Mike post a nice comparison witch made me to test tiny small waves - just curios how it perform.
nolinks://nolinks.bollingerbands.com/ (nolinks://nolinks.bollingerbands.com/)
And referring to Kellys post at GG.
nolinks://nolinks.gamblersglen.com/cgi-bin/teemz/teemz.cgi?board=_master&action=opentopic&forum=Roulette_Message_Board&topic=8787 (nolinks://nolinks.gamblersglen.com/cgi-bin/teemz/teemz.cgi?board=_master&action=opentopic&forum=Roulette_Message_Board&topic=8787)
Playing with or against the flow should not make any difference and known methods as FTL or DBL should be as good as any other selection as they all are based upon gamblers fallacy and does not effect future outcomes.
This selection is based upon playing against a wave of only singles events being present.
Series of singles and single series will become a pure sequence where both are clear from the other two states of the distribution.
It should produce the same result as all other combination you can think of.
Waves contra bet selections and patterns ? :-)
Rules if a straight win of a small tiny correction we stop and start a new session.
If a loss we aim for break even and save -1 for capture a small tiny correction and save us from capture + one more event if we would aim for +1.
If none of above we accept a loss of -4.
If a loss -4 you have to wait for a new sequense.
Result 300 trails.
Random org 20110310.
Flat betting with 4 attempts.
11 sessions.
9 won
4 loss
1 even
19 placed bets
1. +1
2. +0
3. +1
4. +1
5. +1
6. +1
7. +1
8. +1
9. +1
10. -4
11. +1
Result 300 trails.
Random org 20110309.
Flat betting with 4 attempts.
17 sessions.
9 won
0 loss
8 even
33 placed bets
13. +0
14. +1
15. +0
16. +1
17. +0
18. +1
19. +0
20. +0
21. +1
22. +1
23. +0
24. +1
25. +0
26. +0
27. +1
28. +1
29. +1
What should you search for - well the ESTAT ... or win 10% out of 1024 placed bets flat betting.
The number of won units is to be divided by the root from the placed bets.
0.5 Keep looking
1.0 Keep looking
1.5 Hint
2.0 Interesting
2.5 Good /
3.0 Very good
3.5 Super
4.0 Dream on
4.5 You wish
5.0 Forget it
5.5 Never in an life time
6.0 The end of roulette as we know it
Funny so next i will test 10.000 ... post results soon ...
Boring to test 10.000 file so i skip - now i will change and don't play with or against and only play if there is a win.
41 won
24 loss
19 even
?? placed bets
Just fluctation ...
+1
+0
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
-4
+1
+0
+1
+0
+0
+0
+1
+0
+1
+1
-4
+1
+1
+0
+0
+1
+1
+1
+0
+1
+0
+0
+1
+0
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
+0
-4
+1
+1
+1
+1
+0
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
-4
+1
+1
+1
+1
+1
-4
+0
+0
+0
+0
+0
+1
-4
There are indeed trends that occur in roulette. Why? As a general rule, because the same conditions are present - at least within reasonable tolerances. And many of them last for a while. What the real trends are is something that needs to be properly defined. But actual play is much more dynamic, if you do it properly (you realistically need software for it).
Ultimately, segregate variables, then find the relationship between variables, other variables, and spin outcomes. This is not a minor thing. The relationship is dynamic. People can choose whatever they want to do with this.
hehehe it is crazy stuff - I modify and twist it Marigny style and actually improve the results ...
25 placed bets 13 won 6 even 0 loss
X = no selection
3 attempts to gain +1 unit
RESULT :
20110313 random org 300 trails
+1
+0
+0
+0
+0
20110312 random org 300 trails
+1
+1
+1
20110311 random org 300 trails
+1
+0
20110310 random org 300 trails
+1
20110309 random org 300 trails
+1
+1
+1
20110308 random org 300 trails
X
20110307 random org 300 trails
+1
20110306 random org 300 trails
+1
+0
20110305 random org 300 trails
+1
+1
20110304 random org 300 trails
Continue with this soon ...