Quote from: Marshall Bing Bell on March 05, 2013, 09:26:05 PM

Wasn't this challenge playing pennies or nickels?

If pennies then the loss is 20,000 units and if nickels then the loss is 2000 units, not 200.

That also strike my mind ... so what is it ?

 
I have an issue, i buy a new computer for 1,5K it's a gaming computer with windows 8 ...
I feel lost using windows 8 ...

Look at this simple issue.
I create three users account, me, daugter and my mom.
Now i can run all programs and skype among other things ...

But when my daughter login she can not use skype as the program won't start, that is strange ...
It seems that i have to activate some thing to get the other users to use all the programs i can use, but i have no clue how to do that with windows 8 ...
Hmm i hope one day i will solve this issue LOL 

Unix/linux is more simple and better looking ...

QuoteDon't follow the last, follow the trend, unless the last ends the trend
then don't bet, or the last starts the new trend, then follow the last, which is
the new trend.

Exactly ...

And who say you can not jump on one random walk and bet the trends when the walk stop working, change direction ...
Lets say i bet follow the last RRR BB RRRRRRR BBB RRR BB then it gets choppy/erratic R B R B R B R where i stop after two loses ... now comes the question what you do next ?

If i play follow the last and lose then i bet what ? what is the trend or the probability to happen next ?
If i play it will be choppy/erratic strike with my next bet then i have bet that one of the two last present state to show again ?

That is a trend, that two present states or dozen can continue for 32 times in a row ! dominance !
So what did i do when i made up my mind following the wheel, i bet against that three present state would not show.
Same as three dozen to show.

That is one simple way among more complex ways for trending for dominance ...

 
Well Razor, you can practice ...
Here is some sessions using FTL and stop playing when the table getting erratic ...
You can practice with RX and you see how well or bad it can go when you aim for dominance ...
Just aim for 20% and use regression, so if you not hitting with your first bet you lower it for next try ...
If you win you also lower it for next bet ... then go up and pull to capitilaze on dominance ...
Staking plan can look like this 20 10 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 or after you hit two or Three in a row you just bet 10 5 10 5 10 5 10 5 when you Catch dominance ...
8
2
2
-6
2
3
2
7
2
-6

10 sessions
plus 28 units
minus 12 units
total plus 16 units

It is not so much about how you play, even if you need some skills and understanding, so does good MM more then half the job for you, when you try to win two out of Three sessions or four out of five sessions ...

I would read up on Brett Morton's MM and John Patrick ...

Thanks MG you are so good with words - i like and respect you for that and your knowledge 

Cheers

Quote from: Drazen on March 03, 2013, 08:48:05 PM
Ok. We can agree that we disagree

Singles and series have same correlation as R vs B

And that hovering state is something inbetween like artificial pattern and can't represent original value as those 2 can by itself.

True that singles and sereis is 1 in 2 same as clustering that is 1 in 3 with out any other possibility's.
Same as you apply the principal 1/3 - then you can not change the fact you only have 8 existing clustering patterns.
I also have the STD and ECART for does ...

Pretty simple when you know fact from fiction.

Hello eller Hej på svenska ... jag är trött på mitt roulette hjul, du kan få köpa det billigt 
I wrote in Swedish if he wants to buy me wheel ...

Well i wondering do you use any kind of stop loss and win targets when you play ... ?

Drazen i will agree with you that we disagree.
Clustering and Markow chains is complex things.

Cheers

If you don't understand that is only exist three states, 1 in 3, then how could you do a test ?

If you have two singles R B R you have one serie of singles ...
If you have two series that chop RRRBBB you have one serie of series ...
If you have one of each, hovering state, RRR B RRR B RRR B RRR

That is the only three possibility's that exist and are not 1 in 2 or 1 in 4 - that is 1 in 3.

This is the math and probability for 1 in 3 and STD or ECART ...

1. 0,00
2. 0,04
3. 0,11
4. 0,22
5. 0,36
6. 0,36
7. 0,73
8. 0,96
9. 1.22
10. 1,51
11. 1.82
12. 2.16
13. 2.52
14. 2.91
15. 3.32
16. 3,75
17. 4.20
18. 4.67
19. 5.16
20. 5.67
21. 6.20
22. 6.75
23. 7.31
24. 7.89
25. 8.49
26. 9.10
27. 9.73

Well i been doing and are still doing some heavy testing and come to one simple conclusion ...
Each new spin is 50/50 no matter if you had 5 past with same colour.

But i would bet on dominance, that it would continue ...
And if it become six and i won my first bet, then i could not lose with that attack, because i would lower my bet for second time i put money on the table ...

If i had to pick to base my game upon one principal of betting against the wheel or follow the wheel, i would pick the last option.

 
So clustering series have a bias ?

I read about some math experts who explore the law of series and come to the conclusion that clustering series where slight more common.

So you have three possibility's, only three existing states, 1 in 3 with no other possibility's.
And you say that FTL has a slight higher strike ratio ...

Then Spike and others would be correct when they state that you be better of following the wheel.

Now why do you say it is a flaw when you have 1 in 3 - that is not a flaw - that is what it is.
But that the distribution clustering into 1 in 3 show a bias towards FTL is just that, slight more common and also not be a flaw.

So the conclusion on developing a march is to aim for FLT and hovering state or FTL and series of singles and not hovering state and series of singles.

Quote from: MarignyGrilleau on March 03, 2013, 01:38:34 AM
NICE STUFF. The most decent stuff here this year i have to say.
Looking forward for your results.
Cheers

Thanks ...

I still searching for what is the best way to control your master Bankroll, maybe JP wrote about is and i miss it ...

But i learn that if you have 1600 you divide it into four smaller bankrolls.
400 400 400 400 ...

When you double one of does daily bankrolls you have  400 and split with the other four.
500 500 500 500 ...

That is if you are winning ...
And you master bankroll would now be 2000 ...

When you lose then you get minus 400 and get a total of 1200 to split in four.
300 300 300 300 ...

Now if i have 400 as my daily bankroll, a cut of my master bankroll.
Then i am only allow to play and use 50% of it - that would be with this example 200.
This is because i should never go home with a empty wallet if i don't win my 20% ...
Psychological reasons.

So still think how to solve this into the set of rules being made for this test ...

QuoteI can prove and show you this on real spins at any point of course, that number of those "states" won't be in same ratio as you claim it should, same for dozens for example..

Well i don't understand how they don't have the same probability ...
So 13 dozen i a row during 1 milion spins.

That would be 13 hovering state in a row RRR B RRR - so if i am correct it should occur once during 1 milion spins.

Or any other state ...
This is due toward the fact that when you clustering the outcome into three posibilitys then does are 1 in 3.

I see them coming in the same distribution as dozen with even money bets with out being bias towards any other direction

We could also test a march based upon dozen with even money bets and see for your self.

You play for singles and if you hit a serie of two you bet one more until two loses.

1
2 W
1 W
2 W
2 L
1 W
2 W
1 W
3 W
2 W
3 W
3 L
2 W
3 W
3 L
3 L
2
2 L
1 W
2 W
3 W
2 W
2 L
3 W

If you have time to test it you are more then welcome.

Who knows, the student might become the master of the master 

Cheers

Well for me is not This and That or 1 in 2 when i see even money bets.
I see three present states and base my game based upon that.
One side gets stronger and hovering with one state and the last state is at sleep, that is how i see it.

So if you use old thinking or traditional with out using advance probability based upon Markow chains - you will still have three state, where one get stronger at some time and the other weaker and sometimes it hovering between them both.

Cheers

Its fine by me and you can't not get plus one to overcome the amount of attempts doing so.
But with regression you capitalize on dominance ...