroup>
  <dozGlobalSingleD1>2</dozGlobalSingleD1>
  <dozGlobalSingleD2>7</dozGlobalSingleD2>
  <dozGlobalSingleD3>4</dozGlobalSingleD3>
 
</dozSetData>



I spent yesterday canabalising Sims that were developed over the past few years. Many of them are good at extracting sleeping dozens from the stream of spins for an example. I'm an expert at using pull parsing as a way of extracting & populating structured data. I know how to think your way through reading randomness, my way, and using it to manipulate the effectiveness track. If I were to attempt to use another method I would get lost in the demands of the intelligent system. I don't want to use cookie cutter 4th or 5th generation solutions. I will develop this much faster if I just solve actual thinking issues by making it the same process as human association and visual dexterity. You see I know this topic. I play this in real time using a pen and index card at a live casino. All I have to do is task the computer to see my list of characteristics in the flow of spins, select the best occurring trend, check it against the effectiveness track, and apply the next bet. There is no way I would want to cram all that into a bunch of classes in a language that I probably detest. It would be like using excelScript. I'll show an example of a structured data document. Maybe you will see how easy it will be to see what I mean?

Sqzbox, I was just thinking how this opens the door to extensibility. If every programmer has a weakness then mine is namespace overloading and recursion. But there is a beautiful thing I like about these kind of features. I can break the rules and store the attributes in a line delimited kind of a text object. Each object can have an unlimited number of easy to read lines. That way I won't go crazy with huge lists in hierarchies and/or arrays. Function calls, with their attributes can be position based or XML based. I built a non-traditional parallel linear parser for an experimental markup language experiment. I can use it to power  a read/write process for each objects list of characteristics and attributes. If I wanted to, and I really don't, at this time, I could make these objects available for each spin. These would be mind numbing data sheets, if math types wanted to see them that is. It's actually coming together.

Are you aware that I published the chart & the list at this dot com? If you can't understand these then I don't know what to say.

Quote from: esoito on January 01, 2013, 11:05:08 PM

Rather than one shrouded in mystery and obfuscation, the members are entitled to a clear, understandable explanation as to why  6 - 37 = 31 in your world, instead of -31.

Nothing more than absolute laziness. I know there can't be a negative result. I knew I needed a quick and easy result that had to be greater than 30. So I slapped the full quantity with the isolated group. So yes, I sloppied the equation. You should take notice that the full equation was understood. The communication process worked. The point was made. I expect syntax error in a development environment. SO GET OFF MY BACK!

I've been working on creating foundations to stand on. I want to create functionality that allows the software to ask questions like I would ask the question. I instantly relate to dozen 1, numbers 1 to 12. Throughout the software this will be an object that has the ability to know if one of its numbers hit on the current spin. It will pass on an ability to know if it was part of an occurring pattern. It will know if it's a sleeper. It will know if it belongs to any global effects that exist long term & short term. In other words I'm going to create a Roulette playing genius mind. Software can evaluate so many functions that hundreds of conditions can be considered for each number and grouping. I doubt that a person could find the truly abstract and elegant permutations that randomness has to offer. Thank goodness there are only 37/38 numbers and only 12 options for outside bets to consider for pattern recognition. Yes, this is a huge task.

Quote from: spike on December 31, 2012, 07:19:43 PM
Lots of others. Lots and lots. And probably even then
it won't be understood.

I've read your recommendations for flat betting the even chance bets for years. I have no idea how you can play low activity in variance.

This software will show the user the next recommended bet/bets and then wait for the user to enter the next spin. You can use any resource for spins. This is the only way to validate that it works. You won't have to take my word for it. Many will test it. I will refer to this forum for the actual strategy. No point in writing that again. Now the source code. That's for those that want to see how I did it. They will look for tricks first. My software won't have any. Then the brains of the world will go off / on the rampage. Can't wait to see that.

Quote from: subby on December 31, 2012, 04:38:37 PM

yikes -"smiley-sex024. gif"

Superman, this approach might be of use. Once you master dozens & columns you can move on to the opportunities of collisions, 16 numbers. Their odds are very close to the even chance bets. I'm finding them very interesting.

Sqzbox -" This approach is, I would suggest, an entirely subjective one and therefore one that I couldn't put in a virtual lab and test. For that reason (and only that reason) I haven't pursued that approach."

I'm working on it as a computer simulation & as a validation of proof for peer review. The algorithms source code will be the subject of review. My language of choice is LiveCode. It's one of the best xTalk languages. The code is almost the same as reading commented code. So the common structure, custom functions and common methods will easily be identifiable. If successful I'm sure there will be people that reconstruct it in other languages. Attempting to write human intuition and selection is no easy task.

Wow, what an interesting post. My gut reaction is to tell you that two things made me seek my success by working very hard at this. Simplification & patience is the secret. It is a simple thing to look at my chart and to see the best occurring trends. It is a simple thing to probe the gambling session to see if a string of wins is forming. If so then the trends are holding up. If those conditions continue then I attack and keep attacking. If they fail then I back off. To do this I must avoid digging deep holes. I back off to a single minimum side bet when any change occurs that changes the win streak. Without going into it in fine detail, that is all there is to it. It's also as far as I've taken it.

I've given away my software charting method and my list of randomness characteristics. They are posted here on this forum. I've clearly stated that following complex characteristics of trends and patterns is only a device to deliberately manipulate the effectiveness track.

In my opinion patience is almost impossible to use absent playing experience. That includes trying to guess when to attack the effectiveness streaks.


Sqzbox -" Gizmotron - I hear you. I think I understand what you are saying - that tracking or measuring "effectiveness" and adjusting, tuning, etc. until you are in-phase with what is transpiring can lead to a significant and real advantage. I believe you. I haven't been successful personally with that approach - perhaps I lack the necessary intuition. Maybe my focus on the scientific approach has shut that down in me, or maybe it was never there, or perhaps it just withered and died due to lack of use ("use it or lose it" as they say). This approach is, I would suggest, an entirely subjective one and therefore one that I couldn't put in a virtual lab and test. For that reason (and only that reason) I haven't pursued that approach. "