### Author Topic: R.D. Ellison  (Read 2548 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### Jake007

##### Re: R.D. Ellison
« Reply #30 on: April 23, 2019, 11:25:57 PM »
Agree. Makes no sense. Maybe its the balanced spread of 24 numbers that is better than covering 2/3 of the board. But again... makes no sense. On short run if spins... say under 10,000 we might see anomalies between the two method, but if say 1 million spins it should all be averaged out.

The following users thanked this post: Third

#### MrPerfect.

##### Re: R.D. Ellison
« Reply #31 on: April 24, 2019, 05:10:24 PM »
Many do not realise what is betting on the color. There is no advantage to it. Color is evenly distributed 18 numbers all over the wheel. There is no real reason why ball will stop on the number and not on its neibor  ( we are speaking about random number picked up out of the blue from all over the wheel).
There could be some anomalies due to bias numbers, but their affect is projected on other numbers. This way it's not enough to make 18 number bet to pay off. You may get 2-3 numbers of that color worth to bet, but you are betting other 15 numbers, many of these will be negatively biased !!!

The following users thanked this post: Jake007, Third

#### Jake007

##### Re: R.D. Ellison
« Reply #32 on: April 24, 2019, 05:24:07 PM »
Third brought up an interesting point that statistically there should be no difference between betting on two dozens compared to betting on 24 numbers. However Ive seen such differences. And I think this is interesting. Yesterday was just reading the Marigny de Grilleau thread. Interesting stuff talking about deviations. Over a million spins you likely wont see such deviations but on smaller sets we do. Betting as example the same coverages (2/3 of board one way and 2/3 of board another way) we can see deviations as well.

I havent fully digested everything yet... just off the cuff right now maybe hot splits and hot numbers will show more deviation than a deviation from two dozens. Now how to capitalize on that knowledge

#### Third

##### Re: R.D. Ellison
« Reply #33 on: April 24, 2019, 05:55:01 PM »
Betting on the outside is betting on the combined peformance of groups of 18 numbers.  Its the same thing as if you simply bisect the wheel and seek to bet the dominant half.  Number groups are not the same as individual numbers, even though they are made up of individual numbers.  Betting on a top performing group that has negatively biased numbers, means that the other numbers are outperforming expectation to make up for the lack of performance; i.e. positive expectation.

The following users thanked this post: Jake007

#### UnlikelySam

##### Re: R.D. Ellison
« Reply #34 on: April 24, 2019, 06:14:35 PM »
Jake it's coincidental you have brought this thread alive again as yesterday before your post I just had a thought about testing what I mentioned about betting only the DS 1 and DS 6 some time back. Since I was using RX I reckoned I might as well just let it go unhit for 6 times and implemented a positive 2 step progression just for the heck of it   No serious testing

I would like to also test the original Ellis method as well ; the Quads and DS  ---- Quads and Angels... Time permitting offcourse

The following users thanked this post: Jake007, Third