Quote from: esoito on September 11, 2014, 10:53:01 PM
I'm just guessing but it could be that they're hoping to collect during in-running.

Or it's something to do with what's loosely called 'fishing for odds'.

Hopefully others more knowledgeable than I will step in with a correct answer!

Thanks Esoito. Betfair clears all unmatched bets before the game goes in-running. So am not sure whether its for in-running. Hoping someone will know about this.

See the screenshot below.
[attachimg=1]

Why would any one place backing bets at 1.01? What could be the strategy behind it. Is there any means the odds will ever reach 1.01 before the race actually starts? I thought all unmatched bets will be cleared out when the race starts - Is it not the case. I know there are lots of questions, but the simple question that i am tryign to get an answer is why would anyone place bets on 1.01 and keep it there before the race actually starts? What could be the strategy behind it. Any help is much appreciated.

Muggins, Sorry to interrupt the flow of your thread. But I have to pause and say a big thank you to you for shaping the thought process and all the numerous PMs you helped answer. I have adopted your strategy and so far i have seen it working as sweet as it can. I am an absolute novice when compared to your years and years of experience, but a big thank you for sharing the strategy and approach which is a crux of your experience.

Apart from the winnings, the amount of placings i get validate this. Hope this trend continues. Look forward for your selections.


[attachimg=1]

Quote from: muggins on September 08, 2014, 09:16:15 AM
The problem I find is that when a losing run comes along with any system or formula the urge is always there to tinker with the formula, this more often than not has the effect of breaking it. 

Muggins - you are so right. I have seen this outside gambling as well.

Quote from: muggins on September 08, 2014, 09:16:15 AM
Go figure.

All i can say is requote what you said - "Long term is so much better than short term". With the pace of the world, I see every way of investing now becoming a gambling - be it house or financials or traditional gambling - everyone needs results now and right now. We often miss the big picture.

Quote from: muggins on September 08, 2014, 07:17:47 AM
Overdue for a win here. 

Good luck Muggins.

Quote from: esoito on September 07, 2014, 03:16:10 AM
I ask because your strike rate of 11-12% translates to a price range of 8.30 - 9.00.

Just a thought on this, and i might be wrong as well as am all new to this. Just seeing the results so far, 2 wins out of 3 has come from a price that is less than 8.00. Also, I believe that strike rate of 11-12% will drop even further if those bets are dropped. Morever, 8.30-9.00 is a weighted average of price range required to be in the winning mark. Considering you have a couple of wins in 5-6 range and couple of wins in 12-15 range, your average might still be in the range of 8.30-9.00.

Quote from: Slacker on September 05, 2014, 04:47:34 PM

Ah yes, Bayes. I have a lot of respect for the man.

[smiley]aes/beer.png[/smiley]

Quote from: ignatus on September 05, 2014, 01:39:13 PM
trigger: wait for a doublestreet to repeat -bet the other 5 unhit doublestreets-
i haven't seen a doublestreet repeat 4 times yet, that i consider a extremly rare event.

Based on my little observation and knowledge it happens once every 1000 spins. I don't knwo the maths behind it though.

Ignatus, do you have a favourite in all the methods that you have posted?

Quote from: sqzbox on September 05, 2014, 12:19:09 PM
I guess you were a little bit lucky with this group of numbers - no zero. On average I would anticipate at least one zero in the mix for a 35 number selection. Have you got an example with a zero in it? And how do you handle it? Just take the loss and ignore it in the sequence? I think that is what I would most likely do.

You are right. I have been lucky this group of numbers with no zero.

With regards to your question on how to handle zero, i haven't thought about your way of ignoring in the sequence. Because am expecting 2 out of 5 number to be the even chance, i have provisioned for zero to come there. So I do take it as a loss, but not ignore it. See the following example going with my fixed selection of LER

17 - 1 unit on LER
0 - 2 units on LER
21 - 1 unit on LER.
10 - 2 units on LR and 5 units on E. End of set for L
11 - 5 units on R and 1 unit on E. End of set -7 units

As I mentioned, this is one element and not the only element. I am continuing my experiment and trying to mix several elements here based on this concepts like how to expand this as the sets and losses get larger and larger and how to vary how much you spend based on where it fits within in a bigger picture. It might turn out to be a futile exercise, but a very enriching experience.

Quote from: Slacker on September 04, 2014, 11:49:53 AM
The idea that probability is a relative frequency is only one interpretation; others are more useful, depending on your needs.
You might be interested to read these two Wikipedia articles:

Slacker - Indeed they are and very informative. After reading through those, got quite a bit cleared and clarified. And you are right about bionomial distribution as well. Excellent and thanks.

Just started experimenting now. A simple thing in the lines of what am doing now.

In a sample of 5, ideal positioning of a Red to come is 2 times considering a single zero. Now as i understand expanding this sets of 5 further into sets of 30. Ideal positioning of a red to come is 12 out of 30 times, so on and so forth as am taking certain worst case consideration. However we do also have variance. In an ideal sample, 1 out of 4 sets of should have Red appearing less than 2 times. Extrapolating this 5 out of 20 sets/100 spins should have either 1 or no red.

How do i put all these together? I am currently trying out a simple method.
Pick any even chance Red or black or low or high or whatever you may choose.

Play in sets of 5.
1. Play 1 unit in first spin.
2. Win or lose play 2 units in second spin. If both 1 and 2 are wins, then set is finished. See through the next 3 bets without any bet or minimal bets.
3. If the one or both above is a failure play the third spin with 1 unit. If you have reached two wins on your selection by 3rd spin, end of set, else proceed to the fourth spin.
4. If all of the above were failures, place 5 units. On a win proceed to the 5th spin with 1 unit. On a loss end of set. If you had one win in the previous 3 spins, place 2 units. On a win end of set. On a loss place 5 units on the 5th spin.

I am choosing 3 even chances to play this game. Going slow and steady so far and am seeming to win more than i lose.

This is just a start and i think there are enormous possibilities and lots of reading to be done. The more i read it is getting more interesting. I am glad i started this topic. Following is a recent game that i played.

I have pre-selected low, even and red to play.

24 - 1 unit of L, E and R
5 - 2 units on L, E and R
18 - 1 unit on L, E and R   - End of set. wait for the next 2 spins to pass.
9
24 - end of set with +4 units
-----------------
31 - 1 unit on L, E, R
31 - 2 units
29 - 1 unit
32 - 5 units
6 - 1 unit on E and R. No units on L. End of set -7 units
---------------------------------------
15 - 1 unit on L, E, R
6 - 2 units on L, E, R. End of set for L
7 - 1 unit on R and E.
8 - 2 units on R and E
6 - 5 units on R. End of set. End of set -4 units
----------------------------------------
36 - 1 unit on LER
17 - 2 units
31 - 1 unit
21 - 2 units. Red set finished.
8 - 5 units on LE. End of set +4 units
----------------------------------------
18 - 1 unit
10 - 2 units. Set finished on Low and even
29 - 1 unit on red
36 - 2 units on red. Sets finished. Let one spin pass.
4 - End of set +6 units
---------------------------------------
30 - 1 unit of LER
27 - 2 units. End of set of Red
18 - 1 unit on LE. End of set of Even
10 - 2 units on L. All sets over. Wait for one spin.
20 - End of set +3 units
---------------------------------------
36 - 1 unit on LER
10 - 2 units. End of set for Even
25 - 1 unit on LR. End of set of Red
10 - 2 unit on L. End of set of L
1 - No units. End of set +5 units
---------------------------------------




There were 7 sets that i played. 35 spins in total.
End result : +11 units.
Win on 5 sets and loss on 2 sets.

As you have seen i have fixed the Even chance. For a moment, think that i have selected a different set.

High, Odd, Black - +5 units
High, Even, Black - +24 units
High, Odd, Red - -14 units
High, even, Red - +5 units
Low, Odd, Black - +11 units
Low, Even, Black - +30 units
Low, Odd, Red - -8 units

As you can see out of 8 possible combinations, 2 are losers and 6 are winners. If I had played them as 8 different sessions I would have ended with +64 units. That i think is the power of thinking this way. I am not saying this will win for ever. What am saying is a thank you to Slacker for shaping my thoughts in a different direction and I believe that is the right direction if my choice is away from the physics of roulette and treating them as a random set of numbers.

Quote from: Slacker on September 04, 2014, 07:56:00 AM
People expect that the characteristics of a short sample of outcomes will match those of a larger sample, but it's not the case.

Exactly and this goes back to my question on are we
[attachimg=1]
with roulette and statistical principles?
If this is true, then what is the difference between someone who says i am applying statistical principles and probability rules to play my game and some one playing a game of play the opposite? Does it matter really? What is the significance of variance and standard deviation if all it can do is analyse what has happened in the past? What is the use of bionomial distribution and its application in roulette if it can apply only on very large sets of sample and not on your session sample. It all sounds like a bit hyped up to me now.

Quote from: muggins on September 03, 2014, 01:30:16 AM
A NOTE OF CAUTION TO ANYONE FOLLOWING OR THINKING ABOUT FOLLOWING, THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES WHERE I HAVE GONE 30+ BETS WITHOUT A WIN USING THESE SELECTIONS. AT $10 A BET THAT IS $300+.

Very hard to learn.  More hard to practice and even more harder to have the discipline to stick to it.  In a short span I have wasted a lot of money in one mad moment.  The key I have learnt is being patient and have trust in what you are doing. 


Keep up the good work mate.

Is it relevant at all? We know that regression analysis is widely used for prediction and forecasting, but we also know that application of this in small effects or cause-effect based on observational data, which is what practical application of this in roulette, can give misleading results. Then are we not setting ourselves for failure by mapping these principles into roulette? Strange thought, but I thought very relevant for a casual gambler and math guyz alike.

Quote from: muggins on September 02, 2014, 06:32:49 AM
Not sure how this will go down and if unacceptable I won't bother.

Muggins - Consider this as a token of appreciation of what you are doing. As a rookie sports bettor, I know how hard it is to determine each and every selection and how much time and effort goes into it. I am glad you decided to share the fruit of your labour with people. +1 for people who will be following your thread until you decide to post.

Cheers
Leapy

Quote from: Albalaha on August 20, 2014, 07:01:48 PM
Mathematically, I am hearing two things, first say even 100s in a row possible since we should not take past into account, other saying 36 in a row is once in billions. Which one is correct?

Albalaha - The answer is partly hidden in your question.

Yes even 100s in a row is possible. Maths does not say that it is not possible. Maths says that it is possible. However the same maths says that it is  once in a trillion trillion time. There is no contradiction. The chance of that happening is once in a trillion time.

Is a scoreline of 13-0 in football possible. Yes it is possible, but how many times does it happen as compared to a score line of 3-1. Is scoring 400 runs possible in a test innings. Yes it is possible, but how many times has it happened in history. Is an individual scoring 600 runs possible, yes possible, but the chance of that happening is greater than the life expectancy of an average human being.

The problem is we confuse the mathematical term independence with memory. To avoid confusion, we should look at what independence means in mathematical terms. We should understand the law of large numbers has nothing to do with memory. Cause and effect is philosophical where as probability is mathematical.

Let me try explaining the question that you have asked in simple terms with a real world example as it is a difficult concept to explain as Turner rightly says.

I am sitting in London holding a coin. You are in India holding a coin. Esoito from the shores of pacific is holding a coin. Victor is holding a coin in Venezuela. Turner is coming out of Etihad stadium completing his dream ending to the derby at 8-1. He calls up each one of us and asks us to toss the coin.

The same day, China is holding a competition called who tosses the coins higher. There are 37 people in the finals. Every one tosses the coin at the same time.

All these are independent events. There is no question of memory as none of us know what every other person has tossed.
It is more likely in the first scenario to have all tosses as heads  than the second scenario. The law of large numbers applies here in principle. The larger the sample size, the average of the outcomes gets closer to the expected value of the outcomes.  In other words larger the sample size lesser the variance of the final result from the expected value. The larger the number of spins, more likely that it will have a mix of reds and blacks and less likely it is to deviate from the expected value.

Getting a grip of this concept, really has helped me in playing roulette. Ask yourselves three simple questions.

   
• Is 3 reds in a row more likely or 4 reds in a row more likely. The answer is 3 reds in a row.
• Is a black more likely after 3 reds or 4 reds. The answer is they are equally likely.
• Is a red more likely after 10 reds or a is black more likely after 10 reds. The answer is they are equally likely.

Put all the above three questions together and you have your answer on why no one has seen 36 reds.

Quote from: Turner on August 20, 2014, 08:18:17 PM
is the fact that a normal looking RRBRBRRRBBRBRBBBBBRRBBRRRBRRRBRRBRBB had a 0.0000000005% chance of showing.

Oh Turner, please don't start the discussion of every set of random outcome is rare It is an universal fact