1262

« **on:** January 20, 2013, 09:47:18 pm »

Chasing for events or regression/correction towards the mean.

I took Bayes document into the observation and calculations with Marigny's principals.

One state is when there is not happening to much with the distribution.

Singles and series of two chop for tiny, medium and long periods of time.

Then we have tiny, medium and long periods of time when larger series show.

In between does we have series of three.

I use one March to catch the regression/correction of larger series to show after singles and series of two chop.

And i use one March chasing to catch does dominant singles and series of two chops.

This is the results with today's random org file ...

Catch the regression/correction (larger series) during 300 trails.

LWWWWWLW

LLL

LLWWWWWWWLWLLWLWLWLWLWWLLWWW

LLL

LWLW

LLL

LW

LLL

LWWLLWLLWWLLW

LLL

LLWLLWWLLWLWLLWLWWLLWWWWLLWWWLWWWWWLWWLLW

LLL

LWLWWWLLWLLWLLWW

This one is the March chasing to catch the singles and series of two's.

LLL

WLWLWLLWWLLWLLWLWLW

LLL

WWW

LLL

WLWLWWWLWLWWW

LLL

WLWW

LLL

WWWLWLWLWW

The first option seams more tight overall, it also show that the strike ratio is much higher then the last option.

So sure there is a difference how you play or base you game upon, selection.

It should be the same, but in this case i am pretty sure it is not.

As the first option is sooner or later due to hit series of six, seven, eight, nine and so on during 300 trails and will produce strings with high strike ratio.

When you pick the last option, then the cycles of does chop has to hit very frequent if you are going to get the same strike ratio as option one.

We could also put it like this, if i was going to play Oscar Grind, then i would pick the first option.

As i would know before i start to play that i would sooner or later would hit larger series if they did not show in the beginning as i have never seen 300 trails with out them.

And if i was to play up as i go, positive progression i would also pick option 1.