Royal Panda roulette

Author Topic: PHILOSOPHICAL ALCHEMY AND CHANCE  (Read 3029 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


« Reply #60 on: February 23, 2019, 09:07:00 PM »
Corners and Streets include the zero.


« Reply #61 on: February 24, 2019, 03:55:59 AM »
There is no way to have a high hit rate and bother with the losses. These 2 things are simply not compatible.  You can play offencive or defencive , all other solutions is a road to nowhere.

If you are playing a few numbers at 35-1 odds with a high hit rate then losses may be insignificant but if you are playing more numbers with a watered down 2-1 or even 5-1 odds then the losses become significant even with a high hit rate.
Take Palestis Single Dozen System or the Dozen Drive; both have a high hit rate over 3/4 spins but losses significantly influence the potential to profit.
I should have mentioned this in my post above.
That has a lot to do with available B/R.
If for example you had $100,000 B/R and your basic chip value was $5, there is no way in the world you could lose, no matter what dozen system you play. You will have to lose a few dozen triggers back to back. Which will never happen in a million years.
  Take any system ever posted here.
Test it with $100,000 B/R and play it  with the absolute minimum chip value.
None of them will lose.
But who in the world with $100,000 B/R goes to a casino to win $200?
Yet a lot of players go to a casino with $1000 and expect to win another $1000 or more.
Consistent winning requires huge B/R's and reasonable win expectations.
A very important part of a system/strategy has to take into account B/R availability as it relates to win expectations and starting chip value. 

« Last Edit: February 24, 2019, 03:59:20 AM by palestis »
The following users thanked this post: Sputnik, Third


« Reply #62 on: February 24, 2019, 06:43:51 AM »
I have soooo noticed that  B & M casinos love to tweak these things in their favor, especially the minimum chip value.  Online casinos have relaxed this practice and I can only assume its because of the massively decreased overhead.


« Reply #63 on: March 01, 2019, 06:02:52 PM »
Greek, I will answer your question sooner (longer). What I can say is that I'm thinking of doing a test with sequences of 64 spins (no patterns because more stable) that have a significant gap in the game, and show what happens with the following spins. I did a test 20 years ago in somewhat similar conditions and I noticed that the side ahead made series less often and shorter than the side late. There are, in fact, many ways to look at things and I will prepare a text to better answer your question. however, my belief is that you have to look for differences to find after a fairly strong trend and reduce the risk for the player.
The following users thanked this post: Greek


« Reply #64 on: March 02, 2019, 09:21:35 AM »

“Is there another "law" that captures the tendency of small numbers?”

Greek's question makes me think of "JS", an old author from 1825. Moreover, Marigny de Grilleau seems to have found his inspiration thanks to this author who was already talking about the deviation-compensation concept. This old author was an officer cadet and with his military friends, he wrote and studied 150,000 spins. The goal was to look on all types of bet spreads (even on the straight up by taking at least 3 numbers). This was a really gigantic study without a computer.

I give a general example. On the DS, he was expecting a direct gap. Then, he looked in the recent past if this gap was not a return to the balance of a reverse gap. Finally, he played 10 spins to "catch" a DS trend. I point out that there are 66 ways to form a DS with the 12 Streets.

This author had understood, without knowing the law of small numbers, that it was necessary to look into the recent past. This observation of the past makes it possible to go beyond the frame of small numbers to avoid playing completely random spins. The "law of equilibrium" can therefore intervene in a larger frame than that of a few dozen spins and provide compensation.

100 years later, Marigny published "The scientific gain of one unit per attack". In his book he speaks quickly and once of this observation of the past before the gap. Very few of his followers understood the great importance of this observation. So for 100 years the players think and say that the method of Marigny is losing.

I presented this topic on the law of small numbers because many authors publish methods not to mention this problem. But the less the players have theoretical knowledge, the more authors can sell anything. To understand this (elementary) law on small numbers is really to start coming out of certain illusions about roulette and Hazard.

However, if methods, for example on EC, select 5 or 10 spins on average over 64 spins, it is necessary to think that the profit in % will be established in time, within the framework of the law of Bernoulli. There will be in a scheme (in flat bet), a causal chain between all the shots played, then a profit is possible.

What does not work in practice is to fix an attack in a small frame (for example the trigger of 2 red indicates to play for 12 spins column 3, loaded in red). This attack is "only" related to other accounting attacks. The spins played in all attacks are not related to each other in a global structure; there is no overlap between the spins played; they are independent attacks. In this case it is certain failure, but often the misinformed player will think that a progression will save his method. Indeed, vary his bet will create links between attacks. It's a good idea to compensate for an ineffective method, but as the spins played are totally random, so with a strong deviance to predict, the progress will require a huge bankroll (so for a ridiculous profit). And over time, the probability of the player losing his bankroll will also become huge.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2019, 09:33:04 AM by Stratege »
The following users thanked this post: Greek, Third


« Reply #65 on: March 03, 2019, 03:54:02 AM »
Gaps are great on top performing selections.  I have recently started attacking them with this interesting recovery progression:


So that if our debt is 100 units a fully successful progression would run:

50 units
12 units
7 units

for a total of 68 units recovered.  All subsequent bets will be flat.

This progression is designed with cumulative probability in mind, where each coup attempts is more likely to miss and so less money is at risk.

The higher the hit rate of the selection, the longer the recovery progression can run.  I will typically run a progression up to 50% cumulative probability to hit and then start flat betting.

This is a "down as you win" progression and I use expectation for the length of my coup attempt.

« Last Edit: March 03, 2019, 04:00:18 AM by Third »