Author Topic: EPISTEMOLOGY  (Read 1669 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Stratege

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #15 on: June 02, 2019, 07:48:50 AM »

We can really talk about the "sensitivity" of the criteria with what you say. Groups seem to oppose or be slowed down. And then the situation is unlocked. But we must think that it is not systematic, not very far from that, we simply often 55% of the cases that will be predictable. And, if we absolutely want to win on the 45% unstable parts, we will not know where it will lead, we will return the fruit of our 55% advantageous parts.

You're right too, there are situations where for example a hot number (or a group) does not come in 36 spins (or 36 units played) and the next rotation, 2 hits come. I do not know if the "heat" (or the cold) has encountered a temporary obstacle and that its reaction comes with a delay but a new accumulated force? Research hypothesis? Anyway, on EC, there is something like that, an attack is completely losing but, it increases the gap and there is another possible but "different" attack. We will use a larger spin space, a recycled "probability", and a broader "configuration" that must meet other conditions. It is something else. A first attack that does not work must be abandoned after our "duration", because our criteria have not shown their usual sensitivity. But my example with the hot number, also speaks of a second attack that could be to seek 2 hits, only if the new "configuration" is adapted. ;)
« Last Edit: June 02, 2019, 07:58:58 AM by Stratege »
 
The following users thanked this post: Third, fiben7

MickyP

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #16 on: June 02, 2019, 08:14:22 AM »
Congratulations Stratege, this thread has value. I really mean that so please don't think I am being sarcastic.

Your quote below caught my attention. Thank you for this. It is the basis of my play style.


"Only one game criterion (or one technique) cannot win. Because there are different forces in the random currents that form a history of spins. These forces are a set of laws. We need to identify the main forces that will guide the currents that will produce a favorable spin distribution for us. This is why I have already said that "a law taken alone does not bring any advantage to the player, it is the combination of the laws between them" which form the phenomena that we seek."
 
The following users thanked this post: Third, Stratege, fiben7

fiben7

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #17 on: June 02, 2019, 09:26:43 AM »
Totally agree with Stratege and MickyP on this, the "combination of laws" concept, as proposed on my approach as well.

For each and every spin on the wheel there are various processes evolving alongside through in their own way and style. It is when we bet at their intersection that we have a chance to maximize our payout and smooth our perfomance dynamics.

None of the processes themselves are winning systems in the longterm, however their combination in a risk/return optimal way provides a better chance for bettors.

An edge!?! We shall see.

This concept is proven and evident in many natural and mechanic systems. The details of decoding it varies though the main idea is intact. Finding local temporal predictability across dimensions of a seamingly chaotic system.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2019, 10:16:07 AM by fiben7 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Third, Stratege

Stratege

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #18 on: June 03, 2019, 06:46:19 AM »

                                                                  Observation tools

We are therefore all in agreement, it is at the intersection of certain forces going in the same direction that we can foresee the direction of a random current.   ;)

However, it's essential to build one's observation tools to find a situation as quickly as possible that brings these forces to the same direction and which will become our favorable "probability".

200 years ago, an author had built his observation tool. He could record every spin on every chance, even the quads. His tool allowed him to find his probabilities. There are actually few authors and players who have understood the importance of having a tool to multiply the views on the hazard. To not have one's tool is to make two mistakes. The first will be to accept initial probabilities too low to play fairly regularly. The second will be to use unsuitable means to try to correct the first mistake!

An observation tool isn't simply a tool for practice. It will also be used for our tests. It is also by using our tool that we will observe, during our tests or our practice, phenomena or peculiarities. So, we naturally learn new things, new secrets of roulette, using our observation tool.

To build this tool, you have to think, have a little creativity, and things will take shape in our minds.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2019, 07:01:39 AM by Stratege »
 
The following users thanked this post: Third, fiben7

Third

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #19 on: June 05, 2019, 05:56:48 AM »
I have this tool and I am amazed that people were doing it 200 years ago!

This tool tracks the number of hits on every felted bet from EC's to SU's.  It also tracks a fixed series of 3-width wheel sectors (including 0).

I have put in more observation statistics on certain bets that I use most often.  Such as observing gaps or observing the total amount of gapping for a group as a whole, broken down into the individual numbers.

The Law of the Third is always based on sequence length.

I am amazed over this forum thread!
« Last Edit: June 05, 2019, 06:27:41 AM by Third »
 
The following users thanked this post: Stratege, fiben7

Stratege

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #20 on: June 06, 2019, 03:06:56 PM »
I am very happy to add you to my list of players who cover a wide range of the game! The good visibility of our ratings is a very important point, that's why we can talk about a "tool", because we have to invent something panoramic. Synthesize information is also a research!

With your game in progress you have priorities but, in flat bet, the freedom to "make" Composite Chances is huge, and choosing the gaps you want is crucial to get this favorable "probability" that changes so much , or this "heat" in many ways. You can do some interesting things if you have sessions of 200 or more spins, because there are some "returns" to the more frequent balances. The length of the game sequence is another fundamental element! I started an answer for your first message. Thank you for appreciating this thread. There is still a lot to say about the 3 main parameters and complementary strategies but, I will be quite discreet (maybe some of my messages will be private?). 8)
« Last Edit: June 06, 2019, 03:09:34 PM by Stratege »
 
The following users thanked this post: Third, fiben7

Stratege

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #21 on: June 07, 2019, 04:23:19 PM »

We cannot win without positive variance and thus our method must find a way to seek it.  Eventually positiver variance will seek us but "eventually" is a terrible unknown and we must still be on the table playing when it happens.  The only way to stay on the table is to keep our expenses as low as possible.


To respond with my angle of view, the longer your share lasts, the more the losses usually add up with a progression, and the more you have to look for a fairly long sequence with a positive variance.

The image of the fisherman's net shows that if the mesh of the net is narrow (to catch all the fish), the heavier the net, then it will necessarily be shorter. But if the net has very wide mesh, the longer the net can be. We can easily see the consequences of one choice or another, because in Roulette We do not know, during our attack, whether the hits will be close or distant. There does not seem to be a solution without looking at the history of the spins to find out what kinds of hits have come (close or distant?).

By reading your quote, Third, I can't help but think about the "trend" (or positive variance) to get out of a tricky situation. I do not have the theoretical confirmation but, I think logically, the longer a delay persists, the more an important sequence with a positive variance will come. You will tell me that there is no need to theorize to understand this! Then I add another element. I notice that on large spaces with a delay, we might rather think of playing the "trend" for a reversal of the game that will be quite durable. I specify this because I see that on my deviations of a length "x", I search for 1 unit of gain. But on differences of "2 x", things are different, hope to win 5 to 10 units in flat bet (or several hits for other games) is absolutely not exaggerated, because a concentrated wave can better form (I emphasize that 5 to 10 units is a lot for u n game that would ask for a bankroll of 40 or 50 chips in flat bet). But I noticed that this ratio rarity of attacks/profit is less advantageous (for me in flat bet). The selection is much more stable and earns a higher % profit but, the attacks are too rare. So, I can only add them to my game when an opportunity arises.

On the progression side, it would be necessary to choose the right "net" according to the characteristics of the "configuration", and to play a "duration" to be found according to this phenomenon of positive variance which must come in a concentrated way. The key to your progress on the "delay" is to know these conditions. Good fishing then !
« Last Edit: June 07, 2019, 04:27:38 PM by Stratege »
 
The following users thanked this post: Third, fiben7

Third

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #22 on: June 07, 2019, 07:10:10 PM »
Yes I have seen this many times, where a strong selection will gap very significantly and then come back so strongly but I have also observed that when one of these numbers come back it can take the form of roulette's "crooked lines" where small gaps are interspersed with hits.

It seems like in roulette we are almost always faced with the opposite of our proposed solution.
 
The following users thanked this post: fiben7

Stratege

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #23 on: June 21, 2019, 07:01:18 PM »

None of the processes themselves are winning systems in the longterm, however their combination in a risk/return optimal way provides a better chance for bettors.

This concept is proven and evident in many natural and mechanic systems. The details of decoding it varies though the main idea is intact. Finding local temporal predictability across dimensions of a seamingly chaotic system.


It’s unfortunate that we are not numerous enough to explore the combination of laws between them. For all members and readers to understand better, it means for example that on red / black, we can have an imbalance. Then, in this imbalance we can observe another imbalance between the distribution of singles and series figures. In this distribution we may still have an imbalance, for example the series were small (length 2 or 3). All these laws that govern each level have limits and must restore a better balance. Then, in the example given, at one point, the series of a length greater than 3 will come back in force, because there is a compensation process.

As Third says, it seems we can look for something but the opposite can come. What can change what Third says is the value of the gap. If this gap is insufficient, we will not have a real compensation effect. But if this gap is sufficient, I mean on at least 150 spins, the gaps that overlap will eventually collapse and bring sometimes very long series that will soften the value of the overall gap. It is better to waste time looking for a nice gap that will earn several units in flat bet (with a bankroll of 40 or 50 units) than to play too often, scare losses, and end up using a suicidal progression. With the dozens, it will be better to take at least 225 spins…
« Last Edit: June 21, 2019, 07:04:41 PM by Stratege »
 
The following users thanked this post: fiben7

Sputnik

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #24 on: June 21, 2019, 08:15:42 PM »


Hello - can you give one example with the gap methodology.
For example, do you pick a series with a certain length and measuring with what kind of interval it shows to get a median value to use as entering point when to attack and when to exit. Probability dictates that if we pick a larger series we will get a bunch of frequent hits of the lower values between the occurrences, is that how you implement the strategy?

Cheers
 
The following users thanked this post: fiben7

Stratege

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #25 on: June 22, 2019, 08:18:19 AM »

Hello Sputnik. I think you want to know if I use the points according to the length of a series. In fact, it's like counting repeat / break. I do not use this, although it's better than observing red / black but, these 2 observations are too much. In this way, we will lock our game, and we will not be able to do a great job. This technique should rather be used at the end of the chain, at the top of a "pyramid of effects". That's what I do with walking repetition / break. For series, technically we can use different lengths, we just have to respect our STD value between one type of series / all the other larger series. But in practice, it is difficult to observe the series too long.

To answer your second question, It is this STD value that can limit the lower series that would make us lose. I have a good example in my game two weeks ago. On 150 spins, there is a color too early. The late color gave a lot of singles and series of 2. I watched a group of 8 series of 2 (the intermediate singles don’t count), then a series of 3, then a group of 7 series of 2 ! Series of 3 or higher were late. On 75 spins (1 color), there are theoretically 9 series of 2 / 9 series of 3 or more. The group of 7 series of 2 had broken, and several series between 3 and 7 came very quickly to restore a better balance. The phenomenon of compensation came massively, because the internal gap of 1/15 (1 / (8 + 7)) was too strong and the color was also too late. I don’t calculate a median value, and in my example, the only higher series is only 3. The potential is therefore towards the larger series that will (most often) compensate for the imbalance.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2019, 08:23:19 AM by Stratege »
 
The following users thanked this post: UnlikelySam, fiben7

fiben7

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #26 on: June 22, 2019, 08:49:39 AM »
Thank you for sharing here such an important notion of the series and their compensation feature Stratege. Powerful idea for research.
 
The following users thanked this post: Stratege

Sputnik

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #27 on: June 22, 2019, 02:46:42 PM »


Stratege I follow your concept, instead of calling it a gap of certain overrepresented series I call it a window of certain overrepresented series.
For example, 15 series of two versus 1 higher series is above 3.0 STD and the expectation after such (gap/window) is that underrepresented series will start to show with greater length as (compensation).

We can put it like this when we get a vacuum pressure we know the steam will find is way out from the container after reaching a certain level.
Same with the law of series, when there is a strong imbalance of certain events reaching a 3.0 or higher STD then we know the underrepresented events will show no matter what playing model someone is using.

This was my point with Koetsch flat betting simulation for 60.000 placed bets using 100 placed bets sessions were only 1700 session with 100 placed bets did not manifest with one full reversal, back to back compensation.
That is 83% likelihood.

The more interesting concept here is that a gap/window never reach 6.0 STD after several million simulations done by the member and mathematician Bayes. I think the highest value was around 5.34 STD once.

If I understood you right you don't use any specific entering point or the specific moment when to attack.
I assume you start after you see a gap/window reaching 3.0 STD and then flat betting until you reach a positive return on investment.
Maybe there is a misunderstanding and you can clarify some parts of my reply.

The values with our example - Marigny De Grilleau - Playing model

Singles has the value of 0
Series of two has the value of 1
Series of three has the value of 0
Series of four has the value of 1
Series of five has the value of 2
Series of six has the value of 3
Series of seven has the value of 4
And so it continues ...

Cheers
 
The following users thanked this post: UnlikelySam, Stratege, fiben7

MrPerfect.

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #28 on: June 22, 2019, 08:26:29 PM »
Bayes is ( was) a nice guy and knowledgeable mathematician.  But his test worth nothing. Not the time wasted, not the mental effort. And reason is very simple. Wrong basis model of perfect wheel where every number has the same chance to hit.
   Same as such a wheel do not exist in nature, such a study has no application in the game.
 

Stratege

Re: EPISTEMOLOGY
« Reply #29 on: June 23, 2019, 07:30:17 AM »
Fiben7, I see that you understand some subtleties that can make the difference ! The delay pushes the longer series to come, and this phenomenon allows to play the "trend" until the break. But the condition is to seek a way to accumulate a form of delay that would bring a real moment of "reverse tendency". This means is in the length of a gap and in its content. If in my little example there were 15 series of 3 or higher / 1 series of 2, Marigny's theory would have said to play for the break of the next series which should rather have a length 2. But this theorization, which is accurate, would only hope for 1 unit of gain. I think you understand why !  ;)
« Last Edit: June 23, 2019, 07:33:04 AM by Stratege »
 
The following users thanked this post: fiben7