Reducing Volatility @ TwoCatSam

[rob567]

Like I said to TwoCatSam you need to reduce volatility as the first step in beating roulette.

So how?

It's really not that hard.

I will use EC bets to explain.

The odds of an EC bet are 50/50.

But a series still follows the rules of series. Each set being one half the prior. Though the series is comprised of the prior it in no way cares about the 50/50 odds. It is going to get what it needs to stay within the statistical average.

Problem is that there is too much volatility due to the simple a or b result. You as a limited player you will lose too much in a downturn.

So what do you do. Find something to combine it with thereby decreasing the odds of it happening. This will create another set of series that will make sure it stays within the statistical average. It is also completely seperate from the first three, The first singular probability and the 2 resultant series possabilites.

This will decrease volitility or amplitude in the waveform. If reduced enough you can determine where in the cycle you are and enter fairly quickly. Then exit once you know you are above the average which will gain you the trough to peak range.

Simple and easy to do.

Monte Carlo

[TwoCatSam]

OK, I'm sort of playing the "Devil's Advocate" here.........

If I read Monte correctly he is saying something akin to this:  If red has slept five spins and the small numbers have slept five spins, bet the big, black numbers.  Both are out of synch and the wheel is dying to right this error.

I once spoke of "double-advantage" numbers, so I believe in this idea.

But a wheel is a dead, non-feeling, non-thinking object.  How could it "want" anything such as balancing its production of reds and blacks, odds and evens and so on?

Why do I believe in what I don't believe in??

Sam

[rob567]

That's sort of half right.

But the timeline is too long in dispersion and your sample to small to realize an answer in your example because of the simple probability it is based on. I am showing you how to shorten it though combanitorics so that it can be better assesed.

Monte Carlo

[TwoCatSam]

Monte

I will continue to study your posts as you show me how to shorten it.  

I could wait for five blacks in a row, five evens in a row and five littles in a row and then bet the red, odd big numbers.  My friend, Coussin Gonflable, posted this system and called it the "Wait 'till you're darn near dead system" as it rarely produces a bet.

Sam

[rob567]

No actually if you do it the way I am talking about then you will be betting on nearly every spin.

Monte Carlo

[TwoCatSam]

I'm all ears.  How do you play?

[bloomone2002]

I have an ear to. how do yo play?
Bloom

[TwoCatSam]

Alright!!  All you guys with ears, give a listen!

[geoff365]

"If reduced enough you can determine where in the cycle you are and enter fairly quickly."

I don't agree. The entry point is hard work to find.

A - B is very volatile. 1- 37 is less yet on both an entry point is hard to find.

[lucky_strike]

I will use EC bets to explain

I'm all ears!

Cheers LS

[rob567]

Ok I will explain it again,

Take a simple EC bet, a coin toss

The odds are ½
There are no other odds available, no variations, there are only the choice is heads and tails and the only other information that can be used is distribution of series.

Roulette EC bets are not really like a coin toss. They are like a bag of marbles.  
We have a bag with 18 -black and 18 red marbles and then 2 green ones (I[ch8216]m going to use an American wheel because it gives more extreme house edges). No matter how many marbles you take out there are still the same number in the bag.
You can[ch8217]t bet on the green marbles with the same payout, therefore you will get slightly less that 50% odds.
At this point you have approximately the same conditions of  a coin toss.

Except in roulette you have 3 bags of marbles not one.
Can this be exploited somehow?
Well if you were to bet on taking a marble from each bag in succession and betting on each bag separately then  no, but in roulette you can bet on more than one bag at a time.

Lets use only 2 bags to simplify things. The other bag will have 18 white and 18 blue marbles plus 2 green ones also.
Since both bets a based on a singular occurrence then how are they related.  What is the parent event?

The parent event is another bag of marbles. This is what we actually bet on, Except these marbles have 2 colors.
They can be red/white, red/blue, black/white and black/blue, the green ones would become green/green.

Now you have two coins to bet.
You can bet 2 coins on either bag A or B, or bet one coin on each bag.

In the first option you have the same thing as the coin toss. But in the second option you have changed the odds. There is a 23.6% chance you will win 100%, a 28.9% chance you will lose 100% and the rest of the time you break even.

Now lets look at all the things that have happened.

By only taking 2 choices of opposites R/W & BK/BL
In terms of the odds of profit we have something. T
The win/loss is a wash. Therefore 47.2% for a win 57.9% to lose remains.
The house edge is increased 50% from 5.26% to 7.9%.
What have we gain from the increase in house edge is a reduction of volatility by 50%
Since to create a situation with 19 of the same, like we saw on 02/05/08 in Wiesbaden. We would require the same 9 specific numbers to repeat 19 times. Which is beyond statistical probability. (approx 1E12)

The question is this exploitable?
For those of you convinced on progression, yes very much so. It just reduced a very rare series of 19 to either a series of 9 or 10. But it also increases playing time because occurrences are spread out.
For someone like me who uses a flat betting system based on predictable volatility and statistical deviation, then yes also.

Monte Carlo

[TwoCatSam]

MC

Thank you for that explanation.  I have printed it and will study it thoroughly.  I do not understand the math, but I will get it.

Samster

[TwoCatSam]

Monte Carlo

By "volatility" you mean Black followed by Black to infinity?

So a pure lack of volatility would be Black followed by Red followed by Black to infinity?

Or do I have it backwards?

Sam

[rob567]

TwoCatSam

Yes that is what I mean.

I don't want to use the term variance because it is a specific reference in satistics related to standard deviation specifically.

Here it is a measure on a xy axis profit over spins. Which is the standard graph you have all been using.

Now as you plot the distribution of series on it you get a wave pattern. What I am doing is changing the wave pattern so it becomes more shallow by altering selection criteria so that the odd of occuance remain the same in relation to the bet 1:2 but
the odds of repeated occurance are reduced due to complexity in premutations.

Monte Carlo

[TwoCatSam]

Mr. Monte

I am studying your math and have made some inroads.  I am interested in your increase in the house edge, both in this post and the one to wannawin about the Flaming Torch system

I devised and discarded that method of betting about three years ago.  I think mine was as good or better than the one posted, but I've yet to study it.

Sam

[TwoCatSam]

-