New Forum Address: ROULETTELIFE.COM
  Update your Bookmarks

Author Topic: DOUBLE DOZENS  (Read 921 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

scepticus

Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #15 on: November 06, 2018, 07:54:39 PM »
If statistics was the only criterion then  why don't statisticians  bet Roulette ?
This " fallacy" as you call it derives from the fact that the maths of roulette is the same as in the game of craps- except for the zero /s .
I f you don't want my input Ok .  I'll butt out  . 'Bye
 
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1984
  • Thanked: 338 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #16 on: November 06, 2018, 08:20:40 PM »
So when number 2 comes you are betting 5 and that makes sense for you but not for me I'm afraid.

Thank you for bringing this garbage into my attention!
 

Mako

Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #17 on: November 06, 2018, 08:51:15 PM »
I tested a few hundred spins of your wheel sector method Blue Angel, and it came in exactly at odds expectation.  Small batch of results of course so not much can be gained from it, but probability has the three spins combined failing at 3% of overall attempts, and sure enough 3% of my attempts failed. 

It was essentially slightly worse than break-even when I stopped, the units gained or lost depends how often you get that juicy first spin hit with the higher net profit to occur.  If it occurs more often than probability, you'll come out ahead, if it occurs at probability, you'll lose (just like every bet in the game will basically).

I couldn't test the DS method, as the bet selection isn't defined specifically (Hot/Avg/Cold, need to know what the definitions for each are).

Thanks for the post though BA, always interested in seeing new angles, win or lose.
 
The following users thanked this post: BlueAngel

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1984
  • Thanked: 338 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #18 on: November 06, 2018, 09:03:15 PM »
Bayes at BetSelection was not so clear regarding the selection, in my point of view there can only be 2 interpretations;
The hot (good), cold (bad) and the average (ugly) will be determined by the lines' cycle which is 6 spins OR by an ongoing total till the end of session, this last was what I've used.
 

scepticus

Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #19 on: November 06, 2018, 09:09:05 PM »
My Bet Selection suggestion was certainly " clear " BA.

Garbage ?
In craps the total of seven is the most advantageous total - is it not ?.
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1984
  • Thanked: 338 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #20 on: November 06, 2018, 09:11:01 PM »
Yes, it is for CRAPS, but we are speaking about ROULETTE!
 

scepticus

Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #21 on: November 06, 2018, 09:58:48 PM »
Roulette and Craps have the same maths didn't you know  ?
One throw of two dice equals two spins of one wheel.
6 spots on a die  equals 6 DS on the layout .
 
« Last Edit: November 06, 2018, 10:00:55 PM by scepticus »
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1984
  • Thanked: 338 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #22 on: November 06, 2018, 10:06:49 PM »
It's not the same, you may ask Mike to explain you.
 

scepticus

Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #23 on: November 06, 2018, 11:54:19 PM »
If Mike doesn't  understand a simple  Any 3 fronm 4 I wouldn't be sure that he will understand the similarity between  A 6 sided die  and 6 DS . He may surprise us by agreeing with me !Crap results are random as are the results of roulette .
Anyway it is an idea BA and I don't thiink you should dismiss an idea just because you don't understand it .

Did you mean Mike  or Michaela  ? :D
« Last Edit: November 06, 2018, 11:56:23 PM by scepticus »
 

dobbelsteen

Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #24 on: November 07, 2018, 09:11:21 AM »

Betting on 3 lines ( 18 numbers)is exactly the same as betting on an EC. The difference is that you have to start with 3 units. Basis 1  when you bet a 9 step Martingale you do not wager on an EC but on an Event with a chance of 1/256. If you had create the graphic of the profit the you had discovered the same graphic as SSB. The advantage of SSB is that you start after every hit with a new trigger.

When you play SSB on a French roulette with La Partage you have also the benefit of the zero!!!!
 
The following users thanked this post: Jake007

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1984
  • Thanked: 338 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #25 on: November 07, 2018, 10:10:46 AM »
If Mike doesn't  understand a simple  Any 3 fronm 4 I wouldn't be sure that he will understand the similarity between  A 6 sided die  and 6 DS . He may surprise us by agreeing with me !Crap results are random as are the results of roulette .
Anyway it is an idea BA and I don't thiink you should dismiss an idea just because you don't understand it .

Did you mean Mike  or Michaela  ? :D

It's not that I don't understand it, it is because this line of thinking is faulted.
Let's say that number 7 on Craps is the equivalent of a 6 numbers line of roulette, where are the other 5 lines on Craps?
Where is the 0?
What is the logic which suggests that after the 1st line the 6th should come, after the 2nd line the 5th should hit, after the 3rd line the 4th???

We could extended this twisted and fallacious way of thinking by betting number 36 after 1, number 35 after 2, number 34 after 3...of course if those fallacious connections of pairing would prevented anything of coming 2,3,4,5... times in a row, streaks on everything, from single numbers up to group of many numbers are a statistical fact, your connections is fallacy or just another way to "see" something where there is nothing like this.

Long time ago I've seen from Craps player a method which suggested to bet every time after the 7 rolls twice in a row everything else but the 7.
If he would lose that bet he would have to wait for another 7 to roll twice in a row before he progressively increased the bets, so you may call this as an anti 7 trigger bet.
I've introduced this idea first on this forum by considering any 6 line hitting twice in a row as the same trigger.

I'm not the one who implement the "trigger" on the first place, that was a Craps player with the user name "777".

Jake, I'm apologizing for derailing this very interesting topic but unfortunately fallacy lurks and intrudes, so from discussing about winning betting methods I've ended up trying to explain why fallacy is fallacy, God give me strength!
 

scepticus

Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #26 on: November 07, 2018, 12:00:04 PM »
BACraps results are randomRoulette results are randomone throw of two dice is equivalent to two spins of the wheelThere are 6 sides to a Die - There are 6 DS in roulette
The most favourable outcome in Craps is a total of 7 -So Why Not in Roulette when thye have the same maths and Chance ?
And it gives a different set of 3  x 12 which we can use .
As for zero I did say Except for the zero.
Continue to think it a fallacy if you wish .
 

BlueAngel

  • I always express my opinion
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1984
  • Thanked: 338 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Do you want truth? You cannot handle the truth!
Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #27 on: November 07, 2018, 12:28:14 PM »
Continue to be stubborn if you wish, not my problem.  8)
 
The following users thanked this post: mr j

scepticus

Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #28 on: November 07, 2018, 12:34:35 PM »
Your problem BA is a blinkered, dismissive  attitude  .
 

Jake007

Re: DOUBLE DOZENS
« Reply #29 on: November 07, 2018, 05:04:52 PM »
Jake, I'm apologizing for derailing this very interesting topic but unfortunately fallacy lurks and intrudes, so from discussing about winning betting methods I've ended up trying to explain why fallacy is fallacy, God give me strength!

Actually I dont mind at all. Its the dialog that creates ideas for all of us and I appreciate it from everyone.
 
The following users thanked this post: BlueAngel, scepticus