Hi, 6.
Congratulations on your excellent work here in this invaluable study group.
I'm just gonna toss it up here for a bit, so bare with me.
If the law is largely robust...implying that only the lower and upper limits are liable to change from sample to sample then it should be possible to vary the interval lengths away from the fixed notion of 37 results without changing the fundamental principal behind the law. The intervals could be fine tuned for different strategies. If the law commands a fixed average ratio of repeaters/sleepers, then it should be possible to apply the law to tailored wheel sections, groupings, etc, with suitably tuned intervals.
The fundamental premise is that in a 37 spin interval, 13 numbers will hit at least twice. So the most fundamental system should be waiting for 13 numbers to appear without any repeats, and then bet those 13 numbers for 13 repeats, or 13 losses, whichever 13 (wins/losses) that arrive first ending the interval regardless of spin length. Meaning if you are lucky enough to get 13 straight repeaters, the interval ceases at 26 spins. The longest scenario is an interval of 38 spins, which would result from 13 wins to 12 losses or 12 wins to 13 losses. This basic strategy would obviously require a lot of waiting down time for the appearance of 13 straight numbers/no repeats.
Maximum win is 13 repeats x 0 losses = -169 units, +468 units = +299 units profit.
Minimum win is 8 repeats x 13 losses = -273 units, +288 units = +15 units profit.
Minimum loss is 7 repeats x 13 losses = -260 units, +252 units = -8 units loss.
Maximum loss is 0 repeats x 13 losses = -169 units, +0 units = -169 units loss.
This basic strategy would probably lose because it requires betting through to the end while new numbers are being added as the interval matures; and 13 winning bets in one interval is a bit excessive.
By grouping numbers together the waiting down time can be minimized, and the intervals can be reduced allowing for smaller and more realistic win streaks. Also, the arranged groups will encompass all 37 numbers on the wheel, so the "trigger group" (a tricky bit) will likely include numbers not yet hit, but these un-hit numbers may contribute to the group reaching the expected number of repeats.
This type of strategy could be applied to various groupings and arrangements of the number system used in roulette (we need a sweet spot here). It would then be a matter of calculating the expected number of repeats for the grouping over an appropriate interval. Then after timing the entry point (again a tricky bit), commence playing for a set number of wins (expected repeats) against losses (equivalent to expected repeats), whichever comes first ending the interval, as in the above fundamental premise.
Well that's all I'm gonna toss up tonight.
Keep up the great work, 6.
Cheers,
bombus.
Bombus,
Excellent post, my friend! The problem is, the law is only robust in the sense that over a 37-spin interval the numbers will organise themselves into classes of hit/unhit...and then sub-classes of hit once/hit twice and so on. We can't really rely on the classes ever actually being spot on what the averages suggest. The system has to compensate for deviation and the heavy dispersion or clustering of hits. There has to be multiple formulas designed to capitalise on certain sets of conditions, and when used together, every possible contingency is covered. That we can switch bets gives us a degree of variation, and means that more often than not we can use the randomness of the outcomes to our advantage. We just adapt to the outcomes and then attack the perfidious disc when it's opportune and in a way that's fitting. This also cuts down tracking time to a fixed number of spins, and so playing the game doesn't become boring.
Personally I like to limit an attack to catching just a single winner, and then I start a new interval on the next spin. But that's only because I'm cautious! Intervals can last any number of spins as long as they don't surpass 37 consecutive outcomes...this would contravene the essence of the law. By all means an interval can be concluded at any moment before the 38th spin. An interval can last for 5 spins if the system so dictates.
A sector system is intriguing but I think it would have to be very solid...the schematics would have to be perfect. Again, we can't rely on exactly 13 numbers repeating. Whatever we do, we'd have to have an array of bets that cover all conditions...e.g if less numbers than expected are repeating, if more are repeating, if several are hitting more than twice etc.
Looking forward to your next post!
:)
You are wrong:
There are only 9-10 repeaters in the Law of Third.
13-14 hit once
14-13 don´t hit
And if you would look at my "view at statistics" you would find all datas your just guessing about.
br
winkel
Oh, hi again Winkel
The number 13 isn't based on any stats. It's simply a fundamental number derived from an equation. If we were to also use other calculations for further accuracy, the number given here would be 11. So usually between 11 and 13 numbers will repeat. You have figures that suggest 9-10, that is fine because the exact number really doesn't matter at all. The system should be able to compensate for the extremes and everything in between...so say 14-36 numbers hitting in 37 spins. For this we should have a number of different bets...one for each set of conditions. Only 1 number repeating is enough to end an attack successfully. The trick is how to isolate it.
Number Six,
Please explain how that information is going to enable you to get the edge.
Herb,
Create a formula(s) for isolating the repeaters(s). Bet when it's opportune according to the state of the spin outcomes. All angles must be covered and contingencies prepared for. Using a sensible staking plan such as a divisor will keep the outlay low and the returns adequate.
Quote[Create a formula(s) for isolating the repeaters(s).
Can you give me an example of such a formula?
QuoteBet when it's opportune according to the state of the spin outcomes.
When or what is the opportune time or state?
Quote from: Herb on May 03, 2009, 06:27:27 PM
Can you give me an example of such a formula?
When or what is the opportune time or state?
Actually there is an extemely basic example of these in the first post of this thread.
But, Herb, you don't believe in maths or probability theory. Anything I say would be null and void. Hell, you don't even believe in numerology ;D
You're right. :) I don't think you know what you're talking about.
I don't have a clue :-\
Anyway, is there any point to having a discussion about it?
I was just trying to see if you could back up any of your claims with logic rather than fluff.
What claims?
QuoteCreate a formula(s) for isolating the repeaters(s). Bet when it's opportune according to the state of the spin outcomes. All angles must be covered and contingencies prepared for. Using a sensible staking plan such as a divisor will keep the outlay low and the returns adequate
.
The above claim
That's not a claim, Herb. It's one simple guideline for those questioning or interested in pursuing this type of research.
I don't see why people find any value in the law of the third. I have yet to meet someone that could explain why it's relevant.
Quote from: Herb on May 03, 2009, 11:59:42 PM
I don't see why people find any value in the law of the third. I have yet to meet someone that could explain why it's relevant.
I don't see why people find any relevance in explaining the Law of the Third's value to Herb!
PS.
I have yet to meet someone.
Bwahahahaha!
Quote from: Herb
I don't see why people find any value in the law of the third. I have yet to meet someone that could explain why it's relevant.
Numbers repeat in a 37-spin rotation. It doesn't have to be 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 or whatever, 1 is enough. It's only a matter of isolating "likely" repeaters and making sure you are backing one of them when it arrives. Obviously, the more numbers that repeat the better. Conversely, one can bet on unhit numbers if the conditions suggest that would be a better bet. Or what about a combination, altering the bet as the conditions change? No mathematical system can ever be infallible. I mean, there is no ****ing holy grail, it's a load of utter bollocks. The law of the third is just a principle. It appears in every rotation, just not
always as we expect. There are two types of mathematical system: terrible ones and bad ones. Neither are safe enough to be considered "good" as they can easily be undone by unplanned-for events. Bad systems, however, can be made better by including inbuilt elements that deal with contingencies, and better systems made excellent by surrounding them by disciplined strategy. As a rule, the law of the third
is technically totally irrelevant because we can never rely on exactly 24 numbers to hit in 37 spins. What we have to do is design a system that compensates for the deviation. It's not impossible.
QuoteIt's only a matter of isolating "likely" repeaters and making sure you are backing one of them when it arrives
Now here's the big question: What makes you think a specific number is likely to repeat?
Well, Herb, on a basic level think about this: as the outcomes are spun and the spin count of the interval progresses, the numbers are sorted into two interdependent groups - the hit and unhit. The groups are interdependent because each number has to be in either and can't be in both. Essentially there will come times when it's opportune to bet on the values of the groups changing or remaining the same. The outcomes can be choppy, favourable or hostile. It is, of course, up to the player to decide when to bet. Even with a rule-based betting system, the player is under no obligation to stake cash-money if he doesn't like the state of the outcomes. It takes a little intelligence and intuition to be able to accurately judge the situation and make the right choice. Other than using probability theory and law of the third statistics there is really nothing to assist us. There is a phenomenon among the numbers. It is real, but it's largely inexplicable. Why does the ball choose to land in the 15 pocket for the third time in 20 spins...I don't know.
Number Six,
So, are you saying that the unhit numbers are more likely to hit because they are due or that the numbers that have hit are more likely to hit because they are due?
Quote from: Herb on May 05, 2009, 09:40:49 PM
Number Six,
So, are you saying that the unhit numbers are more likely to hit because they are do or that the numbers that have hit are more likely to hit because they are do?
Don't be a do be or do be a don't be, its up to you, mate.
Quote from: Herb
Number Six,
So, are you saying that the unhit numbers are more likely to hit because they are do or that the numbers that have hit are more likely to hit because they are do?
No, I'm not saying that. Do.
Sorry, Herb, I didn't read your post properly. I'm saying that during the attack phase there will be points at which, according to probability theory, one group of numbers is more likely to appear than the other. It's simply a matter of pouncing on them when these opportunities come around. Nothing is set in stone, it's just a common sense approach. And, of course, it doesn't always pan out as expected, which is why sensible staking is essential. No progression nonsense. There can't be a set of rigid rules for the system, because why would you carry on attacking the wheel when you can clearly see that it's producing a hostile seqence of numbers? Even though the rules say attack, one must still be able to judge the situation and realise that the attack can't continue. You can then go virtual for a series of spins until the outcomes are more favourable, and then proceed to conclude the attack successfully. The outcomes can't be against you for ever. There are events that
must happen. But the trick is identifying and catching them as quickly as possible (1st spin is obviously always nice!). I'm not claiming anything about a BS holy grail system because they don't exist due to the negative expectancy...this makes all mathematical systems flawed. An edge, however, can be gained over the house during good sessions. To win consistently, one must strategise. It's a war, after all.
QuoteSo, are you saying that the unhit numbers are more likely to hit because they are do or that the numbers that have hit are more likely to hit because they are do
............ what does "they are do" mean?
Quote from: simon on May 06, 2009, 05:52:55 AM
............ what does "they are do" mean?
I think he meant dew, I mean doo, I mean due. :good:
QuoteI think he meant dew, I mean doo, I mean due.
....... you're right I think he meant "dew", as in, like "fresh" numbers, like the morning dew, or, you're right he meant "doo", as in dog doo crap numbers, which are numbers that just won't hit....
....... sorry Herb just having fun with your mis-spelling of "due." not that anyone's perfect and I make typos all the time, but that's one you might want to make note of.
seriously though Number Six, have you found any specific strategies to capitalize on the law of third, and if so, would you be so kind as to give us a hint as to what they might be, or ones you might suggest trying out? I have many spins from real double zeroe wheels that I like to test with possible strategies.
Well, in a way, yes, but it's impossible to explain. It's tactical betting and can only be implemented according to the state of the outcomes. Rather like the LW methodology.