Royal Panda roulette

Author Topic: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.  (Read 6265 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

scepticus

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #90 on: March 17, 2019, 12:43:38 AM »
O.K.Third . I was wrong in  what I thought Dobbel meant.  Clearly, he is wrong  as is anyone who claims to know how long the long run is .  Obviously, if you attach a certain number to it then it can be computed . We have no Facts about  The Future . We can only guess  the result of  an uncertain future event . I wish members would face the reality that gambling  means taking the risk of losing hard - earned  money  . Where there is no risk there is no gambling and roulette is certainly a form of gambling ... er... entertainment   ;D
 
The following users thanked this post: Stratege

Third

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #91 on: March 17, 2019, 02:00:26 AM »
He determined the long-run by running very many tests of each bet selection and eventually he discovered the maximum number of spins where a loss must take place.  This becomes a practical certainty (which is the best we can get in roulette) because no matter how many times we run a test, a loss will always occur within "x" spins.

I am not 100% certain this is how he determined the long-run (which he calls the DTOP) but it is at least something similar to this.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2019, 02:02:02 AM by Third »
 
The following users thanked this post: Stratege

Stratege

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #92 on: March 17, 2019, 08:50:03 AM »

I am trying to answer the messages of Scepticus & Third. Dobbelsteen's theorem, I can understand it according to what I said about "The law of small numbers and the law of great numbers" (February 23, 2019). But you must also consider your type of bet ! For EC, D and C ..., the "long term" (a few hundred spins) reveals imbalances that the law of equilibrium can better partially restore. But on the straight up, the "short term" promotes repetition (law of the third), and for the player a possibility to locate the heat. It is here the notion of imbalance that is approached. In the long term, the concept of heat disappears (the prediction becomes problematic).

MickyP, I will conclude this debate on "your" methods and "your" variants of Alembert. You say that I cannot show that your variants are ineffective because you have not presented them !

There is no need to show that your variants do not work. You use the progression structure of Alembert. All imaginable variants will remain in this disadvantageous structure. Your variants can never compensate for this disadvantage and then make a profit greater than the flat bet (already said). If you do not understand this mechanical and structural reality with the progressions in loss, it is because you are a great beginner.

A progression d'Alembert (or variante) on a winning method aims to withdraw more money from his sessions. But that diminishes the final profitability. You cannot say that your progress helps you to "maintain your success". No, because you say (telling slip - lapsus) that without your progressions your success would not be maintained. You present your progressions as an important key in your game (error of great beginner) !

Talking about several variations is also incomprehensible, depending on your discourse and your level of play. An experienced player could easily explain the usefulness of several progressions in a particular practice (that you do not know not) and who is not in the books it seems. If nobody comes to support your words, it's because it would be a bad deal. This story of progress has ruined your credibility !
« Last Edit: March 17, 2019, 09:09:27 AM by Stratege »
 
The following users thanked this post: scepticus, Third

Third

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #93 on: March 17, 2019, 09:51:44 AM »
But on the straight up, the "short term" promotes repetition (law of the third), and for the player a possibility to locate the heat. It is here the notion of imbalance that is approached. In the long term, the concept of heat disappears (the prediction becomes problematic).

I have felt that at times but no matter the sequence length there will always be groups of numbers that will be known by their behavior:

1) Top 12 numbers (approximately)
2) Bottom 12 numbers (approximately)
3) Top 6 numbers (approximately)
4) Bottom 6 numbers (approximately)
5) Top 2 numbers (fluctuates from #3)

There are certain statistical features that are known such as:

a) A single number will hit within expectation within 13 attempts
b) Roulette will not produce more than 8 sequences of chop (hit within expectation followed by miss expectation) successively
c) There will always be a top performing number that will always have more hits within expectation than gaps and a significantly larger ratio of hits:gaps than other numbers

Statistical models are available for number behavior, to demonstrate how rare a particular behavior is and thus how likely it is that the behavior will immediately cease.

Many people make the mistake of looking at large samples and thinking that all the numbers have "achieved their statistical norm" and all appear equal but this is a fallacy due to the false impression that is created by the use of percentage.

Where prediction becomes "problematic" is when roulette continues to provide a different number from within the 6 top performers successively but I have found that eventually (the longer we play, the more likely it is) there will be 2 top numbers that will become consistently the best from all numbers and all that is necessary is to play the gap-hits pattern, minimizing loss and maximixing gain.  Unfortunately, this pattern is more likely to be seen after many hundreds of spins and so most people are unable to observe it; it is similar to deep sea diving, where things are seen there that are not visible at the surface.  I am certain that dedicated AP players have observed this.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2019, 10:04:06 AM by Third »
 
The following users thanked this post: Stratege

MickyP

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #94 on: March 17, 2019, 11:35:56 AM »
PMS, at least you used the word "great" when describing me. As a Trump supporter that is one of my favorite words; incredible, amazing how you soften me up with words I resonate with.

On a more serious note, aren't I very similar to a lab rat that keeps finding the cheese and you are the professor trying to understand why?
Roulette presents a maze of obstacles to any player wanting to profit from the game. To the lab rat the cheese is the profit.
I use whatever I can to reach the cheese in as few spins as possible and at times progressions work just fine for me seeing as I am not fully competent in AP prediction methods.
If you can not predict the next outcome with an extremely high level of accuracy then you have to embrace the reality of loss. That's a fact that you rather dismiss than  include in your research. Rambling on about theories and scientific studies gets you no closer to the constant wins you seem to be chasing. Professor, your introduction to the realities of B/M table roulette is best learnt from the lab rat ingenuity that keeps you in disbelief.
Go to a casino (the real lab) and become the rat that finds the cheese (profit) with minimal effort and in very few spins then you see that it is very possible.
 
 

Stratege

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #95 on: March 17, 2019, 12:11:50 PM »

Yes Third, any observer for a long enough time finds differences between the numbers. On 5000 spins, some numbers in advance and late make a big difference. I talked about this with the 8 spins patterns (which represent the image of a roulette with 256 numbers! + zero!). I said that a pattern can get ahead with its rival pattern and at one point one of the two patterns is still ahead of everyone else. At this level (as with the numbers) I will speak of "movement of the game". And indeed, the notion of "trend" is more appropriate than that of "heat".

Indeed, players often think that there is a tie between the numbers that will inevitably come soon. "The drift of the statistical gap" can go on for a long time. On 1 million spins, an EC can have a "normal" difference of 1000 (or more), so if we only take a few numbers it can become huge. In fact, the human spontaneously interprets and simplifies things, but as soon as it goes beyond his direct perception, he makes many errors of judgment. We can wait all our life for equality between numbers, this equality may not come. Perhaps I should emphasize the nuances between "return to balance" and "return to balance". The first is a utopia (which also refers to the d'Alembert), the second is to capture a change of direction to win a bet (deviance-compensation) or more (trend). Marigny said that "the deviance is the rule, the balance is the exception". We cannot run after the exception, we would be short of breath! If you follow number trends, Third, it is true that groups are formed for a duration, then another group comes (I'll tell you later one of my observations). Studying this is exciting!
« Last Edit: March 17, 2019, 12:18:01 PM by Stratege »
 
The following users thanked this post: Third

Third

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #96 on: March 17, 2019, 12:56:49 PM »
I agree!  I had no idea that Marigny thought that about balance.  One thing I like about number performance is that we can quickly and objectively tell when a number is not performing at expectation and immediately take correctiuve measures until it returns (or is replaced by a stronger performer). 

I think we can make many millions of spins but we will only see one dominant grouping of numbers for the entire sequence and furthermore we will find a dominated grouping of numbers that have never become dominant.  I think this is very significant.

I would like to learn how to study number performance better and in an organized way.  I have an unlimited supply of numbers but I simply lack the creative motivation to apply any kind of formal study.
 
The following users thanked this post: Stratege

scepticus

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #97 on: March 17, 2019, 01:44:32 PM »
Third and Stratege
One cautionary note guys . Trying to ascertain a profitable method from many prior spins can give multiple  scenarios . Apart from the intellectual " Buzz " the PRACTICAL  question is " Can we devise a profitable method from your conclusinos.? "  I don't think you can. Are we to suppose that no Statistician or Mathematician has previusly tried this approach?

 The more stats we have the more likely that trends and chops will be observed . If we did 5000 trials each of one thousand spins we are likely to encounter one of those "thousands " contains one thousand Reds or Blacks ?
But Good Luck anyway  !
 

scepticus

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #98 on: March 17, 2019, 01:47:28 PM »
Third ) A single number will hit within expectation within 13 attempts
Really ?
 

Stratege

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #99 on: March 17, 2019, 06:47:15 PM »

Scepticus, the answer is yes. People who read my (technical) messages can discover for themselves this way of "deviance-compensation". The player may use other types of bets than the EC, if he prefers. But ECs may be simpler to practice.

Very good argument to say that if the researcher-roulette or the player found, why did the mathematician fail? In fact, we do not have the same goals. A mathematician who would find, cannot afford to induce crowds to play, as some might win but the majority would lose. This mathematician would be rejected by his scientific community. Imagine a Killian Mbappe math who can no longer play as a team (club)! It would be awful for him to play alone on a "mathematical football field".

Regarding my research, I lost a lot of time (years) to believe that it would be simpler and especially faster to test methods known but easy enough to practice. I was wrong for years. But it was a path of experience, before being psychologically ready to work on the difficult approach of Marigny. In reality, it was difficult to accept a certain rigor, but game principles easy to understand. I started 20 years ago to test the principles of Marigny that were published in magazines or derived methods (without the book Marigny). So, I tested personal variants quite far from the true principles of this author. But what is curious is that I have always observed a positive effect. This "deviance-compensation" principle is therefore very real and powerful enough to observe this effect (this phenomenon) on tests without great technical subtleties. I needed a few more years, after reading Marigny, to build my own method. I retained its general principles but my tests showed that I had to change the general framework of my game criteria. They are basically the same principles as Marigny, but not the same spins played. When we test variants with a positive effect, we try to reduce the number of spins played to increase the % profit. The problems encountered were, for me, that the gains were distributed fairly harmoniously. This proved a homogeneous effect obtained by the selection (thus effective principles). In such a case, we can only repeat a test with a stricter variant, to increase the advantage.

So, I tested a total of 4 major kinds of variants with different versions. My last variant, the most successful ended with a version 8! For the pleasure of research, I'm working on a fifth variant, which will be on the concept of "trend", a game to capture the series. My goal is to find a higher advantage than that with Marigny's principles. This project should occupy me for 500 or 1000 hours. The question of growing and evolving is posed by this topic, I think that my answer corresponds to the subject and the fundamental questioning of Scepticus;)
« Last Edit: March 17, 2019, 06:56:11 PM by Stratege »
 

Third

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #100 on: March 17, 2019, 07:48:55 PM »
Third ) A single number will hit within expectation within 13 attempts
Really ?

It sounds useless doesn't it?  The only reason I quoted it is to illustrate that there are practical limits to number behavior.  A good example of how these limits can be used in a practical way is the 8 chop statistic.  if we examine the path to 8 we will find:

1   67539   0.8075060677435168   # of sessions where a Loss occurs
2   12939   0.154700558351965      1 in 25
3   2541   0.03038056409091453   1 in 132
4   486      0.00581068640227645   1 in 596   
5   103      0.001231482920647067   1 in 2221
==================================================================
6   23      0.000274991331794976   
7   7      0.00008369301402455792   
8   1      0.00001195614486065113   1.0000000000000000


This statistical model is very helpful to choose a good bet sizing for our presses as we continue to encounter chop.

8 chops, as is 12 successive misses, is a once in a lifetime event (if that).

« Last Edit: March 17, 2019, 07:53:24 PM by Third »
 
The following users thanked this post: UnlikelySam

scepticus

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #101 on: March 18, 2019, 01:02:25 AM »
Third
I think it was Vitorwally that posted a chart that showed that the expectancy  for a 50% chance of a single number is 25.2 spins .   I prefer to rely on his chart  !
For  the chance of 2 Dozens on the first spin coupled with  1 dozen on the next spin  is -oh. well - work it out  !
Basically, any stats have to be interpreted . Therein lies the problem .

As to the Subject of the thread  . If someone has been playing roulette for a number of years and has found his niche then he has no need for further growth as a roulette player . Evolving is for those who have not yet found a profitable strategy .
 

MickyP

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #102 on: March 18, 2019, 01:25:39 PM »
Growing or evolving as a roulette player should lead a player through the standard process of understanding (as a newbie to the game) system/strategy/method play to a final realization that the game depends on the accuracy of prediction. The best way to achieve desired results is to study AP methods of prediction including the many factors that have a distinct influence on the accuracy of prediction.

Mastering AP in my mind is the graduation point of any serious player. To be content with anything less is to accept second best. AP is constantly changing to adapt to subtle changes introduced by the casinos so learning and adapting remains ongoing.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2019, 01:29:18 PM by MickyP »
 

Rinad

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #103 on: March 18, 2019, 02:58:42 PM »


   growing and evolving as a player has to do with accepting other's views.

  Micky, every time I read your posts I feel that hatred towards liberals and everything Scepticus is writting.
it gets tiring to read your negativity and constant attack. you are probably not a bad guy at heart but man, can you just lay off the criticism of his nine block system ? 
you dont like it then dont talk about it, you could learn something from it possibly.

so sick of your bull.....lets grow up and evolve as players and human beings !!!

  God bless,

Rinad
 
The following users thanked this post: scepticus, Stratege

MickyP

Re: Growing/Evolving as a Roulette Player.
« Reply #104 on: March 18, 2019, 04:43:33 PM »
Rinad, you feel the "hatred" I have for liberals because I've stated my stance as such. Am I not as relentless as liberals are when it comes to responding to "attacks"?

I find your opinion to be biased. The 9 blocks is not worth the space it has been given on the forum (free space) because it will fail every player trying to generate a decent profit with it. Septic believes otherwise and is not open to fair debate. I will continue trashing it because to me it is trash. At least other member can read why I say its trash and then they can decide for themselves if they really want to invest time and effort into it.

You have given Septic the much needed acceptance he desperately needs.

If my posts offend you then simply don't read them. I will not bow down to liberals and snowflakes for the sake of being politically correct. Fu*k that for a joke.

I am capable of mature and open debate but will treat people like immature teens if they behave that way. Would you perhaps like me to ignore the condescending behavior of the liberal group that are hell bent on directing their BS in my direction? How many names have I been called, how many insults have come my way? Ken and MrPerfect are also in the line of fire. In case you forget we were labelled "the Triad"! BUT... not one of us plays the victim card.

A final point: We don't grow by simply accepting the views of others. We grow by challenging those views and only when we reach consensus do we accept the specific point of view.

As I said, if you don't like my posts then don't read them. 
« Last Edit: March 18, 2019, 04:49:31 PM by MickyP »