Quote from: Turner on August 20, 2014, 02:20:08 PM
Its just probability isn't it?
0.0000000005% chance of 36 reds in a row.
Once every 185 billion spins

Best answer possible without getting into the philosophies of cause and effect, memory etc etc

It is. Having thought about it multiple times over the last weeks, I can see that these two completely different monsters.  While the basic principle and game is the same, the difference in  pace, the units involved and above all the ambience impacts your game so much that you need to have two different strategies for online (whether live or rmg) and b&m. 

While I would never think twice before going 100 u on a 10p base, i might do it twice if I my base is 5£.  I don't know about others when there are 100£ units flying on the table it takes a bit of mind games before I place a 5£ bet.  I don't have that outside influence when I am playing online at home.  I have to master the art of writing notes in a paper amidst people putting their hands over my head to place bets while the computer does the work at home. It is different and both are satisfying in their own way. 

I went to hippodrome again today.  Thought I will try some of Martin Blakey today.  As the initial fear has gone, I went straight to the drinks table, ordered a coke and started watching.  Suddenly something strange happened. On 25£ min table there was a string of 5 lows and a high followed by 10 lows and a high.  I don't know what took me, before I could think I was there putting 30£ cash on low. Crazy and came 28. What a start. 

Everything went for a toss. I was playing strategies that I never planned to play.  Played in 4 breaks and ended up converting 200£ into 490£ and two cokes and a beef skewer.  This is not me and never did I intend it to be. I wanted to have a look around hippodrome, but that's now for a different day. 

Thing is people talk about discipline and I thought am a lot self disciplined. But that one hour changed my view on myself. It is a different ball game.

Albalaha - I wish to learn. I am very thankful that you took time to explain when I asked for a view. I am not arguing any point here, I am just trying to understand. So please don't take me otherwise.

I understand and concur with your view that if a method has nothing to do with long run it is a loser.  That is my belief as well.  But I am questioning my own belief here. My only question is what is long term and what is it based on? If it is 100000, why is it not a million or a 1000.  Does van keelen, if he existed, has any basis behind putting a 100000 number as the threshold or is it based on the fact that it is a large number? If there is a basis other than the fact it is a large number what is it?  Curious, and I don't expect you to know the answer. I am just politely asking whether you can share in case you know the answer.

Let me describe my problem in a bit more detail. I have a set of million spins that I downloaded from this forum. I split it into 10 sets, because I wanted to test an EC selection of mine. In 3 of the sets of 100000 spins it passed the van keelen test.  In 7 of them it failed.  Overall for million spins it failed.  So that means essentially it is a losing System and which has passed van keelen test 3 times. If van keelen hypothesis is right then the test results has to be consistent.

Am I missing a trick here?

Albalaha - thanks for taking the time to reply.

Quote from: Albalaha on August 13, 2014, 06:36:30 PM
There has to be a standard to measure something.

So am assuming van Keelen's method is the standard for roulette testing? Is that right?

Quote from: Albalaha on August 13, 2014, 06:36:30 PM
if we do not know those logic we can't question them either.

don't take me wrong, I am not questioning the logic. I am simply asking if anyone understands the logic and share it so that i can understand it. I am no one to question the logic.

The problem i have got is I am starting to doubt whether there ever existed a mathematician existed called as Van keelen. Does anyone know anything about this mathematician, which century he belonged to etc or is the van Keelen test just scam without any basis.

Quote from: Albalaha on August 13, 2014, 06:36:30 PM
why a dozen have 12 count

Dozen comes from the french word douzaine which means a group of twelve, in turn from cardinal number douze which is 12. Supposedly, this practice of placing things in a collection of 12, originated from the practice of counting the finger bones in ones hand using the thumb. So using one hand you can count 12 and two hands you can count 144 which is also called "gross". This is my understanding of the practice behind counting in dozens and why it is 12.

Quote from: Albalaha on August 13, 2014, 06:36:30 PM
why a meter has 100 cm

A meter does not have 100 cm; a meter is divided into 100 cms. What it means is a metre is the fundamental unit of length. 1/100th of this measure is cm so on and so forth.

Quote from: Drazen on August 13, 2014, 06:21:06 PM
This is certainly not a VALUE. In sports betting "value" on a match means something different, and for sure doesn't have anyting with accumulation.

100% with you and for clarity the term value I used there is nothing to do with accumulation.
It is to do with 2.52 for all three teams to win and I would place the expectation to be around just about evens. 

Quote from: Drazen on August 13, 2014, 06:21:06 PM
Betting crime for me is not understanding how accumulating odds is lowering your chances to win...

Drazen.  Just so that I get you correctly, can you use three odds I chose and explain this if you don't mind?

Between nothing is a crime, it was just used in the context of saying that this is a wonderful opportunity to be missed. 

Thanks Albalaha for the clarification. 

  I think I will have to leave it there as still am left wondering why it is 100000 and not 90000 or 110000 and not able to understand the mathematics behind the magic 100k

Quote from: Albalaha on August 13, 2014, 11:37:29 AM
@Leapy,
           Maybe this could be a good reference point that you need to know:
http://albalaha.lefora.com/topic/4297616/authentic-way-effectiveness-playable#.U-tM5MWSxA4

Thanks Albalaha.  I had seen this in Kavs site as well. My problem is am trying to understand the basis of this claim. Why would anyone say that it is a winning system based on the numbers defined there? Why is 1000 not 500 or 2000.  Why is 50 not 25 or 100. 

Quote from: Turner on August 13, 2014, 12:01:12 PM
http://www.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=11293.msg100277#msg100277

Found it

Thanks turner.  Wish I found it earlier. Would have saved a couple of hours

Turner, definitely it will be a better team. However, I am a bit skeptical considering how the city was performing on the road last season. It bettered as the season progressed. Of course the odds are a reflection of what City is capable of doing and I have my own doubts of toons as well even though they have spent close to 30mn figure.  They are capable of springing surprises and I hate betting any game involving toons. I predict a high scoring thriller. 

Televisions are crying - The most watched football league in the world is back. Every street I can see posters between warring BT and sky on showing who is showing the most exciting matches. Back pages are filled with excitement around the millions exchanged in the biggest monopoly played in real time by millionaire clubs. Amidst all this, there is a fan who is waiting for the weekend excitement to commence again. 10 matches every weekend, well almost.  So what's giving me value in this opening weekend?

Not always does the promoted sides valued high in the market. Foxes are valued really high in the market and considering they won over Everton in the friendly with a solitary goal, market is just is saying so. But that leaves us with a great value for Everton to win at 2.42. It is going to be a game of experience vs speed. Pure adrenaline vs mature heads. I am backing maturity to prevail in the end and will be going for Everton to win at 2.42 and HT/FT of Everton/draw at 6.2

Then comes the lay of the week. Fresh from the community shield glory, can they sustain the momentum against the side who had a fairy tale ending last season. They might. Just. In the match against Brentford which the palace lost, I could see glimpses of what pulis is working on. New signing frazier may not start, but I doubt whether it influences the outcome in any way. Eventhough Wenger has tried filling his weaknesses, I still believe they have at least 3 or 4 games to go to shine as  a team and predict an upset. Lay Arsenal at 1.3

What fun is betting without accumulators. Opening week spreads the red carpet on a perfect accumulation for MU, Chelsea and Liverpool all to win at 2.52. This is value and if someone is not doing this then it is a betting crime. Key players coming out at Southampton against a strong Liverpool side, a struggling Swans against van Gaal inspired reds in their home ground and a promoted team against the Mourinho might. Worth taking a chance, even though the struggles of Chelsea against minnows are well documented from last season. Accumulator for all three to win at 2.52.

Have fun.

Quote from: Turner on August 13, 2014, 10:42:57 AM
some pairs hit higher than others in a sample..

Great to hear some concurring views.

Quote from: Albalaha on August 13, 2014, 10:10:18 AM
You sample is very small to get any conclusion.

Albalaha - I would be really interested in understanding this better. I have read elsewhere that when you test 1 million spins, the next 1 million will show up a completely different beast. Which essentially mean that any sample size will remain inadequate to understand the principles of randomness.  What sample size is a good sample size to you and why do you think so?

My sample size is based on the fact that I would approximately play about 700-800 spins a month and someone who plays 10 hours everyday for a month may do approximately 3000 spins.

A Big lie – goes the title of the famous blog by author R D Ellison. Often in my school days I used to hear the conspiracy by Americans on their claims for the first to reach the moon. A Big lie said one side and a great achievement said the other. Warren commission concluded that Oswald was the lone gunman behind JFK incident and there is a section that says it is a big lie. Elvis death in 1977 is a big lie to a section. And that is the wonder of the sixth sense we hold. Arguments. Opinions. Theories. Philosophies. Beliefs.

Beliefs have a great part in making a man what he is. And I believe no one is an exception to this rule. Some believe things as it is said, some believe in what they see and some believe in things which are proved. Again different beliefs when it come what is to be believed. Roulette and gambling is not an exception especially with loads and loads of things lying in the shades of grey. Last few months, I have been lucky enough to get introduced to this world of roulette, the beliefs and disbeliefs, agreements and disagreements, learnings and un-learnings. It interests me and will keep on interesting me for days to come.

One such believe is 13 and 31 and their affinity. I have seen posters with strong belief to this affinity. Some accept that it is illogical, but still believe the affinity owing to what they have seen in the past.  Irrespective of whether I look at American or European wheels, they are placed distant from each other to qualify for a neighbour bet. Apart from both being black, odd and falling in the first column, I can't see any similarities from a wheel or table perspective. So I decided to experiment. 1000 spins from Wiesbaden, 1000 from my own collection that I played in view casino and 1000 from random.org. Affinity was tested against 5 spin sequence and 10 spin sequences. Affinity of 31 and 13 vs 31 and 12 vs 31 and 32. Surprisingly 31 vs 12 resulted in a profit situation as opposed to losses for the other two. Does that mean 31 and 12 is a better bet compared to 31 and 13?

My conclusion and belief is one on one, slot on slot, spin on spin the outcomes are independent. 31 and 12 is no different from 31 and 13. Will be very interested to hear what others think.

A leap.

I have always passed through the covent garden station.  I have been to the Leicester square a number of times.  Always a thought comes out about getting into one of those inviting casinos on the way.  But the fear of unknown has always stopped from entering them. 

Friday was different.  Over the last few months I have learnt a lot about roulette here and at betforum And it has brought in a new found confidence. Playing at viewcasino on an experiment following Bally has given a better exposure with real money bets.  That confidence let me enter into the hippodrome just outside Leicester square station.  No membership needed was a treat to my eyes. Stepped into it for the first time and said hi to the big man standing outside.  Handing over the bags at reception, felt like checking into one of those posh hotels. Then it was absolute darkness.  Is it deliberate that the lighting was dim to suggest what was being practiced here is what someone might consider as the dark art of gambling.  But the atmosphere was riveting and felt like in a market but a bit more organised chaos. 

Cente of the hall was 4 tables of roulette surrounded by black jack tables and didn't notice anything beyond it. There was still the fear of unknown masking my eyes.  Didn't know where to start.

Then there were four letters that caught my eye. C A S H.  Had 300£ on me.  Gathered all my courage went to the cashier and asked for chips worth 150.  Came the question cash or card.  Cash I whispered.  He said buy at the table.  Dang. I went into the shell again.  Back to tables with the thought of how and who to ask. I saw something which I could t understand but it was a welcoming sight. There was a table with a lady dealer and no one was playing.  Next moment I was standing in front of her Asking for chips. Then there was a reply which nearly made me go back and get out.  She cried you better use the other tables as this table has min bet size of 10£.  Well that explained why there was no one at the table. Somehow gathered All my courage and asked the dealer in the next table chips for 100, before taking a walk back to cash desk and denied buying chips for credit card without membership.  And hurray, my journey started.

First 5 outside bets, flat bet winning all give in a row. Shifted to dozen and won it but was warned for the min outside bet to be less than 10.  Ended a 20 min session turning 100 to 150.  Wanted to play more, but had an appointment at covent garden in half hour and had to leave. 

Will be back hippodrome.  I like the sound of balls rolling and some one real standing in front of me saying no more bets and out in frenzy popping out so many hands with chips to place at the dying seconds.  Characters throwing black 25£ chips at dealers calling for nbers on neighbour bets.  Roller coaster emotions.  Just love it and can relate with people here saying play only at b&m. 

One thing I can't figure out though is an explanation behind the large number of Chinese women in late Middle Ages. 

Quote from: Albalaha on August 06, 2014, 01:31:11 PM
When none of the methods have the potential to "win more and lose less" but rather opposite is the reality, how can they get a grail together?

Sometimes Albalaha, the sum of the parts are stronger than the individual. I have seen in this forum members reporting success from similar strategies.

Max - the key take away for me here is the Diversification. Diversification is an important aspect of any investment which has a risk element attached to it. Diversification could mean investing in different disciplines or within the same discipline adapting to different ways of working either within a specified period of time or across time intervals. This could translate to playing different bet selections, money management within a session, across sessions so on and so forth. If there is any one who is relying on finding an edge to beat the wheel, then diversification is one of the areas to look into. Of course, there are those whose preference is money management, but even for them they should have a go at diversification from a money management perspective.

Quote from: Mathemagician on August 06, 2014, 04:50:35 PM
I had an email from a chap yesterday he'd made 14% of his bank in 20 minutes. He should have stopped then , did he? Of course not, he went on to try something else and lost most of his winnings. But we've all been there haven't we?

Peter - very simple words.  But too difficult to put to use right? After all Patience and discipline pays.