### Author Topic: 65-135 question  (Read 18262 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### Sainter

##### 65-135 question
« on: October 04, 2015, 06:04:11 AM »
Hi All a newbie question

Does 65-135 include 0 and 00 results?

Is it 65 reds and 135 (black and green) or is does it ignore the greens and is only for the next 200 black or red spins?

Where do I find the equivalent break down for 300 spins.

Thanks

#### kav

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2365
• Thanked: 1327 times
• Gender:
##### Re: 65-135 question
« Reply #1 on: October 04, 2015, 06:11:53 AM »
The 65-135 max Simple chances variance in 200 spins, mentioned here, refers to 200 spins in single zero roulette including the zero. This number is very close to 3 standard deviation, which has never been exceeded.
For 300 spins the numbers would be like 100-200.

#### dobbelsteen

##### Re: 65-135 question
« Reply #2 on: October 05, 2015, 08:14:53 AM »
I do not understand the 65-135 rule for the even chances.
I have read the Belgian topic. He claims the 65-135 is based on mathematcal calculations.
My analyses of the even chance tells me,  a 200 spins sample is about the start of a long run sample.
The ratio Black/Red is with a very small deviation 1, See the diagram in another topic!!
The 200 spins is possible based on 65 B and 130 R and 5 single zeros. The 1/3 rule is not valid on the even chances.
On the ratio 65/135 you can not develop a realistic system or strategy

#### kav

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2365
• Thanked: 1327 times
• Gender:
##### Re: 65-135 question
« Reply #3 on: October 05, 2015, 10:37:08 AM »
65 - 135 is based on millions upon millions of spins tests.
One color has never appeared less than 65 times in 200 spins in single zero roulette (the other 135 spins being zero and the opposite color).
This is a very interesting discovery and can be used as a basis for a successful system.
Actually it transform the problem of the even chances to this:

How can I be in profit if I only get 65 hits in 200 spins.
If you can solve this you will always win, because one color never gets less than 65 appearances in 200 spins.

The following users thanked this post: Reyth

#### dobbelsteen

##### Re: 65-135 question
« Reply #4 on: October 05, 2015, 02:55:01 PM »
Now I understand. Statiscally the ratio of R/B  lies between 65/200 and 200/65 for 200 spins samples.

This is not a mathematical approach but an empherical approach based on a large number of spins.

My analyses tell me this  ratio for 200 spins sample is close to 1.

Try my excelprogram.

#### scepticus

##### Re: 65-135 question
« Reply #5 on: October 05, 2015, 04:32:28 PM »
I think both kav and dobbelsteen are both right -  depending on how you look at this.
All statistics need to be interpreted to be of any use .

#### palestis

##### Re: 65-135 question
« Reply #6 on: October 05, 2015, 07:47:46 PM »
65 - 135 is based on millions upon millions of spins tests.
One color has never appeared less than 65 times in 200 spins in single zero roulette (the other 135 spins being zero and the opposite color).
This is a very interesting discovery and can be used as a basis for a successful system.
Actually it transform the problem of the even chances to this:

How can I be in profit if I only get 65 hits in 200 spins.
If you can solve this you will always win, because one color never gets less than 65 appearances in 200 spins.
Here is the problem.
A color may never get less than 65 appearances in 200 spins, but running into this situation is very rare . Most likely, after recording 200 spins a delayed color will have around 70-95 appearances.
Recording 195 spins where one color has 62 appearances  might take a very long time to see it.
Then (if this statistic of 65-135 has never been wrong),  you know that in the next 5 spins you should expect  3 more appearances of the delayed color. But what are the odds of seeing this situation?
If the situation comes that close, it is then and only then that the record of 65-135 could break. And a new record established. (I broke many records throughout my roulette career).
To use this premise for a system, you have to scale it down. In 100 spins 32/68.
In 50 spins 16/34. This is more likely to happen if you record shorter sequences. Then you can bet the delayed color and stop if you hit it once. Then record again looking for the same situation.
Looking for repeated hits is looking for trouble.

« Last Edit: October 05, 2015, 07:50:45 PM by palestis »

The following users thanked this post: Reyth

#### kav

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2365
• Thanked: 1327 times
• Gender:
##### Re: 65-135 question
« Reply #7 on: October 05, 2015, 08:51:15 PM »
Pal,

Unfortunately you can not scale down.
The 65-135 relation is specific to 200 spins. The less the spins the greater can become the variation and a color can appear even less that 1/3 of the spins.

The wait for 62 same color in 200 spins is not the best approach to this data. The problem is more complicated than this, but also offers more ways to approach and take advantage of it. Basically one needs to create a progression than can stand 135 losses in 200 spins.

#### weird

##### Re: 65-135 question
« Reply #8 on: October 06, 2015, 04:18:02 AM »
HAMBURG 25/10/1999 TABLE TISH 1.
THE WORST EVER RECORDED OF 'RED' APPEAR ONLY 69 OUT OF 200 SPINS...
200 SPINS, START FROM SPIN NO 37..TO 237..

ZERO=14,105,153,186,190,199.

IF U CAN FIND A SYSTEM TO WIN THESE SERIES, U MAY WIN AT CASINO.
Hamburg, 25_10_1999, Francese 1 — laRoulette_files
69red appear in  worst roulette 200 spins ever recorded.
X=RED,
ZERO at 14,105,153,186,190,199.

3x

5x
6
7x

9
10x
11
12x
13
14  ZERO
15
16x
17
18
19
20
21x
22
23x
24
25
26
27
28
29x
30
31x
32x
33
34
35x
36x
37x
38x
39
40
41
42x
43
44
45x
46 x
47
48
49
50
51
52x
53
54
55 x
56
57
58x
59
60
61
62x
63
64
65x
66
67
68x
69x
70
71x
72
73
74
75x
76
77x
78
79
80x
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90x
91
92x
93
94
95 x
96
97x
98
99
100
101x
102 x
103
104 x
105   ZERO
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114x
115
116
117x
118
119 x
120
121
122 x
123
124
125
126
127
128 x
129 x
130x
131 x
132
133
134x
135
136
137
138 x
139
140x
141
142
143 x
144
145x
146 x
147 x
148
149 x
150x
151
152
153 ZERO
154 x
155 x
156
157
158x
159
160
161
162
163x
164 x
165
166
167
168 x
169
170
171x
172x
173
174 x
175x
176
177
178
179
180x
181
182
183
184 x
185
186 ZERO
187 x
188
189
190ZERO
191
192x
193 x
194
195
196 x
197
198
199 ZERO
200
=================

========================

#### kav

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2365
• Thanked: 1327 times
• Gender:
##### Re: 65-135 question
« Reply #9 on: October 06, 2015, 05:46:10 AM »
weird thanks.
This is a great "worst case scenario" to work on and test our even chance systems.

#### dobbelsteen

##### Re: 65-135 question
« Reply #10 on: October 06, 2015, 09:06:34 AM »
The Multi Roulette records the numper of performences of the last 50 spin. The difference between the even chance Is very rare more than 15 .
Suppose we have the next row  and stats:

R-R-B-B-B-R-B-R-B-B-B-R B-B-B-B  and 18 R and 32 B. Now I start flat betting on RED and I expect that in the next spins Red shall occure more than Black

I never lost such an event. The game is very dull, but the profit is nearly guaranted.

The following users thanked this post: Reyth

#### scepticus

##### Re: 65-135 question
« Reply #11 on: October 07, 2015, 09:46:31 PM »
HAMBURG 25/10/1999 TABLE TISH 1.
THE WORST EVER RECORDED OF 'RED' APPEAR ONLY 69 OUT OF 200 SPINS...
200 SPINS, START FROM SPIN NO 37..TO 237..

ZERO=14,105,153,186,190,199.

IF U CAN FIND A SYSTEM TO WIN THESE SERIES, U MAY WIN AT CASINO.
Hamburg, 25_10_1999, Francese 1 — laRoulette_files
69red appear in  worst roulette 200 spins ever recorded.
X=RED,
ZERO at 14,105,153,186,190,199.

3x

5x
6
7x

9
10x
11
12x
13
14  ZERO
15
16x
17
18
19
20
21x
22
23x
24
25
26
27
28
29x
30
31x
32x
33
34
35x
36x
37x
38x
39
40
41
42x
43
44
45x
46 x
47
48
49
50
51
52x
53
54
55 x
56
57
58x
59
60
61
62x
63
64
65x
66
67
68x
69x
70
71x
72
73
74
75x
76
77x
78
79
80x
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90x
91
92x
93
94
95 x
96
97x
98
99
100
101x
102 x
103
104 x
105   ZERO
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114x
115
116
117x
118
119 x
120
121
122 x
123
124
125
126
127
128 x
129 x
130x
131 x
132
133
134x
135
136
137
138 x
139
140x
141
142
143 x
144
145x
146 x
147 x
148
149 x
150x
151
152
153 ZERO
154 x
155 x
156
157
158x
159
160
161
162
163x
164 x
165
166
167
168 x
169
170
171x
172x
173
174 x
175x
176
177
178
179
180x
181
182
183
184 x
185
186 ZERO
187 x
188
189
190ZERO
191
192x
193 x
194
195
196 x
197
198
199 ZERO
200
=================

========================

I deduce from this is that both Harry and Palestis would  both have won playing " The Waiting Game " !

#### dobbelsteen

##### Re: 65-135 question
« Reply #12 on: October 08, 2015, 08:52:58 AM »
I miss the performence of the numbers or the even chance random row.If I had ,I could make a simulation with my SSB system. I predict a profit of about 80 units.

#### kav

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2365
• Thanked: 1327 times
• Gender:
##### Re: 65-135 question
« Reply #13 on: October 08, 2015, 08:54:54 AM »
x means a hit

#### dobbelsteen

##### Re: 65-135 question
« Reply #14 on: October 08, 2015, 02:16:09 PM »
I suppose the unhit figures are black and the numbers with a x are red. Am I right?