Roulette Albalaha, about Equilibrium ?

Hi Albalaha,
Thank U so much for your reply.
Appreciate them.
===============

I think, or rather a fallacy,
that SERIES/SINGLE has some intrigue pattern,
but since I cant do test programmer,
I see after a FEW handtest,
to see that they will always try to equilibrium,
not in the truest sense, but around equilibrium...

if MOST of the time they do equilibrium,
then if we use your idea of "variance",
then this is fantastic...
when we see that they diverge extremely,
then toward the mean...
just a fallacy, maybe...
==========================

say if 20black, followed by 2red, then 20 black,
then if we bet single vs series, u get...

BBBBBBBBBB-BBBBBBBBBB
red-red,
BBBBBBBBBB-BBBBBBBBBB...

We get three series...no big deal..
no br depleting...
=========================

say if 20black, followed by ONE red, then 20 black,
then if we bet single vs series, u get...

BBBBBBBBBB-BBBBBBBBBB
red,
BBBBBBBBBB-BBBBBBBBBB...

We get series...single..series...
=======================


say if 20black, followed by one red,one black,
then 20 red, then if we bet single vs series, u get...

BBBBBBBBBB-BBBBBBBBBB
red,
black,
RRRRRRRRR-RRRRRRRRRR...

We get series...single.single.series...
====================================

Even if, the impossible 100red, one BLACK,
then 100 red...then one black,then 100 red...

100red,
1 black,
100red..
1 black,
100red..


that also
series,
single,
series..
single,
series...
no big deal...no depleting banroll...
======================


If we do series/single,
with the much touted,
"ONLY 69red in 200 spins",
we will ALSO see the equilibrium...
try it,
or I post them here...
======================

I do some series/single with,
YOUR 3 set of WORST DOZEN/ 185SPINS,
and do I surprised to see that they also equilibrium...1/3...

try it,
or I post them here...
=================================

I THINK it is just IMPOSSIBLE to get,
say 20 series, in row, or 20 single in row...
if it so, maybe we could bet,
as..

20-series,series,series.
20-singles...
20-series,series,series,..
1 series..
1 single..

that..
series of series,
series of single..
series of series,
1 single of..series..
1 single..of single...

hahaha...
oops! sorry for lol,
just jesting..hehehe..

==============================
Please do me a favor...

MAY U PLEASE, do a few thousands spins,
of dozen, or EC, to see what the worst possible
variance of series/single...

Thanks in advance.

 

will this be debacle if bet SERIES...?
only 5hit in 20 bet?

BRBRBBRBRBBRBRBBRBRBBRBBR

B--SINGLE
R--SINGLE
B--SINGLE
R--SINGLE
BB-series
R--SINGLE
B--SINGLE
R--SINGLE
BB-series
R--SINGLE
B--SINGLE
R--SINGLE
BB-series
R--SINGLE
B--SINGLE
R--SINGLE
BB-series
R--SINGLE
BB-series
R--SINGLE

 

Wong,
Doing a few thousands will lead us nowhere. I have already done over 100 millions.
First of all, equilibrium is a myth. We reach close to equilibrium but can not predict how much close we can get and in which span. If you think that
you will get at least 5 hit in 20, it is not true. You may get even no hit of a series for upto 30 spins. Chance to get a BB or bigger series is equal to getting a BR or to be simple, of any EC bet.
All patterns that you see are illusionary. There is nothing like any perfect ratio of single vs series. Perfection has no room in a random order. What you expect to happen in any playable span is merely an expectation. I may happen as you wish, it may be exactly opposite.
Only thing that you can sustain with, is, an expectation of almost(upto 5% deviation) equilibrium in a reasonable span of a bet.
For example, if you can play an EC bet upto 20,000 trials, you will be very close to the equilibrium and the max deviation can be 5%, nearly double of the house edge.

 

Thanks for your reply.

Thus, u mean, that,
series/singles will act like any EC's probability and DEVIATION.
=======================
U mention...
'the max deviation can be 5%',

This mean, apart from inadequate BR,
and table limit,
most gambler lose their shirt eventually,
because the reality of the

"the max deviation can be 5%" !!!

Thus if we know, how to wring the neck of,
"the max deviation can be 5%",

then only we could win CONSTANTLY!?

 

The 5% or double the house edge deviation is about reasonable long trial and not small sessions where deviation could be even 50%, as I have told already that 25/100 hits of an EC is not impossible and can be witnessed in reasonable simulations. Momentarily, at a stretch or two or more bad stretches can give us together as bad deviation as 1500%, i.e. where average expectancy to hit is 15 times, you may see just 1. It is possible to have about 40 losses with only 1 win, in between, of an EC bet, in worst times.
Such a wild range of deviation is what makes the game unbeatable. As a whole, the variance reflects as the house edge or something closer but in any playable span, it could be something 500 times tougher than merely house edge.
If the variance remains at house edge always, even in a thousand spins, constantly, even the dumbest gambler would get to win. In reality, you can face harsher cases, that is what randomness dictates.

 

Hi Albalaha,
Thanks for your precious reply,

But, if the deadly happen, doesnt that mean the other side making a killing profit!???

ie.
if black may hit at only 25/100, the why not we devise a way to bet the red side,
I mean, bet both sides, and take advantage of the advantage side.

Since variance, always kill a single side of EC....maybe if we play both side, then the deadly variance, most welcome...
or there a variance that kill both sides TOO?!

 

and how will u play both sides without knowing which side will override? How will u increase or decrease bets?

 

below, oversimplified example, let see where go wrong...
=================
add one when win, remain same when lose.

+1=wl=-1=0= [0]
-2=lw=+1=-1=[-1]
+2=wl=-2=0= [-1]
-3=lw=+2=-1=[-2]
+3=wl=-3=0= [-2]
-4=lw=+3=-1= [-3]
+4=wl=-4=0= [-3]
-5=lw=+5=0= [-3]
-5=lw=+6=1= [-2]
-5=lw=+7=2= [0]
-5=lw=+8=3= [3]
-5=lw=+9=4= [7]
-5=lw=+10=5=[12]
-5=lw=+11=6=[18]
+5=wl=-12=-7=[11]
+6=wl=-12=-6=[7]
+7=wl=-12=-5=[2]
+8=wl=-12=-4=[-2]

 

Hi,
I stumbled on this conversation today and I feel like it is on track with how
some of my thinking has been going. I'd like the chance to throw in some ideas
and see where it goes.

A while ago my thinking (on EC) was related to some other systems, progressions,
etc. and I got interested in this problem of variance which, of course, is the thing
that walks a neg progression to loss. I decided somehow to kind of try to figure
some ideas, first, to have no change. What I generally like is playing next to last,
capturing streaks of single sides and chops. The doubles and changes are the losses.
I went to a craps table a couple times and played and watched. It seemed to stay
pretty even, walking slowly against me. (The best would be if it walked in my favor,
which could get you winning some units, but it didn't).

So I feel like that methodology at least keeps you within the bulls eye. From there
maybe trying to do something to avoid more losses (like sitting out losing streaks)
but also a mild progression which would not be crazy if the variant was small and
slow.

But it looks like the direction of this thread is thinking in that direction and I like
it because basically, it is a comfortable way to play.
Does this add anything? or just make me look stupid? It seems like a safe
starting place.

Thanks

Mogul

 

I don't understand the math and decisions.

 

Sorry. I get it now. Forgive me. And interesting direction to test in.

 

BTW, for the record, my brief tests were showing a rather low variant.
Not losing 25% or 50%.

 

It is simple Oscar's Grind or Pluscoup progression. Do you feel that playing both ECs this way will handle all odds? It is not so simple buddy.
Let's see a sample:
Red

W
L
L
L
W
L
L
W
L
W
L
W
W
0(L)
L
W
L
W
L
L
W

 

Hi Mogul,
Welcome!
No one look stupid here,
Everyone entitled to their right to agreed or disagreed, to learn new idea and de-learn old idea, so to speak.

One does look stupid, when start spitting venom toward others without substance.

The major purpose of joining here is to..
like ..
Archimedes's eureka of naked truth.
WRIGHT Bro's found what's WRONG with their flying plan.

We all aim, to search the grail, way to beat the casino.
a handful of people in this planet know how to beat the casino, but they keep the card close to their chest, so we start from scratch.. thus these forums.

People who shout out loud, that no way to beat the casino, the edge, the bla, bla, bla...should read only, but no comment, since their comments, already stale since the first casino open for business...

U say..quote.
"From there
maybe trying to do something to avoid more losses (like sitting out losing streaks)...unquote.

I think u should write or print out that quote, on a large cardboard, and stare at those words, every night and day, and one day, u will shout like Archimedes...

Every known PROGRESSION, and system, will eventually hit the wall...when the LONG LOSING STREAKS OF LOSSES, arrived !!!

So the trillion cents question, is HOW?!
How...to avoid those dreaded streaks???

So your method or strategy MUST avoid the dreaded streaks.

For many time, year in, year out, people visit casino, win, win, win for many time, then BANG!...lose all the fortune won, and their underwear too...

There nothing wrong with your strategy and progression..
the only glitch, is....it will lose huge when the LONG LOSING STREAKS ..hit...

thanks for reading.

 

Wong,
Please try my given sample session the way you described.

 

Hi Albalaha,
I cant win with the previous method.
=======================

I try to use sort of Hollandish,
lets see where wrong.

=======
hollandish progression,
[1,2,3,4,5,6.....]
===================

black/Red


-1=-1,lW=+1
+1=0,wL=-1=0
+1=1,wL=-1=-1[1 mark fist loss]
+1=2,wL=-1=-2[11 mark two loss]
-1=1,lW=+1=-1[1] first 1 deleted]
+1=2,wL=-1=-2[11]
+1=3,wL=-1=-3[111]three losses,up prog. to 2, till no 1 left.
-1=2,lW=+2=-1[1]
+1=3,wL=-2=-3[12]loss of 2, add to line
-1=2,lW=+2=-1[2] win of 2, strike off 1
+1=3,wL=-3=-4[23 ]prog. up to 3, as no more 1.
-1=2,lW=+3=-1[3 ]win 3, strike off 2.
-1=1,lW=+4=+1[ 0]reset..prog up to 4

-1=0=zero(L)=-1=0[1 ]
+1=1,wL=-1=-2[11]
-1=0,lW=+1=-1[1]
+1=1,wL=-1=-2[11]
-1=0,lW=+1=-1[1]
+1=1,wL=-1=-2[11]
+1=2,wL=-1=-3[111]
-1=1,lW=+2=-1[11]

===================
hollandish progression
=1248...marthy.

black/Red


-1=-1,lW=+1
+1=0,wL=-1=0
+1=1,wL=-1=-1[1]
+1=2,wL=-1=-2[11]
-1=1,lW=+1=-1[1]
+1=2,wL=-1=-2[11]
+1=3,wL=-1=-3[111]
-1=2,lW=+2=-1[1]
+1=3,wL=-2=-3[12]
-1=2,lW=+2=-1[2]
+1=3,wL=-4 =-5 [24 ]
-1=2,lW=+4 =-1 [4 ]
-1=1,lW=+8 =+7 [ 0]reset

-1=0=zero(L)=-1 =0[1 ]
+1=1,wL=-1=-2 [11]
-1=0,lW=+1=-1 [1]
+1=1,wL=-1=-2 [11]
-1=0,lW=+1=-1 [1]
+1=1,wL=-1=-2 [11]
+1=2,wL=-1=-3 [111]
-1=1,lW=+2=-2 [11]

may wrong , as I in rush

 

this type will not win if long streaks occur.


if red sleep for 10spins,
then, it will be...

Hollandish, marthy prog.

1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2=-17
[while the other bet just garner 10, thus -7]
11th spin=w=+2=-15
12th spins=w=+2=-13
13th win=w=+4=-9
14th win=+4=-5 [the other side won +6]
15th win=+4=-1 [the other side won +5]

 

That is where you lack seriously. You see L/W and change your proposed progression accordingly. Same case was there when you debated HP Johnson progression that I will play with 20 zeros and 1 and when I gave you a sample you said no, I will do with 25 zeros and 1. Then I shown you that HP Johnson is nothing out of world and it can fail even with 40% hits and it is only a mix of flat bet in the beginning(till there are zeros in the line), normal labby once zeros disappear and a deadly martingale when last two digits remain in the HP Johnson formula string. I saw pages of debate over this silly method in roulette30.com. Ironically, none could notice how bad it could go, even in a good enough case.

I mean to say, every progression is meant for one type of situation/variance. Unless you have one that can plug all holes, it will only harm you, in long run.

 

Dear Albalaha,
Thanks for your reply.

You are right when u say, that,
what I lack seriously,
or rather lack sorely...hehehee...

I think the "last straw",
before I could really become a pro,
is the...progression!

For the last one year,
I had bang my head on the wall countless time,
but alas, the perfect progression, that can,
as u say .."plug all holes",
keep out of my reach, or comprehension.

I do understand that,
any particular progression,
will be only killed by a certain variance.

Maybe U could help..
as my Guru himself,
keep the "last card" close to his chest.

No matter how much I threaten him,
or wring his neck, or twist his arm,
he wont let me look through
the last page of his Holy Grail book...

Please help...

Thanks in advance.

 

Just think how can u manage the 5% deviation, in the long run. You will win for sure. It is only about fighting the 5%, almost double of the house edge. Sadly, people can't find a way to win in no house edge games too. Make your own path. Fight your own battle.