Does anyone know anything about Ion Saliu?

[curious]

I found some interesting ideas from one Ion Saliu.

He talks about something he calls the Degree of Certainty.  In this he advises to use progressions on events that have probabilities greater than 50%.  For example, the chances of getting a win in 2 spins when you bet 19 numbers per spin is 75%.

Ion then says that there is a 66% chance of  the next roulette number having appeared in the previous 42 spins. 

Ion then says that Losing (L) streaks are short, more regular, and less frequent for this event that has a 66% chance in occurring.  He gives a bunch of evidence that I didn't quite understand and then says "The degree of certainty DC is 95% that the losing streaks will be no longer than 3 (LLL). The degree of certainty DC is 99% that the losing streak will not be longer than 4 consecutive losses (LLLL)".

He then outlines a play style where you watch for back to back Losses and bet on a W, then use a 4 or 5 step Martingale.  He says that the chance of getting 6 Losses in a row (LLLLLL) is 1 in 1000 or .1%.  So, if you jump in after LL, then your Martingale will be at most 4 steps, but that will not happen very often.

He also talks about the W side of things and says that Win (W) streaks are longer, and more frequent, so there is a strategy for playing W streaks.

Can someone who knows more about roulette than I do read his discussion and see if it makes sense?

nolinks://saliu.com/best-roulette-systems.html

[VLSroulette]

Hello dear friend,

The Winning and losing theory as described by Ion Saliu is correct.

When dealing with probability, the degree of certainty mentioned by saliu reflects the fact the more numbers covered, the more w's and the lesser the numbers covered, the lesser the w's.

For instance, let's have two extremes.
a)   35 numbers covered.
You can expect to have long strings of w's. In an ideal distribution, out of a 37-spin cycle, you would get 35 w's and two 2 L's.
This would be an expected Lw string:
nolinksnolinksnolinkswLnolinksnolinksnolinksnolinksnolinksnolinkswwLnolinksww

b)   2 number covered. You can (ideally) expect the exact opposite distribution two wins (w's) at a 37-spin cycle, which a string such as the exact opposite from the one above is perfectly  expected:
LLLLLLLLLLwLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLwLLLLL

Of course, such are the ideals. You can have instances of 35 number betting with several losses (LL's) in a row as well as hitting with 2 numbers several wins (ww's) in a row.



In my opinion what one can do to improve this is noticing the current happenings: employing situational awareness.
Remember every bet selection will have times on which it hits according to expectation as well as times on which it will hits at a higher or lower rate at the current session; by being aware of this extra factor you can then "filter" the bets to say –for instance– I'm betting the patter wLLw on double-columns/dozens as it is currently hitting at a fair rate as opposed to wLLL. For instance, it has came out three times in a row effectively and you wish to try for it to continue appearing.

Also, once it misses two consecutive tries it would be better to disable it.

We have people here for whom these patters provide a way to "tune into" the stream at a good rate for their money management scheme, resulting on winning (I.e. Steve morgan, Lionel/Lanky). wL's are nothing more than yet another way to "transform" the results for suiting a person's preferred way to choose when to bet, as valid (or not) as any other bet selection.

Kind regards.

Victor

[curious]

@VLSRoulette

Could this situational awareness  be as simple as keeping track of the number of occurrences of some event as compared to standard deviation, then increasing or decreasing bet size based on where the number of W per the number of trials falls in terms of the number of standard deviations away from expectation?

Given something like betting the 2nd and 3rd dozen:
the win probability P = .648,
the standard deviation in 100 trials is then 4.77. 
The expected number of successes in 100 trails is 65.

68.2% of the successes will fall within 1 Standard Deviation from 65 - i.e., between 60 - 70
95.4% of the successes will fall within 2 Standard Deviations from 65 - i.e., between 55 - 75
99.7% of the successes will fall within 3 Standard Deviations from 65 - i.e., between 50 - 80

So, we could track spins in 100 spin sets and record Wins (W).  After 100 spins, we look at how many standard deviations the number of Wins is away from theoretical.

Below 65 we are within 1 SD.   Increase bet size 1 unit.
Below 60 we are within 2 SD.   Increase bet size 2 units.
Below 55 we are within 3 SD.   Increase bet size 3 units.
Below 50 we are within 4 SD.   Increase bet size 4 units.
...

Above 65 we are within 1 SD.  Decrease bet size 1 unit.
Above 70 we are within 2 SD.  Decrease bet size 2 units.
Above 75 we are within 3 SD.  Decrease bet size 3 units.
...

Could it be as simple as that?

Say, I use $10 as my unit size and start off playing $50 per column on column 2 and column 3.  After 100 spins I check W to see which SD the Ws are in.  Then adjust the bet size accordingly.

[GARNabby]

I found some interesting ideas from one Ion Saliu.

He talks about something he calls the Degree of Certainty.  In this he advises to use progressions on events that have probabilities greater than 50%.  For example, the chances of getting a win in 2 spins when you bet 19 numbers per spin is 75%.

Ion then says that there is a 66% chance of  the next roulette number having appeared in the previous 42 spins. 

Ion then says that Losing (L) streaks are short, more regular, and less frequent for this event that has a 66% chance in occurring.  He gives a bunch of evidence that I didn't quite understand and then says "The degree of certainty DC is 95% that the losing streaks will be no longer than 3 (LLL). The degree of certainty DC is 99% that the losing streak will not be longer than 4 consecutive losses (LLLL)".

He then outlines a play style where you watch for back to back Losses and bet on a W, then use a 4 or 5 step Martingale.  He says that the chance of getting 6 Losses in a row (LLLLLL) is 1 in 1000 or .1%.  So, if you jump in after LL, then your Martingale will be at most 4 steps, but that will not happen very often.

He also talks about the W side of things and says that Win (W) streaks are longer, and more frequent, so there is a strategy for playing W streaks.

Can someone who knows more about roulette than I do read his discussion and see if it makes sense?

nolinks://saliu.com/best-roulette-systems.html

curious,

While i would agree that using (some) betting progressions when there are more W's than L's, in the long-run of course, could help lower the BR-variances/swings to lose less... not at those latters much greater by increasing one's bet to achieve the additional W's.

Furthermore, facts like, (eg, if i recall this one,) "With 40 persons in a room, the chance of at least two having the same birthday is 0.60" are of no help in another room of persons.

[Lanky]

Hi curious .

Mate I came across the way that Ion Saliu played the Dozens back in 2004/2005.

He Tracks the Dozens different to how Victor and now I do them.
Saliu tracks them 1/2-1/3-2/3  but He seems to get the job done.

And I must say that along with what I was already doing and a tweak/Idea that I gained from His ways.
Was probably a factor in Me taking to Victor's Lw Method in 2006 so easily when I saw that.

Even though I tweaked Victor's way a Tad as well to suit the way I play.
The combination of all of this gave the idea of what I call Wave Betting on the W's.
Which I have mentioned in posts about this in the past. 

Having said all that Saliu does have some rules about how many times and how the L's form with rules about when and how many times an isolated W is present before He starts to bet this way.

So if I was You and You were thinking about doing things this way I would urge You to make sure that You understand that part first along with remembering that the Dozens are tracked 1/2-1/3-2/3.

Another thing I would urge You to do Before You attempt to do this is to read the Excellent Thread that Our Member Carpanta did on this some time ago.
(on page 2 of that is some Good examples of how Carpanta is playing them)

Here is the Link below to Carpanta's Thread.

nolinks://vlsroulette.com/situational-strategy-play/carpanta's-views-on-lw/

Enjoy My Friend.

Lanky.

[VLSroulette]

Hello dear curious,

The Standard Deviation for the w's could be used as the "large indicator".

The current trend (via situational awareness) could be used as the "short indicator".

The way to look for correction is when both the large and short indicator are in such a way that:

- The large indicator is biased enough from the ideals -the stronger the bias the better-.

- The shorter indicator is currently "trending" towards the event which could do the correction.

Then you do a short & sweet attack, Marigny style: looking for it to bounce back for at least to get you +1 in the bankroll, never expecting full return of balance as it will be less likely to have a full balance, only to have that little bouncing back that can lead to your +1 per attack.

Putting aside the w's, you could grasp the idea from simple even chances:

After a deviation in favor of blacks (say out of the last 20 spins you have 16 blacks / 4 reds), you can expect some correction in favor of reds, and your indication to enter is 2 reds in a row = the reasonable possible start for the correction.

After 100 spins I check W to see which SD the Ws are in.

100 spins is too much, Lanky's way and in the past mine dealed with shorter trams. I don't know how much is Lanky's current spins window, but I can assure you a 20-spin window of past spins shall be enough to make a decision when aiming at such short-term betting style of attack.

Regards,
Victor

[Lanky]

100 spins is too much, Lanky's way and in the past mine dealed with shorter trams. I don't know how much is Lanky's current spins window, but I can assure you a 20-spin window of past spins shall be enough to make a decision when aiming at such short-term betting style of attack.

Regards,
Victor

Hi curious.

Yes Mate Victor is spot on 20 spins sure is enough.(most of the time anyway)

Lanky.

[VLSroulette]

Curious, of course you should set a stop-loss limit with your attacks. It would become futile to keep on attacking the long indicator to correct if it keeps on deviating more and more. While it is true it is scheduled to correct "in the future" (due to the very nature of the game), it will correct when it gets to correct, and you can't "make it" do such; you are simply aiming for the most reasonable indicator as entry point = the possible beginning of a correction while at the same time having a humble aim of +1 unit, not expecting the whole return to balance.

Remember: while not every concentration of hits means a correction, every correction starts with a concentration of hits.

[VLSroulette]

-