### Author Topic: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance  (Read 4863 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### Joe

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #45 on: January 07, 2019, 02:57:11 PM »
I'm not quite certain what the principle is of the Marigny way, but it seems to me something like balance or correction. The problem I have with that is that you tend to find what you're looking for, ie no hits.  It seems more sensible to apply the same principle in the other direction, ie look for a lot of hits and bet for them to continue, even though this carries no more weight mathematically than betting for balance.

The following users thanked this post: Jake007, MickyP

#### Stratege

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #46 on: January 07, 2019, 05:35:15 PM »

JOE, I think you mean, after a gap, follow the trend. This is one of the settings I'm doing now because I have enough gaps that show me that in certain conditions it's interesting. Marigny never talked about the "trend" but I noticed that in some cases I could follow a series until it breaks. So without stopping at + 1 like the author. In fact, you have to find the right conditions because the goal isn’t just to win spins, but to choose the spins that have the best results.

In the early 1900s, a mathematician explained with formulas that a difference of 15 (I think) on Red or Black, gave the mathematical certainty that the opposite game could win +1, but we don’t know when! It seems that Marigny took this "certainty" by using the figures (more stable). Then another gap (inside the figures) allowed Marigny to get this +1 shot faster. I of course tested his theorizations. That's why I saw that I could sometimes follow a trend. But I especially noticed that it was not the first spin of my attacks that won the best, but the fight with 5 tokens maximum (with stop if +1). I can not say that Marigny was wrong, not at all. But I can say that there is also the trend (risking 3 or 4 chips, it seems to me). Marigny advises with strong deviances to win +2. But his way does not seem interesting to me. I can say (sincerely) to Joe that I don't see what I want to see in Marigny's theories, I see the result of my work.

THIRD, I did not understand your explanations, I think you speak with technical expressions that I do not know !
« Last Edit: January 07, 2019, 05:42:42 PM by Stratege »

The following users thanked this post: Jake007, Joe, Third

#### Third

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #47 on: January 07, 2019, 06:33:43 PM »
I mean exactly this:

1) We track the performance of all the [insert selection type of your choice here; EC,DZ,DS...SU Groups, etc.] using ecart (STD)
2) We wait for at least -3 ecart (STD) and always bet the selection with the worst ecart (STD)

Using the above method we will find the worst possible performance that will exceed what we would normally see according to probability.  It is called the "curve fitting curse".

If we search the deep dark back alleys of roulette, we will find terrible things that are normally not seen by a single individual in their lifetime.

The way to avoid this is to stick to a single particular bet selection and ride out its variance shifts.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2019, 06:41:35 PM by Third »

The following users thanked this post: Stratege

#### Joe

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #48 on: January 07, 2019, 06:44:15 PM »
If we search the deep dark back alleys of roulette, we will find terrible things that are normally not seen by a single individual in their lifetime.
That's the point I was making. So why not search for the bright, sunlit open spaces?
Stratege, I was under the impression that Marigny's was an "anti-trend" system, not a trend system, but maybe I have misinterpreted it.

Could you give a concrete example of Marigny's method using real spins?

Incidentally, what I would recommend anyone who believes they have a superior bet selection to do is use a totally random selection in tandem with their favoured selection, and then compare results. Surprisingly, hardly anyone seems to do this, but if they don't, how do they know that their selection really is better than random?
« Last Edit: January 07, 2019, 06:52:25 PM by Joe »

The following users thanked this post: Jake007, Third

#### Stratege

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #49 on: January 07, 2019, 07:21:06 PM »
THIRD, what you say happens quite often with some numbers. An area of ​​the wheel is hot for a long time but a number does not come and then the area is asleep or wakes up but the number is still forgotten. Several areas do this too at the same time. I did not know the expression "curse ...". The principle of the game here is to wait for the return of a number and to play the band but never continuously otherwise, yes, it is the abyss. But it must be said that it is because there is this "curse ..." that the phenomenon of heat exists too. These two phenomena compensate each other. That is why sometimes a number comes 5 or 6 times in a single rotation (of 37) and that before or later it isn’t there during 6 rotations (of 37 spins). This is why we must not insist directly and durably against the gaps. In the future, I will test Marigny on straight-up and split with the same criteria as even chance.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2019, 07:22:56 PM by Stratege »

The following users thanked this post: Third

#### Third

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #50 on: January 07, 2019, 07:32:14 PM »
The opposite of curse is:

#### Stratege

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #51 on: January 08, 2019, 08:36:10 AM »

THIRD, so there is the opposite of the "curse"! At roulette, and about deviations, the advantage lies in playing a few shots only after certain very specific conditions, otherwise it is useless. It's the same with the heat. Stop the first gain or after the loss of a few spins, otherwise it's like the gaps. With the trend it's the same thing, just a few spins because the wave can come or never come. Marigny is talking about a gap and looking for +1 per attack with 5 chips. It's the search for minimal "compensation". Another author  with a similar method said, no, 6 chips per attack and search +2 systematically. Each researcher finds a different little thing. Personally, I say that there are specific situations where I can follow the trend (with 3 or 4 chips).

To answer JOE, it is obvious that players have to test their method with roulette numbers to know the % profit. It's a long job but it's the only reliable proof. The opinions of the authors or the players can not give us certainties.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2019, 08:38:09 AM by Stratege »

The following users thanked this post: Third

#### Sputnik

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #52 on: January 09, 2019, 02:52:55 PM »

Stratege can i reach you in other ways then post in this forum.
For example email or a forum that allow you to use Grammarly spell checker.

Cheers Patrik From Sweden

The following users thanked this post: Third

#### Stratege

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #53 on: January 09, 2019, 04:48:01 PM »

I will answer several members. For the attention of JOE, Marigny isn’t a game "anti-trend", on the contrary and thank you for bringing this opinion. All good methods have a signal that indicates when to play. With "heat", the signal is the massive and brief arrival of a repetition. With the "trend", there are indicators that trigger the bets. With the concept of "gap compensation" (EC ...), we have to wait for the very late figure to come back once in a very short cluster (2 figures). This indicates a tendency to return the late figure.

For the THIRD message on curve fitting curse, 3 STD isn’t enough. It takes combined gaps and playing according to a specific signal. It’s true that sometimes a gap does not diminish, so we must abandon the attack pattern and concede the loss of a few chips. Obstinacy before chance and its laws is like a desire for omnipotence before the universe.

SPUTNIK, you can first contact me in private message to better explain to me your idea about a language translator.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2019, 04:52:01 PM by Stratege »

#### Sputnik

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #54 on: January 10, 2019, 12:32:15 PM »

Testing Stratege about Ideas using Marigny De Grilleua methodology.
- - -
I come up with something that can be the perfect state or the perfect window of events where you get more than one ordinary imbalance with underrepresented events.
This is based on two different playing models.
- - -
Singles versus Series
Singles versus Larger Series
- - -
Illustration and explanation:
- - -
Singles versus Series is based upon to find singles being overrepresented with 2.5 or 3.0 STDV
Where the underrepresented series should recoup with small, medium or large correction.
- - -
Singles has the value of 1
Series has the value of 1
- - -
Singles versus Larger series is based upon that singles and series of two are overrepresented and larger series are underrepresented.
After an imbalance of 2.5 or 3.0 STDV, the expectation is that larger series will start to show with a small, medium or large length.
- - -
Singles has the value of 1
Series of two has the value of 0
Series of three has the value of 1
Series of four has the value of 2
Series of five has the value of 3
And so it continues ...
- - -
The Perfect State including two sequences with imbalance into one window of events reaching 2.5 or 3.0 STDV
For example:
Five singles and one series of three and five singles and one series of three and five singles
That is 3.16 STDV
- - -
Now one more series would create correction with Singles versus Series and make the window of events drop to 2.66 STDV
Now one more series of three or one above three in a row would create correction with Singles versus Larger Series and make the window drop to 2.66 STDV.
- - -
The concept is different than any other known way to tackle imbalance and we might develop this kind of equilibrium further.
For example, a 2.5 window would look like this:
Four singles and one series of three and four singles and one series of three and four singles.
- - -
Question is if we have to wait for a 2.5 or 3.0 STDV window of events or if we can attack after four singles when we have the expectation.
We have defined the variance and have a road map how the variance looks like and how it would unfold with our reaching 2.5 or 3.0 STDV.
- - -
This is how you define a selection based upon match and probability where the regression towards the mean is anything then fuzzy description of random bits.
Maybe there are more complex ways to incorporate imbalance several times into the same window of events.
- - -
This kind of concept needs to analyse the gaps between the small, medium and large sum of corrections to build a way of entering the attack in the right moment and know when to exit.
There is a huge difference using the law of series measuring underrepresented and overrepresented events opposite to Red and Black.

#### Sputnik

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #55 on: January 10, 2019, 02:08:06 PM »

Made a short test using one simple sequence with red and black.
Very easy to win flat betting against 2.5 or higher with very good results
This is not The Perfect State as i don't know how to wager using that situation.

Cheers

The following users thanked this post: Stratege

#### Stratege

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #56 on: January 10, 2019, 05:43:13 PM »

SPUTNIK, I think it is better that I bring new ideas to better structure your approach and it will be useful also for those who play progressions, because the goal is to find "quickly" gaps, and then play with more security. The combinatorics between ECs must be used. To make it very simple it is necessary to take values ​​red = 1; black = 2; odd = 3; pair = 4 ...

We must now establish a maximum of combinations. The first 1 2 3 4 5 6; 0 1 2 3 4 5 6; 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6; 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6; 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6; 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6. This is the first block. These sequences must be vertically aligned with the spins notation. Each zero indicated corresponds to the offset of a line of the combination. For example with 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 this combination starts its notation at spins number 3 and as it is number 1, we will tell if red has come. Since we are only shifting at the beginning, this combination will be 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... Another block of combinations now consists of taking only 5 EC: 1 2 3 4 5; 0 1 2 3 4 5; 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 ... Then you have to create another block with 5 other numbers, example 1 2 3 4 6.

There are so many possible blocks. But each new block always needs at least one different number or fewer numbers. This is important because the former authors who have worked on combinatorics have apparently not understood that if we make all the combinatorial possibilities with the 6 EC, there is a "circular effect". Which means that we would make combinations that would oppose each other in different ways, at different times. It's an amazing thing. The solution I found is to have at least one different number in each block. Making these combinations on Excel is better.

For the moment we must understand the principle. The combinatory + a good way to note the spins on the combinations, makes it possible to find interesting gaps very quickly. This is a first tool to try with paper and pen at home before thinking of writing formulas on Excel to get incredibly fast results ... to check his theories. Of course, we can do the same thing with D and C.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2019, 05:47:00 PM by Stratege »

#### ludo8400

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #57 on: January 13, 2019, 04:48:15 PM »
@sputnik

Singles has the value of 1
Series of two has the value of 0
Series of three has the value of 1
Series of four has the value of 2
Series of five has the value of 3
Where do you  use  the values of the series?nice threadludo8400

The following users thanked this post: Sputnik

#### ludo8400

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #58 on: January 13, 2019, 05:21:38 PM »

@ SPUTNIK

The Perfect State including two sequences with imbalance into one window of events reaching 2.5 or 3.0 STDV
For example:
Five singles and one series of three and five singles and one series of three and five singles
That is 3.16 STDV

Statiscal Ecart= 15 / square of 17 = 3,153       HERE you have 17 events
- - -
Now one more series would create correction with Singles versus Series and make the window of events drop to 2.66 STDV
Now one more series of three or one above three in a row would create correction with Singles versus Larger Series and make the window drop to 2.66 STDV.

Statiscal Ecart= 15 / square of 18 = 2,828     HERE you have 18 events I think your 2.66 is wrong, because based on 17 events kindly regards ludo8400

The following users thanked this post: Sputnik

#### Sputnik

##### Re: Marigny de Grilleau´s thoughts on the notion of Chance
« Reply #59 on: January 13, 2019, 05:27:26 PM »

Ludo, I will explain.
- - -
Think about a vacuum pressure where you do not allow the steam out and then it will explode with 100% certainty.
That is the expectation and likelihood.
- - -
Same with even money bets that are within the same universe, the whole.
Let's say that we only have a sample or a small part of this universe, for example, 300 random bits.
- - -
Now let's say you track all even money positions for 100 random bits each and get a total of 300 results within 3 hours.
Then you search for singles and a series of two being overrepresented, imbalance and you want them to reach 3.0 STD within your 100 trail sample.
- - -
Assume you find 14 singles with 6 series of two and 2 series of three, that is 3.0 STD.
Now the expectation and likelihood are that you will see larger figures/series to unfold in the future as part of regression towards the mean. They can come as small figures, medium figures and large figures.
- - -
You know they will show for the next 200 random bits because they have a limit like a vacuum pressure to explode.
This with 99.9% certainty, because after several million simulations the worst and most extreme sequence ever was 5.36 STD.
That means that the STD can grow stronger and stronger without a show of larger figures/series until you reach 5.36 STD.
But you would not be betting and playing, you would only observe the STD grow stronger until you have a valid indication of that the STD stop growing stronger and that is when and where the larger figures/series start to show.
- - -
Now one thing you do no for a fact is that 3.0 STD will not go back to back without regression/correction and hit 6.0 STD.
You know what the future will produce and you have the indications of the likelihood when they are about to happen.

The following users thanked this post: Stratege