blockdamofo

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

#### MrPerfect.

« on: February 26, 2017, 03:39:28 PM »
Definition of Terms

Trigger Range -- This is a contiguous series of win and/or loss events of a specific length.
Betting Range -- This is a series of bets of a specific length.
Betting Levels -- This represents the number of Betting Ranges available to be exhausted.

Statistical Facts

1) The longer your Betting Range, the greater chance you have to hit in that Betting Range.

2) The longer your Trigger Range, the greater chance you have to hit in your Betting Range.

3) Each Betting Level exponentially (statistically yet undefined) increases your chance to gain a hit.

4) The Betting Range, Trigger Range & Betting Levels are a multi-dimensional matrix; their values can be individually altered to create different resulting odds of receiving a hit.

EXAMPLE A -- Trigger Range 0, Betting Range 12, Betting Levels 1

Bet Red 12 times in a row.  Our chances to hit are 99.97%.

EXAMPLE B -- Trigger Range 4, Betting Range 12, Betting Levels 1

Wait for 4 non-Red results in a row & bet Red 12 times in a row.  Our chances to hit are 99.998%.

EXAMPLE C --  Trigger Range 4, Betting Range 4, Betting Levels 3

Wait for 4 non-Red results in a row & bet Red 4 times in a row.  Repeat this 2 more times, each time on a new series of non-Red results in a row.  Our chances to hit are now EXPONENTIALLY INCREASED beyond 99.998%.

A new statistical term must be coined in order to name this phenomenon.  I call the process "segmenting the range" and I guess I would name it Exponential SegmentationTM.

Thanks to HPTM for revealing this phenomenon, its the only thing I have found in roulette that actually works.

This is NOT Gambler's Fallacy

Those that claim this is the Gambler's Fallacy will say that the chances of receiving back to back failures on multiple Betting Levels are exactly the same as spread farther apart than one level.

There must be some extra-dimensional phenomenon relating to statistical variance examined in a set of repeat trials where the chances of receiving a loss are reduced.

This extra-dimensional phenomenon is accessed by creating a new set of trials but continuing the Betting Range on a new Betting Level.  Therefore the key to this phenomenon is the difference that occurs between successive sets of trials.

Why should one set of trials be different than another?  OF COURSE IT IS.  Each trial is unique.  Even though the ODDS relating to that trial are the same, the results do not remain the same; somehow the repetitive switching of trials has triggered a statistical anomaly.

This MUST be what Dobble means by his Short Run Theory:

Quote from: Dobble
I have discovered the difference between short and long run rows. There is a relation between short and long run with the largeness of the number bet.
The changeover is the D(obbelsteen)T(urn)O(ver)Point. From this point the result of a system is negative.

Where each (segmented) Betting Level is a short run and therefore outperforms the long run (one Betting Level only) statistically.

This is also what Dirty Harry means when he says:

The math guys ignore the differing probabilities of various groups of numbers.

A fact that gamblers can exploit to their advantage!

Where each trial (level) is a new group of numbers.

Successive groups of trials cannot be expected to conform to statistical expectation; i.e. successive short runs do not equal a long run.

The switching of trials represents AN ADDITIONAL STATISTICAL SIEVE that is not accounted for by one-dimensional statistical expectation:

Betting one level three times on one trial (12 bets) <> betting one level one time on three trials (12 bets)
Each introduction of a new trial incorporates an additional statistical factor that when multiplied will overtake the expected statistical results from a single trial.

x is the odds of receiving a hit in a single bet.

y is the hidden statistcal factor incorporated by a new trial, where each new trial (4 additional trials total, each one bet in length) increases its effect.

Our goal here is to solve for the values of y,a,b & c

There is a varying relation between [the number of bets per trial AND the amount of x] and the amounts of y,a,b,c.
Why complicate? To kill the snake is more easy to cut the head then cut little chanks starting from tale point.
If you look bell curve , highest points is where head is, less rare situations is where the tail.
If you limit degrees of freedom of the system, you move head ( more thick part of distrebution) to more positive values. It mean that you get more hits and have more playing opportunity to yourself.
Messing up with the tails just put you in the position to look for rare events . Probability of hit is considered the same independently of previous results, unless you limit degrees of freedom. Every number, color or groop of numbers do have same expectation as dictated by simple probability.
What changes odds in this game is not series of events themselves but behavior of the ball in determined conditions. Series of events may be a reflection of underlying conditions , choose have real physical reason to affect outcome on posterior spins, but this affect is not direct. Real reason for correlation between past results and outcome on next spin is imperfection of wheel and how it affects ball jumps on conditions that present.
If conditions that permitted such correlation stop to be present, no more correlation to be expected.
No need to devise method based on stats themselves.  Stats is just a tool to assess physical underlying reasons ( deffects, limits in freedom of system).
However it's always nice to mess around with math, continue this line of thinking and who know what you could descover along the way .

The following users thanked this post: Reyth

#### scepticus

« Reply #1 on: February 26, 2017, 04:52:47 PM »
Modern Wheels are Imperfect " Mr. Perfect. ?
Wheels need to be sufficiently imperfect to be exploited. You think multi- million casinos leave the Barn Door open for AP to walk in ? Not only AP fallacy but AP fantasy  !

#### MrPerfect.

« Reply #2 on: February 26, 2017, 05:48:15 PM »
Modern Wheels are Imperfect " Mr. Perfect. ?
Wheels need to be sufficiently imperfect to be exploited. You think multi- million casinos leave the Barn Door open for AP to walk in ? Not only AP fallacy but AP fantasy  !
What is a point to know from my words if wheels are perfect or not ? I would never tell you their location in the first place.
One thing however l can tell you for sure. Their imperfections affect these who do not account for them, be it AP or system player.

The following users thanked this post: Reyth

#### scepticus

« Reply #3 on: February 26, 2017, 07:58:52 PM »
Modern Wheels are Imperfect " Mr. Perfect. ?
Wheels need to be sufficiently imperfect to be exploited. You think multi- million casinos leave the Barn Door open for AP to walk in ? Not only AP fallacy but AP fantasy  !
What is a point to know from my words if wheels are perfect or not ? I would never tell you their location in the first place.
One thing however l can tell you for sure. Their imperfections affect these who do not account for them, be it AP or system player.

You AP guys in this forum remind me of an old song
" Me and my imagination
My imagination and me
We can do the things we want to......."

#### MrPerfect.

« Reply #4 on: February 26, 2017, 10:08:30 PM »
Modern Wheels are Imperfect " Mr. Perfect. ?
Wheels need to be sufficiently imperfect to be exploited. You think multi- million casinos leave the Barn Door open for AP to walk in ? Not only AP fallacy but AP fantasy  !
What is a point to know from my words if wheels are perfect or not ? I would never tell you their location in the first place.
One thing however l can tell you for sure. Their imperfections affect these who do not account for them, be it AP or system player.

You AP guys in this forum remind me of an old song
" Me and my imagination
My imagination and me
We can do the things we want to......."
Yes, Sceps. Me and my imagination can do a lot, but it's nothing compared with yours!!! You can imagine PERFECT WHEEL.  I have no clue even how one supposed to look like .

#### scepticus

« Reply #5 on: February 27, 2017, 12:51:06 AM »
Modern Wheels are Imperfect " Mr. Perfect. ?
Wheels need to be sufficiently imperfect to be exploited. You think multi- million casinos leave the Barn Door open for AP to walk in ? Not only AP fallacy but AP fantasy  !
What is a point to know from my words if wheels are perfect or not ? I would never tell you their location in the first place.
One thing however l can tell you for sure. Their imperfections affect these who do not account for them, be it AP or system player.

You AP guys in this forum remind me of an old song
" Me and my imagination
My imagination and me
We can do the things we want to......."
Yes, Sceps. Me and my imagination can do a lot, but it's nothing compared with yours!!! You can imagine PERFECT WHEEL.  I have no clue even how one supposed to look like .

That is because you have become cross-eyed  looking at a revolving wheel for many hours .Anyway, I have said before that physicists will say that nothing man-made is perfect and  have  said that the bias needs to be sufficient to be exploited while you AP claim to always find  biased wheels.
Why don't you discuss your ideas with real Physicists if you think your idea has validity ? Perhaps they will agree with you  !

#### MrPerfect.

« Reply #6 on: February 27, 2017, 03:26:58 AM »
@Scepticus,  l have very limited interest in physicists who are unable to beat roulette wheel.
These who can , do not need my explanation.
Is it me being cross- eyed or you being blinded by your lack of knolidge on the subject?
« Last Edit: February 27, 2017, 03:30:09 AM by MrPerfect. »

#### scepticus

« Reply #7 on: February 27, 2017, 05:14:00 PM »
@Scepticus,  l have very limited interest in physicists who are unable to beat roulette wheel.
These who can , do not need my explanation.
Is it me being cross- eyed or you being blinded by your lack of knolidge on the subject?
Mr. Perfect
We don’t need to be expert in AP . Just  enough to call Bullsh*t on  those who claim to profit from it.

First you note hundreds ( thousands ? ) of spins on ONE wheel . From this you draw conclusions as to whether or not
It is “ playable “ for your AP method.
Then ,when you get to get to the casino , you test the air temperature ,and goodness what else , to adjust your play. Really ?
So the value of your previous hard work can be rendered useless if the air temperature changes ?
And you can do all these calculations before No More Bets is called ?
So, tell me , Mr. P , just what have you actually deduced from the stats of your many spins ?

#### MrPerfect.

« Reply #8 on: February 27, 2017, 06:28:25 PM »
@Scepticus,  l have very limited interest in physicists who are unable to beat roulette wheel.
These who can , do not need my explanation.
Is it me being cross- eyed or you being blinded by your lack of knolidge on the subject?
Mr. Perfect
We don’t need to be expert in AP . Just  enough to call Bullsh*t on  those who claim to profit from it.

First you note hundreds ( thousands ? ) of spins on ONE wheel . From this you draw conclusions as to whether or not
It is “ playable “ for your AP method.
Then ,when you get to get to the casino , you test the air temperature ,and goodness what else , to adjust your play. Really ?
So the value of your previous hard work can be rendered useless if the air temperature changes ?
And you can do all these calculations before No More Bets is called ?
So, tell me , Mr. P , just what have you actually deduced from the stats of your many spins ?
Many things can change, Scepticus. I do not specifically measure temperature, unless l got a flu .
No one says it's easy . If it would be, there you could observe many suxsessfull players, wich is simply not a case. It has to do with human nature more then wheels themselves.  Humans are lazy. Not many are able to put effort required in order to perform proper study  or develop proper method. It require a bit of determination, you know.
Result of a study is understanding of ball and sometimes wheel bahavior in different conditions. They act differently, it should be accounted for.
In studies l perform , l see answers to common qwestions ( Where to bet? When to bet? How to bet? And if bet at all? ). That's why such studies are performed in the first place.
Beware of incomplete understanding! !! Your idea that you do not need to know something in order to speak about it is simply delusional. It put's you in the position where you show your incompetence nothing else. Besides that, it rase qwestions about your motives. You are clearly not interested in learning something , all you wanna do is criticise for a sake of cretisism. It's obsession, my friend. You should correct it yourself .

« Last Edit: February 27, 2017, 06:45:34 PM by kav »

The following users thanked this post: MickyP

#### scepticus

« Reply #9 on: February 27, 2017, 09:55:46 PM »
" More to do with Human Nature than the wheel itself " says it all Mr.P
AP is the New Religion !
And we should all become True Believers !

#### MrPerfect.

« Reply #10 on: February 27, 2017, 11:42:40 PM »
" More to do with Human Nature than the wheel itself " says it all Mr.P
AP is the New Religion !
And we should all become True Believers !
Some will do anything to not work... what is a point to belive in something you can verify for yourself? Is it working on your own understanding is terrifying?  Time and effort required is off limits?
I would say that you are just lazy.

#### scepticus

« Reply #11 on: February 28, 2017, 04:20:32 PM »
" More to do with Human Nature than the wheel itself " says it all Mr.P
AP is the New Religion !
And we should all become True Believers !
Some will do anything to not work... what is a point to belive in something you can verify for yourself? Is it working on your own understanding is terrifying?  Time and effort required is off limits?
I would say that you are just lazy.

Yes . Mr. Perfect
Everyone who doesn’t use AP is lazy - in your opinion.
Kav-bayes- palestis- dobblesteen -Harry J- Reyth
myself  and some others - we are all lazy. Why are we lazy ? Because we don’t believe in the True Religion of AP  ?
Why can’t you understand that we are not lazy - we prefer to apply our efforts to methods other than AP.  Why do we do that ? Because we can profit by using our own ideas and the maths of roulette -  that’s why . And we don’t need a Team to do so !  So -why should we learn something we don’t need to learn  ?
Roulette is a numbers game and math deals with numbers so why can’t we use maths ? True, it doesn’t produce the certainty that you claim for AP but it does give us reasonable expectation of profit.

The following users thanked this post: Reyth

#### MrPerfect.

« Reply #12 on: February 28, 2017, 04:48:16 PM »
@ Scepticus.
You say" reasonable expectation of profit".
Please show your reasoning using numbers that you mentioned above. How one would reasonably expect profit on the game with negative expectation? I'm super curios to see it.
The thing is, everyone is free to think or do whatever they want. It's OK to have wrong theory.
Not "ok" part starts when wrong theories being shared with others without any facts supporting such a theory. Again, it's OK to have belives that do not correspond reality, as long as you keep them for yourself or share them as belives.
Do you see, what l do can be shown both in math and practice... show me what you do, you are free to stand for any believe,  as long as you not argument it with other belives... that's where it becomes religion. Belive without any confirmation from facts. You are beliver , Scepticus, unless you demonstrate otherwise.

#### scepticus

« Reply #13 on: February 28, 2017, 08:04:08 PM »
You are a hard man to convince Mr P that some of us win more than we lose .
No. I don’t have to give you the maths to justify my method, Like some others in the forum I don’t think we should divulge how we arrive at our conclusions. I have  stated that I use The Nine Block- The 5 in 7 and the New 3 Sets of 12 so go figure. Unless, of course, you are too LAZY to do so.
As for the maths, I have said that I ignore the zero and calculate an “Even Steven “ bet - a bet that has an even chance of success going by the maths. Add an idea and there you have it.. Didn’t Bayes criticise me for ignoring the zero? I think the zero has the same chance  as any other number so ignore it because to win some number/s must be left out mustn’t they ? So why not the zero ?Has it some magical property that other numbers don‘t have ?
You forget that I offered to come to your local casino and show me betting in a real life situation . You declined yet NOW ask for proof !  What better proof than an actual demonstration ?
As for my being a critic you are the one who told Reyth
"No need to devise method based on stats themselves. Stats is just a tool to assess physical underlying reasons ( deffects, limits in freedom of system "
You are fixated with AP  and , basically, tell others that they are wasting their time using a method other than AP. And THAT is not “ criticising ?
Finding a biased wheel means that you have identified a section of the wheel that is favoured. This means that no more work is necessary . You merely keep betting that particular section. So it is you that is wasting your time , not us. Well , not yet anyway  !
« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 08:06:34 PM by scepticus »

The following users thanked this post: Reyth

#### MrPerfect.

« Reply #14 on: March 01, 2017, 05:26:44 AM »
You are a hard man to convince Mr P that some of us win more than we lose .
No. I don’t have to give you the maths to justify my method, Like some others in the forum I don’t think we should divulge how we arrive at our conclusions. I have  stated that I use The Nine Block- The 5 in 7 and the New 3 Sets of 12 so go figure. Unless, of course, you are too LAZY to do so.
As for the maths, I have said that I ignore the zero and calculate an “Even Steven “ bet - a bet that has an even chance of success going by the maths. Add an idea and there you have it.. Didn’t Bayes criticise me for ignoring the zero? I think the zero has the same chance  as any other number so ignore it because to win some number/s must be left out mustn’t they ? So why not the zero ?Has it some magical property that other numbers don‘t have ?
You forget that I offered to come to your local casino and show me betting in a real life situation . You declined yet NOW ask for proof !  What better proof than an actual demonstration ?
As for my being a critic you are the one who told Reyth
"No need to devise method based on stats themselves. Stats is just a tool to assess physical underlying reasons ( deffects, limits in freedom of system "
You are fixated with AP  and , basically, tell others that they are wasting their time using a method other than AP. And THAT is not “ criticising ?
Finding a biased wheel means that you have identified a section of the wheel that is favoured. This means that no more work is necessary . You merely keep betting that particular section. So it is you that is wasting your time , not us. Well , not yet anyway  !
l was not criticising Reyth post. It was a really good one. I have written there exactly what l mean to say. I already spent several months thinking about it, however.... it's like sniping.  You need to know how far is the " target". Judging probabilities of hit on next spin makes sense only if some limits have been established. If it's random,  relying on next spin more highly then on previous is pointless. You need these extra hits that advantage produce in order to exploit such approach.  And you do need to know where they are more likely to manifest and why.
Math or stats doesn't cut it by itself, these are simply tools , not solutions. Imagine that final result is to hang your coat on the wall. You got hammer ( math), you got ability ( stats), but no neil ( physics) to finish the job. That's all about it. You need all 3 to be suxsessful.
No need to convince me of anything. You not play for my money, but for yours.
I have no clue whatsoever what is it about betting number just because it's green . I would consider to bet it if it show ratio better then 1:36 or would be in high probability zone....
I really don't know why would you need a personal demo from me. You can see same thing doing simulation in your local casino. Just chart ball jumps and diamond hits.  If there is a pattern, l could exploit it. I do not see reason to hide what lm doing. It's have been shown many times by different people on YouTube for example.  It's not a secret long ago, just some technical stuff is omitted,  rest of it is common knolidge.
System players clame too much sometimes, but rarely have something to show. Don't get me wrong, some do show actually, Sputnik for example. It's amazing to see that some are able to manage logically sound method that is well presented. I would more likely to consider his method for a test then something l have problems to connect with.