The Holy Gral or G.U.T the Great Universal Theory

[kompressor]

 0  1X  2+

11 12  14


WHEN THE CROSSING FROM 0 VS 1 AND 1 VS 2 ARE MADE:

1- PLAY THE 2 VS 3 AND 3 VS 4 ETC...
OR
2- START A NEW GAME

IS THIS RIGHT ??

[TwoCatSam]

Ernesto

It would seem I am in a world of my own. 

I understand a "potential crossing" such as this:

[table=,]
0,1,>1
10,9,3
[/table]

In the above, you would bet 0 vs 1.  A hit does two things:  It decreases the quantity of numbers in the 0 line of the software and it increases the quantity of numbers in the 1 section of the software.  On a graph one line goes up and full notch and one line goes down a full notch and they cross!

In the following example:

[table=,]
0,1,>1
10,11,9
[/table]

I seem to understand there is a potential crossing now at 0 vs >1.  I am saying there is no potential crossing of these two lines!  Plain and simple.  If you bet on the 0s and get a win, here is your table:

[table=,]
0,1,>1
9,12,9
[/table]

At this point, yes, you could still bet for 0 vs >1, but it would only be a crossing where one data point moved.  The >1 would remain the same!  By the same token, you could bet on all the >1 numbers and if you had a winner, you would still have a crossing.

Here is the overall question:  If you can bet in the above situations where there is clearly no possibility of a crossing, why can't you bet in ANY case where there is clearly no possibility of a crossing?

Sam

[ernesto]

Sam

I think we can bet in every three trigger in your examples.

Winkel wrote somewhere the basic rules:
play only difference 0 or 1
stopp playing when difference >1

[table=,]
0,1,>1
9,12,9
[/table]

At this point, yes, you could still bet for 0 vs >1, but it would only be a crossing where one data point moved.  The >1 would remain the same!  By the same token, you could bet on all the >1 numbers and if you had a winner, you would still have a crossing.

If you want to bet >1 you need 2 or >2 column to found a trigger. You can't play >1s when you found 0 vs >1 trigger, only you can use this trigger one way, can't apply backwards.

Winkel can you confirm me?

ernesto

[TwoCatSam]

OK, I must be really missing something here.

I am going to stop posting on this thread until I have found my examples.

Sam

[winkel]

Now I see what you are discussing!

I understand a "potential crossing" such as this:

[table=,]
0,1,>1
10,9,3
[/table]

In the above, you would bet 0 vs 1.  A hit does two things:  It decreases the quantity of numbers in the 0 line of the software and it increases the quantity of numbers in the 1 section of the software.  On a graph one line goes up and full notch and one line goes down a full notch and they cross!

This is absolutely correct!!!!

In the following example:

[table=,]
0,1,>1
10,11,9
[/table]

I seem to understand there is a potential crossing now at 0 vs >1.  I am saying there is no potential crossing of these two lines!  Plain and simple.  If you bet on the 0s and get a win, here is your table:

[table=,]
0,1,>1
9,12,9
[/table]

You just examined, that there are two kinds of crossings.
This referrs to the two kinds of behaviour of our columns (lines)

As I said:
a) 1 line is strictly going down to zero (the "0")

b) following lines are going up first and then going down to zero
(almost waving in between presenting several crossings)
"1" "2" "3" "4" etc.

c) following lines are strictly going up (because they are sums)
>1 >2 >3 >4 etc.


If you play a b) vs b) or an a) vs B) you have your description of "potential crossing" as you called them

If you bet a) vs a c):
as a) is defined as a "strictly falling down" it has to fall under the lines of the c)s

now the examples

10 any 9
can move to

[table=,]
2 wins   ,   1 win      ,1 win   ,   1 loss   ,   2 losses
                        
   ,      ,   10 any 9   ,      ,   
   ,      ,      ,      ,   
   ,   9 any 9   ,   or   ,   10 any 10   ,   
   ,      ,      ,      ,   
8 any 9 , or    ,   9 any 10   ,   or   ,   10 any 11

[/table]

your probaility to win is 1:1, so why don´t bet?

[winkel]

due to a systems break down it came in twice, sorry!

Now to the math on that risk:

If we bet just one spin;
left side win 36-10=26
right side loss =-10

If we bet both triggers
left side win win: -10+36 -9+36 = +53
right side loss loss: -10-10 = -20
right middle loss win = -10-10+36=+16
left middle win loss = -10+36-9 = +17

isn´t that a nice expectation?

br
winkel

[TwoCatSam]

winkel

I deleted the second post.

My head is about to explode.  I have copied your reply and must take a break!

Thanks for your patience with me.

Sam

[winkel]

@TCS
thanks for deleting the double

Now as we get in the deeper I hope all can see why this strategy is bound to win long term.

@ernesto
your definition is absolutely correct. my respect to you and thks.

br
winkel

[TwoCatSam]

Well, this response is 666 on this thread.  Is that an omen?

ernesto, you wrote:

If you want to bet >1 you need 2 or >2 column to found a trigger. You can't play >1s when you found 0 vs >1 trigger, only you can use this trigger one way, can't apply backwards.

in post 660.  Of course, you are right.

Sam

[droidman]

Hi bjb,

Thanks for the hard work, it's getting closer!

The lines should be separate though, for example,
there should be a line for the number of numbers that have hit
exactly twice, not more than twice. Then a whole different
line for the number of numbers that have hit more than once.

Let me break down the concept, because it's important to the system.

Say 16 hits. That makes the =1 line go up to 1, because it hit exactly once.
Ok 16 hits again. 16 no longer has hit exactly once, so the =1 line
should go back down to 0, and the >1 line goes up to 1. Another separate
line has also changed, the =2 line goes from 0 to 1, because one number
(16) has hit exactly twice.

Now 25 hits. That makes the =1 line go up to 1, because there
is only one number (25) that hit exactly once. >1 line stays at 1,
because there is only one number (16) that has hit more than once.

Now 25 hits again. 25 has no longer hit exactly once, so the =1 line
goes back down to 0. The >1 line goes to 2 now, because there are
2 numbers that have hit more than once. Another separate line has
also changed, the =2 line goes from 1 to 2 because there are now
2 numbers (16 and 25) that have hit exactly twice.

Ok, 25 hits again. Line =1 stays at 0, no numbers have hit exactly once.
Line >1 stays at 2, because 2 numbers (16 and 25) have both hit more than once.
But now the =2 line goes from 2 to 1 because only one number (16) has
hit exactly twice. And now the line >2 goes from 0 to 1, because there
is one number (25) that has hit more than twice. AND the line =3 goes to 1,
because 1 number (25) has hit exactly 3 times.

I know this sounds redundant, and I'm not trying to argue that >1 is not the
same as 2, cause it is. Just a different way of presenting information.

I guess a minor tweak would be to run the color legend across the top, instead
of down into the graph.

Keep up the good work!

[ryan08]

Hi,

does the trigger only work if the left column is higher or the same as the right column, eg-

0 has to be greater or the same as 1 column,
if 1 column is 1unit greater than the 0 column you cannot use that as a trigger, is this correct?

@twocatsam

the real number of the devil is 616, it got miss translated through history to 666 so your safe lol!

[winkel]

Hi Ryan

thats correct

br
winkel

[winkel]

to compare the chances for a "potential crossing"
[table=,]
   ,   1 win   ,   1 loss 1 win   ,   1 loss   ,   2 loss   ,   1 loss   ,   
   ,      ,      ,      ,      ,      ,   
   ,      ,      ,   15 14 8   ,      ,      ,   
   ,      ,      ,      ,      ,      ,   
   ,   14 15 8   ,      ,   15 14 8   ,      ,   15 13 9   ,   
   ,      ,      ,      ,      ,      ,   
no bet   ,      ,   14 15 8   ,      ,   15 13 9   ,      ,   no bet
   ,      ,      ,      ,      ,      ,   
results   ,   21 +   ,   6 +   ,   -15   ,   -30   ,   -15   ,   

[/table]

[bjb007]

droidman

I might be wrong but it seems to me that what
you're saying is that >1 doesn't mean >1 but
the difference between total of numbers with
one hit and total of numbers with 2 hits.

Since this is represented by the difference between
the 1-hit graph and the 2-hit graph I don't see
any advantage in potting it.  It's represented visually
and the two lines will always get closer as spins are
added whereas the difference will go up an down and
not be much, if any, use.

Unless I've misconstrued your explanation...

[winkel]

look at this and you will see there is an useful information in it

R="0" blue
N="1" pink
F= ">1" dark red
F2= "2" yellow
F3= "3" light blue

[winkel]

-