I've witnessed 9 numbers hit 18 times in succession.

Interesting name, interesting method.

Question,

Let's say you start betting your two numbers and two spin later two other numbers hit side by side.

We keep betting the first two and it happens to take 45 spins to complete but in that time no other two numbers hit side by side.

Do we then start betting the two numbers that hit 43 spins ago straight after we started betting for 45 spins, or do we wait for something more recent to hit?

Hey Leapyfrog,

You need a blog for this!

There's nothing new about this idea.

Grap a bunch of systems then play each in turn or concurrently...

Or, grab a bunch of systems then play the intersecting, or crossover numbers.

Even, grab a bunch of systems then eliminate the intersecting, or crossover numbers.

...And the list goes on.

The difficult part is knowing how and why to switch, when is it worth switching and when is it not. Something we can never truly know 100%.

Changing systems after 1 unit profit is not always going to be successful, or as easy as that. There will be occasions when the current system of choice never attains the 1 unit needed to trigger the switch. What then? Bring in a stop loss? What then? Switch to a new system and go for 1 unit profit to slowly recover the previous stop loss amount? Who's to say the original system couldn't recover the stop loss of its own, or faster than the rest? I mean, it's in your team so it must be good, right?

Switch after 1 unit profit seems too short-sighted for any long term edge. It's just another simplistic 'hit & run' mechanism.

Roulette never ends – you can't run. You can't run because roulette never ends and eventually you will run right into it again.

One good and stable method of bet selection that can hold its own and break even over lengthy time is enough foundation to build upon. Once you have that (not an easy ask, BTW) then it's time to study forms of diversification within the break even system. It could be on/off switches, looping switches, scaling switches, limiting switches or empowering switches. The switches could be selection based or MM based or both.

One thing's for sure, it's going to take more than one switch to squeeze an edge out of whatever you throw at roulette.

IMO.

Quote from: Mike on August 06, 2014, 03:30:14 PM
You might start losing from the get-go and never recover. It does happen, and more often than you might think.

You might, so if you do you switch.


This can be very helpful where you use methods with short burst loops, or trigger cycles of no more than a handful of bets.

Quote from: esoito on June 29, 2014, 11:42:24 PM
That balance is steadily rising. 

Curious to know if the balance is still rising?

Bally, have you reached 1000 games yet?

Quote from: Mr J on July 07, 2014, 03:05:51 AM
Was playing a couple days ago........we have a max. payout of $3,500 on the inside.

A guy put $100 on the 2 and $100 on the 1-6 DS.


Any thoughts?

Ken

Any guy dropping black chips should know how to play by the rules.

Easy enough for him to put $100 on the #2, and $20 each on the #1-3-4-5-6. It's amost the same bet and doesn't compromise the casino's requirements.

If I'd been there and witnessed this I'd have let out a belly laugh! [smiley]aes/tongue.png[/smiley]

Quote from: The Crow on June 20, 2014, 05:43:27 AM

Any number comes in play the sum of 37.

This looks like whar Mr j had in mind, but why would you use it? What advantage could it have?

Quote from: Gizmotron on June 16, 2014, 04:25:39 AM
Thanks for also including the link.

Hmmm, I just read that thread. As useless as tits on a bull.

Quote from: Mr J on June 16, 2014, 12:17:51 AM
What I wanted to do......use a pencil and write on my monitor, the wheel size (a circle).

You are so old school Mr j - I love it!

If online airball was bogus the more likely scenario would be an extensive video library of results, with sophisticated software editing programs that cut the video stream between actual spins and stored spins. You might see the cut stream switch as a tiny glitch or lag in the video you are watching and think little of it, as this happens all the time anyway. The result given could be any result the casino loaded into the video stream, and likely the one that gives them the best result. The stream might then cut back to an actual live spin while the ball is moving with high velocity around the ball track.

Like others have said, the casinos don't need to do this because they have an edge already, but every now and then they could water down your efforts by introducing a "facsimile" result or two in order to put out any brush fires, so to speak. Whenever they felt the need, big money bettors and big progression players could be squashed in very little time by using a library of facsimile results and sophisticated video editing software.

I suppose it's possible, and greed does strange things to people.

Thank you for explaining but if you play 40 sessions of each 100 spins then you have witnessed 4000 spins so you should expect some rare events as per probability which renders them not so rare after all.

If you are hoping to catch one of these rare events without having to witness the whole 4000 spins then I think luck will play a part.

You could try to continuously play the most recent dominant EC over a short burst and stop to wait if others catch up then play again when one is dominant. This way you could almost guarantee your bets would be riding on at least some of the "rare event" when it happens.

Quote from: Xander on June 07, 2014, 04:31:06 PM
Randomness has no limits.

Yes randomness should have no limits, but it also has no knowledge of how to find out if that is true, so it will never extend beyond some reasonable boundries. This is where gamblers hope to find an edge. Within the reasonable boundries set by the lack of skill and knowledge possessed by randomness. 

What is a rare event? Can someone explain it please?

I mean when is it considered rare, and when is it not?

Is there a specific point at which an event moves into the rare zone or is it a fuzzy logic thing?

Quote from: XXVV on June 07, 2014, 10:07:09 PM

> a preparedness and readiness to accept change and modify our views would be wise.

My remark of sheep mentality was not so much a criticism of clumping, but a suggestion that for roulette it might be better to lead than to follow. Be ready and prepared for things to change.

Modify your view to predict the next set of clumping numbers. rather than chasing the ones already there.

Hello.
Mr. seykid31 makes a fair question. Is it old stuff as such???
In my view the answer is yes, it is old stuff, tried and tested at great length.
The clumping theory is just that, a theory. An unproven speculation like the existence of aliens for instance. [smiley]aes/smile.png[/smiley] It has some use for roulette only because probability allows for limited variations due to there being only 37 numbers. If you put 2000 numbers on the wheel the clumping effect driven by this new probability would be almost undetectable and fleeting at best. Actually it is already fleeting with only 37 numbers.
I don't have the answer, but I feel following clumps is a bit sheep mentality and I never met a smart sheep.