BetSelection.cc

Please login or register.

Topic: why not study this winning possibility seriously?  (Read 3039 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline wannawin

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 726
  • Don't get into Drugs, you will enjoy them!
    • View Profile
why not study this winning possibility seriously?
« on: March 09, 2015, 02:29:40 am »
  • ReplyReply
  • Bayes said this:

    Quote
    Regarding diversification, it's just a fancy way of saying "don't put all your eggs in one basket". A  simple example in roulette which FLAT posted would be to bet 3 units on an even chance. There are lots of ways of doing it, but instead of putting 3 units on red,  you would put one unit on each of 3 sixlines, the first being the "coldest", the second the "hottest", and the 3rd "average". The variance is reduced compared to betting only on red, even though the return is the same.

    maybe I am not reading the implications correctly? This is a discovery of major proportions if kept as stable. To win the variance is a way to earn money with progressions although not having more than normal game wins.

    This should be discussed thoroughly.
    say things directly to show respect for other people's time. Walter.


    Offline Blue_Angel

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 887
    • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
      • View Profile
    Re: why not study this winning possibility seriously?
    « Reply #1 on: September 18, 2017, 02:49:57 am »
  • ReplyReply
  • Quote
    you would put one unit on each of 3 sixlines, the first being the "coldest", the second the "hottest", and the 3rd "average".

    How do you determine which line is what?
    How many spins you have to chart/track before you know which lines to bet?
    Why to be constrained to lines exclusively when you could bet the top, bottom and middle to corners, streets, splits and numbers too, or even a combination from all.
    ''For after all what is man in nature?
    A nothing in relation to infinity, all in relation to nothing, a central point between nothing and all and infinitely far from understanding either.
    The ends of things and their beginnings are impregnably concealed from him in an impenetrable secret.
    He is equally incapable of seeing the nothingness out of which he was drawn and the infinite in which he is engulfed.'' B.Pascal

    Offline Albalaha

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 1890
    • Gender: Male
    • Learn about randomness before trying to fight that
      • View Profile
    Re: why not study this winning possibility seriously?
    « Reply #2 on: September 18, 2017, 06:05:31 am »
  • ReplyReply
  • Bayes has been one of the most intelligent and rational guy arounds forum and I have heard lesser irrational things from him than anybody else. What he is suggesting is to put 3 units as 1 on the coldest doublestreet, 1 on hottest doublestreet and 1 on average. There are lots of trouble deciding them. At times, there will be two hottest or coldest or average doublestreets together. So, it is easier said than done. There can be cleaner parameters like farthest hitting  line, the latest hitting line and one in the median leaving the last line i.e. 3rd in nearness. That can be played with decisive pick.
                                        All these won't seriously help in any manner, in my humble opinion. I have worked on these for pretty long time and found that no way of picking bet is superior by itself than all others. It is impossible. Hence, although it could be interesting to pick three doublestreets instead of RED, it won't matter in short or long run and it can not reduce variance by even an iota. Trying to find a better bet in a purely random game is a joke. We better make strategies to survive the worst cases(whenever they come in our bet) and how to win if there are average wins after a horrible drag.
     
    Email: earnsumit@gmail.com - VIsit my blog: http://albalaha.lefora.com

    Offline Blue_Angel

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 887
    • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
      • View Profile
    Re: why not study this winning possibility seriously?
    « Reply #3 on: September 18, 2017, 06:09:23 am »
  • ReplyReply
  • Bet selections fail when they don't represent what exactly happens during the game.
    ''For after all what is man in nature?
    A nothing in relation to infinity, all in relation to nothing, a central point between nothing and all and infinitely far from understanding either.
    The ends of things and their beginnings are impregnably concealed from him in an impenetrable secret.
    He is equally incapable of seeing the nothingness out of which he was drawn and the infinite in which he is engulfed.'' B.Pascal

    Offline delectus

    • Rising Member
    • **
    • Posts: 30
      • View Profile
    Re: why not study this winning possibility seriously?
    « Reply #4 on: September 19, 2017, 06:56:45 pm »
  • ReplyReply
  • Bayes has been one of the most intelligent and rational guy arounds forum and I have heard lesser irrational things from him than anybody else. What he is suggesting is to put 3 units as 1 on the coldest doublestreet, 1 on hottest doublestreet and 1 on average. There are lots of trouble deciding them. At times, there will be two hottest or coldest or average doublestreets together. So, it is easier said than done. There can be cleaner parameters like farthest hitting  line, the latest hitting line and one in the median leaving the last line i.e. 3rd in nearness. That can be played with decisive pick.
                                        All these won't seriously help in any manner, in my humble opinion. I have worked on these for pretty long time and found that no way of picking bet is superior by itself than all others. It is impossible. Hence, although it could be interesting to pick three doublestreets instead of RED, it won't matter in short or long run and it can not reduce variance by even an iota. Trying to find a better bet in a purely random game is a joke. We better make strategies to survive the worst cases(whenever they come in our bet) and how to win if there are average wins after a horrible drag.
     
    Looking at the complex mathematics, that Bayes has produced on this forum, together with being directed
    to even more complex mathematics, it appears he is a very competent mathematician. If I was a maths
    student, I would of course be thrilled. I don't see how it helps a roulette player.

    Any suggestion using hot & cold double streets (presumably lines) or any hot, cold numbers is a non
    starter. I mentioned on a previous occasion, the casino's are only too happy to provide such info on
    their indicator boards and they would not do that, if they thought it would give a player an advantage.

    It is a pity that mathematicians don't spend some of their time on random numbers, rather than for
    example their latest amazing discoveries, that there are two types of infinities !!



    Offline DoctorSudoku

    • Rising Member
    • **
    • Posts: 30
      • View Profile
    Re: why not study this winning possibility seriously?
    « Reply #5 on: October 02, 2017, 06:51:21 am »
  • ReplyReply
  • Bayes said this:

    maybe I am not reading the implications correctly? This is a discovery of major proportions if kept as stable. To win the variance is a way to earn money with progressions although not having more than normal game wins.

    This should be discussed thoroughly.

    How (or why) is the proposed strategy better than betting on the three most recent unique double streets (six lines) or the three double streets that have appeared the most frequently in, say, the last 12 spins?
    What is the fastest way of destroying your bankroll at the casino?

    Play roulette with GLC's progressions.

    Offline Blue_Angel

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 887
    • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
      • View Profile
    Re: why not study this winning possibility seriously?
    « Reply #6 on: October 02, 2017, 11:28:13 am »
  • ReplyReply
  • I don't back but understand what purpose serves this principle, when the game is more choppy/balanced the coldest six-lines will thrive, when game is streaky/hot the hottest six-lines will dominate and the average/middle will support in both of the cases, whether hot or not.

    Despite it seems sensible selection it has a constant weakness, the table/game will be either cold or hot, not both simultaneously, therefore half of the total lines/bets will produce negative and the other half positive results.
    Since we won't get more positive than negative there's no long term advantage, you could try it flat and sooner or later you would find out that gradually but steadily will be bogged down.

    That's how I consider it, take it or leave it.
    ''For after all what is man in nature?
    A nothing in relation to infinity, all in relation to nothing, a central point between nothing and all and infinitely far from understanding either.
    The ends of things and their beginnings are impregnably concealed from him in an impenetrable secret.
    He is equally incapable of seeing the nothingness out of which he was drawn and the infinite in which he is engulfed.'' B.Pascal

    Offline VLS

    • Back on the main seat
    • Administrator
    • *****
    • Posts: 2912
    • Gender: Male
    • Software Architech
      • View Profile
    Re: why not study this winning possibility seriously?
    « Reply #7 on: October 09, 2017, 10:13:48 pm »
  • ReplyReply
  • Quote from: Bayes
    you would put one unit on each of 3 sixlines, the first being the "coldest", the second the "hottest", and the 3rd "average".

    Would it be okay for the procedure to be:

    - Coldest is always the furthest back.

    - Hottest is considered looking back using 6-spin batches, excluding zeroes, picking the one with the most hits.

    - Warm / Average would be the DS appearing exactly 1 time for the most consecutive cycles.
    Bringing our new www.BetOnly.club to life! (System-only website)

    Email: betselectiongmail.com
    -- Victor

    Offline AsymBacGuy

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 689
      • View Profile
    Re: why not study this winning possibility seriously?
    « Reply #8 on: October 09, 2017, 11:19:12 pm »
  • ReplyReply
  • Well placed thought but...
    Why choosing to bet sixlines?

    Sixlines are numbers practically grouped on the layout without any relationship on what a strict physical process produces.

    If we think that a half wheel betting selection will come out in handy more often than not (in terms of possible variance reduction) we better choose straight up numbers.

    A new EC could include the 6 hottest, 6 coldest and 6 close to average probability numbers (or 19 numbers taken as a perfect 50/50 EC on double zero wheels) but we know that such state will change continuosly.
    To get a sort of variance reduction we need that the probability that warm numbers will suddendly become hot is quite low or restricted within acceptable terms.

    as.




     





     

     

     

         

     
    Winners are simply willing to do what losers won't

    Offline wannawin

    • Moderator
    • *****
    • Posts: 726
    • Don't get into Drugs, you will enjoy them!
      • View Profile
    Re: why not study this winning possibility seriously?
    « Reply #9 on: October 10, 2017, 06:45:32 am »
  • ReplyReply
  • Well placed thought but...
    Why choosing to bet sixlines?

    any analysis on any group of 6 numbers is the same. the layout is there for convenience0. nothing else

    - Coldest is always the furthest back.
    - Hottest is considered looking back using 6-spin batches, excluding zeroes, picking the one with the most hits.
    - Warm / Average would be the DS appearing exactly 1 time for the most consecutive cycles.

    a valid way of approaching the system in the absence of clarification by the author.

    Since we won't get more positive than negative there's no long term advantage, you could try it flat and sooner or later you would find out that gradually but steadily will be bogged down.

    That's how I consider it, take it or leave it.

    the possible advantage is to use a progression that covers the variance. please see  bold quote: "The variance is reduced compared to betting only on red". it would be the winning hit of the century.
    say things directly to show respect for other people's time. Walter.

    Offline Albalaha

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 1890
    • Gender: Male
    • Learn about randomness before trying to fight that
      • View Profile
    Re: why not study this winning possibility seriously?
    « Reply #10 on: October 10, 2017, 04:05:30 pm »
  • ReplyReply
  • Bayes suggestion could be an interesting way to play but it can not be the best as nothing is better or worse permanently. It is as random as it could be. The warmest could go choppy or cold when you start to bet that and vice versa.
    Email: earnsumit@gmail.com - VIsit my blog: http://albalaha.lefora.com

    Offline AsymBacGuy

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 689
      • View Profile
    Re: why not study this winning possibility seriously?
    « Reply #11 on: October 10, 2017, 04:44:11 pm »
  • ReplyReply

  • the possible advantage is to use a progression that covers the variance. please see  bold quote: "The variance is reduced compared to betting only on red". it would be the winning hit of the century.

    You told me that any 6 numbers group analsys is the same no matter how the numbers are taken, so it's difficult to accept the idea that "warm, hot, cold, ap" attributes could help us for a possible variance reduction.

    I fear it can't be the winning hit of the century, this topic was deeply studied several years ago by one of the best roulette researchers, Charles Van Bockstaele.

    as. 


     



       

     
    Winners are simply willing to do what losers won't