Good post Bally.

QuoteIf we learn to exploit it instead of challenge it, the results will be greatly to our advantage!

I'm with you. If you master the short term, you will master the long one automagically, because the long term is the sum of all your short-term sessions

QuoteCan a particular way of betting be "better" (not sure what word to use?)

Perhaps "more effective"? I get you Ken, you are asking if given that the game of roulette is a fixed-odds game, can any bet be labeled as better than the other? And the answer is... drum rolls... no... at least not officially.

On the side, players will aways label their own betting systems as "better", but that is a subjective opinion based on each player's personal experience.

QuoteBob Smith the 21 year old goofball only plays the 2, 22 & 32, his favorite numbers and he swears by them, "they hit a lot" Bob says with a smile!

I think bob missed something: "they hit a lot when I play". And that is the gist of the matter.

Bob can experience wonderful results with his stiff bet, and the next player from that casino playing the same roulette can get ruined by betting 2,22 & 32,  Unless he bets at the exact same time Bob does it.

Such is the nature of randomness.

The wonderful results are related to a set of spins happening during a particular time in a particular roulette wheel. Therefore we can also ask: "Is Bob's timing real?". It certainly is real for Bob. BTW I recently started a poll related to this very topic: http://betselection.cc/gambling-philosophy/is-the-time-line-real/

---

Regarding the decent profits over many years, it can be seen as the player experiencing a positive deviation, not beating the game. Positive (and negative) deviations can last thousands upon thousands of spins.

As much as the casino with his positive edge and the APs can have long gaps when they lose (negative deviation), these decent profit wins by the player are simply regarded as positive deviations; never as the player truly "beating the game".

In the case of the casino, it is only a matter of leaving the table open for more spins until the deviation equalizes to what math dictates. Problem solved and back in profit.

In the case of the player, dead is the ultimate stop-win or stop-loss, so he/she may die in profit yet it doesn't mean he actually beat the math of the game, because more spins are required to make him go back to what math dictates. It's just that he won't play such games.

Quote from: Gizmotron on January 07, 2013, 05:57:30 PMIn this level of thinking, all you are searching for is anything that continues. As long as you can see a continuing structure, and as long as it continues to stay in that form, you can exploit it.

Curious how this thread is from 2012/2013 and "clumping" selections remain a strong point.

Since the game is the same today as it was 400 years ago, it is pretty safe to say this clumping thingy is quite a consistent trait

( And I'm coming to think everything for becoming a better bettor under these framework(s) of observation has been discussed already --And yet people continue to try to discover the next new thing instead of focusing on the consistent traits of the game )

A fascinating subject when dealing with an officially-declared independent-spin game. Can ordering these independent spins for spotting patterns be considered "valid"?

Regular statistics uses collections of spins to compare them with each other and draw conclusions.

I tend to think of it like this:

• Statistics are based on samples of N amount of spins, valid in any order.
• The timeline is based on samples of N spins, which must be analyzed one after the other, in strict order.

This is like analyzing a house versus analyzing the way the house's being built, in real time.

When seeing the house as a whole, you can count the number of blocks, how much concrete was used, how many meters of roof material it took, as well as any other total. This is akin to the long term, what the casino sees and calculates. Totals only, not how they came to be.

On the other hand, when tracking the house being built, you spot how the actual house-building develops: first the foundations, then the outer walls, the walls for the living room, the kitchen, the bathroom, etc... then finally the roof.

In this case, it is akin to watching the short-term. The confines of your current session. Where you spot the events that are happening within a certain cycle or length of spins.

I think it is the main difference between being the casino and being the player.

The casino knows exactly how the house will turn out because it has the exact list of materials (this is the house edge ). The player -instead- can only wager on specific events with a limited bank. So, when seeing the builder is preparing some concrete near the kitchen, then the player bets that the builder will make the kitchen wall and not the living room wall. No guarantees, of course, but simply betting on what seems to be the logical continuation according to how s/he sees houses are usually built.

In other words, betting for the continuation of events, right as the events are taking place.

---

How do you see using past spins to try to predict the game? Do you see any form of tracking useful?

Feel free to express your views.

Quote from: VLS on November 27, 2014, 04:29:52 PMThe steady locations concept is, well, steady.

This is one of those foundations which can build a solid system with a good MM attached to it.

Steady locations go throughout the game; so no matter how many numbers you play, you can track this event.

When you track different locations in cycles like the steady locations principle does, you realize how simliar things go all the time in the game. It's like the same tune over and over. You see clumps of one set of locations, then see clumps of the others. You just don't know how long would a certain set continue in that state, nor can you predict exactly when a new set of locations will clump, but you can spot what is already happening and bet on its continuation.

You simply target the active clumping locations until they exhaust and dump them as they deactivate and lose momentum.

In this game, when one side (or event) is not coming, it is because another one is taking the spotlight. You just have to develop the "right set of eyes" to spot it.

Quote from: VLS on December 03, 2014, 11:52:22 AMYou have all possible choices covered and of course are able to switch freely.

An extreme (and I mean extreme) multiple-timeline event to witness is having several players with their own "entropy" inserting themselves at random points of the game, all betting with their own personal timeline and events, betting against the same set of numbers, all on different point of their personal cycles and hitting consistently.

You can of course "fake" different players this way in software, but it doesn't take away the extreme nature of the event. It feels like seeing water from a waterfall go up...

Quote from: VLS on May 04, 2013, 02:58:51 PMBased on frequent events. (a.k.a "White swans")

This aims to make consistent plays going with the flow. Whatever the currently-identified "flow" might be. For instance, if a common event in the cycle is the 2-times repeater, then that's the "white swan". (The black swan would be the 5-time repeater).

Same thing for neighbors. If the Zone of 4 is the common event in the current cycle, you would focus on it.

If you go a bit further, when you organize your timeline in cycles you can notice the "clumps of events", some going for several concatenated cycles (think cycle-pairing). Under this, you can hunt for events looking like a clairvoyant when they simply continue or appear as they would naturally do in a clumping game.

As it seems with everything in the game, events in the cycles "clump" too.

This means the events you collect in your timeline can appear in clusters of cycles if you track them in this way. For instance, take a look at the shortest cycle in roulette, the even chance = 2 spins.

When you see a run of 10 reds, it means the same "cycle tendency" has been repeating for 5 times (2 spins x 5 cycles). Observing players will expect to see at least a small bounce-back of blacks in the future,

Uner this cycle-pairing framework, the savvy player would ride the cycle-clump event(s) without a limit, until it stops. Then go in wait mode for the next tendency.

Nothing new -and something even expected in the cyclical game-, but people tend to focus their attention away from the most obvious things.

The whole procedure:

• 36-unit bank of minimal unit is the session bank.
• Each session is comprised by several "attacks".
• Each attack is ended on any hit giving you a plus (or breaking even).
• You compound the unit as per the 75% MM's rules after every attack (important).
• If the next bet would dip the balance at or past -36 from current balance high, the session is over.

Any "leftover unit" from the session is added to the minimal-unit bankrolls. A "leftover" unit is what remains when the amount of numbers to bet would surpass -36. For instance, if next bet is 4 numbers and you are -33 from your highest, you stop the session and save the remaining 3 units as leftover from the attack.

It is advisable for the initial unit to be divisible by 10 (at least). This means if you bet with 0.10 as base unit, session bank is 0.10 x 36 = $3.6 and your casino must have a 0.01 chip. If you bet with $1 as base unit, then your session bank is $36 and your casino must have 0.10 chip to apply the MM comfortably.

You must round down when dealing with decimals you can't place exactly with you available table chips.

Generous table limits are better because there is no stop-win for the session(s) with this, only stop-loss (important too).

It is quite an exciting thing to see the unit rise with this MM (the 50% to compound part). Also, knowing that no matter what happens you will have some units locked as you hit is reassuring. At times even the "leftovers" with an engorged unit can make-up for a tasty gain in initial unit-value. Of course, it is a downer to see the unit drop when starting again with minimal units, especially after the unit is very engorged, but it doesn't matter because you know even only one session going the right way can make you rake-in several "cushion" banks and your 25% cut also rises with a higher successfully-compounded unit.

The 75% MM is VERY recommended for those methods where the winning streaks truly clump.

Don't miss trying this baby with your favorite streaky/clumping method. In my book, the 75% MM has the double thumbs-up when you find that special method that clumps its wins and losses steadily.

Splits and straight-ups are preferred of course.

Cheers again!
Vic

...From a very special friend to spread & share the Christmas spirit with us all:

[attachimg=1]

Thank you!

Hello guys, I'm doing behind-the-scenes work to open-up our database for "plugging in" BetForum.cc

If you perceive the site a bit "shaky" momentarily in the next days, please reload. It should be a minimal delay.

I'm making subtle changes to the database (harmless) to first create a "bridge" to this one, then merging it with a centralized one, so new test users may come and go, as well as some test posts.

Do check out the idea behind the new BetForum.cc if you haven't: http://betforum.cc

This is a going to be a PROCESS, we are not migrating servers but creating a multi-site setup for sharing and enabling the same users across our 3 sites (BetSelection, BetSoftware, Betforum) with a custom home-grown content management system.

Feel free to use the sites as usual; other than the small delay here and there, this current step isn't going to have a visible impact until it's all done.

Cheers!
Vic

Merry Christmas 2015. May you host plenty of cheer and happiness in your heart these holidays.

[attachimg=1]

Vic & Family

Thanks for the advice Carlitos,

It'll be helpful for the land-based playing fellows.

Just recommended "boom" to a fellow friend

Hello guys,

We're back online from having server downtime due to a sudden hardware failure.

The database is fine. The files have been restored. Fortunately our current data center guy proved efficient. I repeatedly said downtime didn't matter as long as data integrity was preserved. Gladly, this has been the case.

We're fine now.

There's hope:

We are about to start a small business with a paid PRO version of our BetSoftware.cc package, which we can eventually use to sponsor a high-availability server for us to enjoy here too.

This type of situation is avoidable if we move to enterprise-grade facilities with a (redundant) high-availability setup being fault-tolerant so these type of incidents don't happen again. We'll get there.

Now please feel free to enjoy the site(s) again.

Cheers!
Vic