Popular pages:

Roulette System

The Roulette Systems That Really Work

Roulette Computers

Hidden Electronics That Predict Spins

Roulette Strategy

Why Roulette Betting Strategies Lose

Roulette System

The Honest Live Online Roulette Casinos

Reducing Volatility @ TwoCatSam

Started by rob567, May 08, 2008, 01:58:49 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

TwoCatSam

Monte

I will study on it.........

Thanks

Sam

rob567

Bloom

you said (in quotes):

"Ok, what you are doing is taking a limited dataset and determining what is the trend for the most likely event on the next spin"

That's pretty much the definition of analytical extrapolation.

"but in order to do that. We must assign to the [exprapolate from] Red vs Black, multiple indicators, which establish ingmore[less] flexibility in our determination of the value and less volativity in within the multiple indicators.

"The question is what happens most on opposite [the right] ends of the curve. "

Essentially correct but you are confusing one part of the equation with another. At this stage you don't even need a graph.

"So, that in theory with each limited dataset, we will project what is the resultant that is 80% most likely to occur"

I have never bothered to work out the exact number for accuracy, I know it is much higher than the median. Maybe i will work it out later.

"within the 50/50 game of which is likely less than a overall 50/50 game due to the zero."

ok

"So if you get the formula correct from one spin projection to another, then it is a likelihood of 62% hit rate. I don[ch8217]t know if this is correct or not."

Neither do i because I have never calculated the number exactly.

Monte Carlo

bloomone2002

Ok, I think I need my math wiz friend for this or basically an applied example from you. MC are you still working this out in your head? Are you using this method in actual play?
At this point, I feel I'm explaining or attempting to explain your methods more than you and that is fustrating. I'm starting to lose faith in the process and its potential because of no clear direction. Even the greatest ideas must have clear direction, otherwise it becomes ignorance.
Please give an applied example, please?

Simplfied example
ECs format with limited dataset
1,R,O
2,R,O
3,B,E
extrapolation is below:
Resultant= R or B and why? and what is the probability for accuracy? and how is it determined? What is the hit rate calculation?

Depending upon your response this maybe my last post on this subject.
Bloom

TwoCatSam

OK, betting both Red and Odd here's the shake-out............

R/O  WIN 2
R/E  PUSH
B/O PUSH
B/E  LOSE 2

What are the chances of red and odd hitting on the same spin?  18/37 = 48.65%   48.65 X 48.65 = 23.67%.  The chances of winning two units are 23.76% which is exactly the same as the chance of losing two units.  The two pushes do nothing except give the zero a couple of extra shots at you.

If I'm seeing this wrong, someone tell me.  I need to either understand this or move on.

Sam

rob567

In relationship to what I tried to explain in this post from the begining. (american wheel)

2 EC bets R/B & H/L

PERMUTATIONS

1. R & H
2. R & L
3. B & H
4. B & L

RESTRICT BETS TO #1 & # 2 @ ONE UNIT EACH

IF BET = RH
THEN PAYOUT =

1. +2
2. 0
3. 0
4. -2

IF 0 THEN PAYOUT = -2

ODDS

1 TROUGH 4 = 23.7%
0 = 5.26%

DISTRIBUTION & VOLATILITY

Volatility is reduced because of distribution.

To acheive 19 red in series requires the repeating of 18 specific numbers 19 times.
odds=1/(.47419)=1 in 1,446,143

To acheive 19 red/high in series requires to repeating of 9 specific numbers 19 times.
odds=1/(.23719)=1 in 7.58E11


CONCLUSION

If volatility can be reduced the following can potentially be exploited:

i) Swings in bankroll value will be reduced therby allowing the player to wait through negitive play due to adverse clustering in system play without hittng his daily loss limit.
ii) Reduction in maximum series will allow player to apply betting progressions that exceed calculated allowable risk countermeasured through table limits, but at a cost of longer timelines
iii) Reduction in volatility will allow for greater potential in designing systems. Systems designed to exploit short series will see less negitive potential.
iv) Reduction in volatility will allow for systems that exploit inverse betting criteria to be more accurate in gauging inflextion points in the curve.

That's about as simple of an explaination as I can think of.

Monte Carlo



















bloomone2002

Quote

CONCLUSION

If volatility can be reduced the following can potentially be exploited:

i) Swings in bankroll value will be reduced therby allowing the player to wait through negitive play due to adverse clustering in system play without hittng his daily loss limit.
Sample Resultant

ii) Reduction in maximum series will allow player to apply betting progressions that exceed calculated allowable risk countermeasured through table limits, but at a cost of longer timelines
Sample Resultant

iii) Reduction in volatility will allow for greater potential in designing systems. Systems designed to exploit short series will see less negitive potential.
Sample Resultant

iv) Reduction in volatility will allow for systems that exploit inverse betting criteria to be more accurate in gauging inflextion points in the curve.
Sample Resultant


Monte Carlo
Ok thanks MC, we are getting there. Thanks for the explaination. Now what I would ask is for each of the 4 conclusion statements, please give a simple resultant example, if your concept is applied with a system for these types of bets?
Bloom

rob567

 For illustrative purposes only.
I don't recommend doing this all the time without other rules.

I just hit print screen at Spielbank around 6:30 tonight and did this while having a coffee.
I am going to try and attach a scan of the printout.

Using only red/odd and black/even simply because the are the most common due to a natural skew in board distribution. Betting the table limit of 100 each or 200 per bet. I leave the table at +400/-400. Just alternate the bet on each win or loss.

Once again for illustrative purposes only.

Table 1

20      -BE       entry point
1      -RO      -RO      -+200      =+200
9      -RO      -BE      -(-200)      =0
12      -RE      -RO      -
25      -RO      -RO      -+200      =+200
13      -BO      -BE      -
18      -RE      -BE      -
4      -BE      -BE      -+200      =+400 exit point

using just red/black you would have

E/WLWLLLL = (-300) since 100 is the max bet

using just odd even you would have

E/WLLLWWL =(-100)

It's the volatility that kills you. What i have taught you solves that problem. Essentially it's oo many of the same in a row.

Since I don't want to spend all night writing this: here is a summary.

Table 2 +400 in 9 spins
Table 3 +400 in 5 spins
Table 4 +400 in 7 spins
Table 5  (-400) in 11 spins but I took it to the bottom of the page for the hell of it and got to (-200) and if I didn't have the zero I would have made the +400 in 5 spins. I am pretty certain I would have made it back to 0 at a minimum if I had more numbers.

Conclusion:

+1200 in less than 1½ hours table time.

Monte Carlo

p.s. I tried to attach an image file to this thing but I got no idea how. If anyone knows I have the scan.


numbers on the table if you want

tab 1

20
1
9
12
25
13
18
4
6
5
18
6
15
6
25
11
14
26
8


Tab 2

13
28
24
18
6
25
27
5
35
34
24
32
17
10
34
31
33
12

Tab 3

24
14
33
31
7
6
35
0
28
14
18
20
1
33
20
10
8
5

tab 4

29
23
35
13
24
11
17
17
7
23
11
14
35
12
21
23
27
19
22

tab 5

2
27
12
25
27
0
29
26
23
23
6
23
0
28
10
34
20
31
27


All are from the same moment in time, I started each time at the very first one and took whatever numbers came up.


bloomone2002

MC thanks for the sample workout that was very clear for me. Ok, going back to your 4 conclusion statements from reply #34, I can apply the first point. the third point, I understand where you are going but I dont know quite yet what are the best choices. Now points 2 and 4, I need a little more help. So, let just deal with point 2 first.

Quote
CONCLUSION

If volatility can be reduced the following can potentially be exploited:

ii) Reduction in maximum series will allow player to apply betting progressions that exceed calculated allowable risk countermeasured through table limits, but at a cost of longer timelines

Monte Carlo
"Reduction in maximumum series", assumption: I guess if the volatility is reduced, then the length of the session is reduced because the series of spins is reduced, so you only need play a handful of spins to acheive goal?
Please give an example of: "will allow player to apply betting progressions that exceed calculated allowable risk countermeasured through table limits, but at a cost of longer timelines." I guess that has something to do with placing bets at the table limit? please associate your examples or example directly to this point.
Thanks

Bloom

rob567

Bloom

The length of the session is reduced so much because I used a flat bet.

As for an example of a progression, you don[ch8217]t need me to do that. It is everyone here who argues over the virtue of progressions, I am the one who says they are redundant. They drag out the time at the table and expose you to added downside risk. They put the capital G into Gambling. But I have already said enough about that elsewhere on this board.

The reason that this exploit helps you with this is because table maximums on the outside bets are calculated by the casino to virtually guarantee that the law of series will overcome any progression except ones that wait for rare events like 10 reds or more in a row. Which means that you will win your 5 buck start progression once every couple sessions. If you start your progressions earlier then loss ratios will claw back those winnings with painful losses. Hardly a threat to them, more like an amusement. Mathematically it doesn[ch8217]t matter, the odds are virtually the same, the timeline is just pushed.

But if you halve the statistical odds of series then you expose them to twice as much danger of losing. Still with the doubling of timeline occurrence you could find yourself at the table as a job not a simple quick way to earn a few bucks. Better to stick with flatbeds that mitigate risk though low loss recovery ratios.


Monte Carlo

bloomone2002

Ok, MC, I just re-read your thread on progressions and I'm open minded to your views and after re-reading
your explaination here I do understand. However, concerning conclusion point#2 it seems that the point is contradictory to other statements made. Are you saying that the benefit is that you get shorter amount of bets but you have to wait for the right time to play, which means you still have longer overall play time at the table. If this assumption is true, it contradicts playing about every spin. This is why I confused by the statement. As I stated before, I work with words in my profession more than most and I've come to realize that word structuring means different things to different people. So a visual application accompliment is key for my understanding, especially when explaining something of technical value.

Ok, ignoring progressions per say

  • What is an example of a bet that exceed calculated allowable risk?
  • What is the calculated allowable risk in a particular scenario?
  • Please give an example of the calculated risk being countermeasured through the table limit?
  • Also, in an illustration please show why the previous will cause longer timelines? and longer timelines of what? is it actual bets made or actual time at the table or both?
Bloom

rob567

Bloom

[ch8220] However, on point #2 it seems that the point is contradictory to other statements made.
Are you saying that the benefit is that you get shorter amount of bets but you have to wait for the right time to play, which means you still have longer overall play time at the table.[ch8221]

No I play every spin starting almost immediately, I only need to read the marquee. I don[ch8217]t wait around. The above example shows that. There is no contradiction.

[ch8220]So a visual application accompliment is key for my understanding, especially when explaining something of technical value.[ch8221]

Agreed, and I believe the learning experience gained from doing yourself is the best learning tool. So look at the example above. It is relatively simple to work it out for yourself a few times. I even mentioned the parameters. I don[ch8217]t have the time to provide repeated examples of the same thing.


As for your questions:

1. Casinos don't want more than a 5 or 6 max fold progression using a marty. That is why they set the outside table limit the way that they do. Low enough for punters and not a wide enough spread for progression players.

2. Whatever risk the casino wants to accept as terms of the bet. They decide that not you. Work out the math for yourself. All odds and repercussions are calculatable.

3. The table limit is a countermeasure in roulette. The real concern here is if enough people would learn what I am talking about then the casinos will be forced to narrow the spread by half. The lower limit  is directly related to the upper even on high roller tables.

4. If you don't understand why the timeline (x-axis)  has been lengthened then you don't understand any of what I am saying and you need to go back to page one and start again. I have explained this in as simple terms as I can think of and do not plan to repeat myself ad nauseam.

Monte Carlo

lucky_strike


Well i have read the posts and got dizzy in the head :) i think that is a good thing :)

Well M Carlo i think i understand the concept and i will try it.

Thanks for sharing.

Cheers Lucky Strike

bloomone2002

Quote
CONCLUSION

If volatility can be reduced the following can potentially be exploited:

iv) Reduction in volatility will allow for systems that exploit inverse betting criteria to be more accurate in gauging inflextion points in the curve.

That's about as simple of an explaination as I can think of.

Monte Carlo
Ok, MC, i'm just about there with my understanding
What is an inverse betting criteria? and how did you associate your examples to the inverse betting criteria?
Bloom

lucky_strike


I have a program that converts any txt file with spins to 3 different columns, RB HL EO, if you want it let me know, i send it to you, PM me with your email. That would speed up things and make the testing go fast :)



Cheers Lucky Strike

rob567

Bloom and anyone else following this,

I thought I would have gone further into this than I have but it is obvious that it is far to complex for everyone. I haven[ch8217]t even started to explain the mathematics and we are at 45 replies on this one point which was intended to be a minor precursor to the rest of the explanation.

Look at it this way I have basically described a brick (exploit) in which to construct at house (system). I do not intend to spend two hours a day writing things out 5 different ways on each point. I don[ch8217]t have the time and I have far too much work in mathematics to put that kind of time into this.  The mathematics that I am seeing used by most roulette players is the equivalent of sandcastle houses and every time a wave of  bad luck rolls in you are going back to the beginning again. You have to get the fundamentals right and you have to understand what causes all the other systems to fail on a structural level.

I assure you the game is mathematically beatable in the long run. I have given you at least the first piece and now you will have to assemble the rest on your own. I was prepared to spend more time explaining the actual mechanics and mathematics, unfortunately I realize now that I would take too much time. What time I do wish to spend on roulette I would rather use actually playing the game.

Incidentally if you take the principle I showed you, then take the square root of the initial matrix and multiply it by the inverse of the second criteria you will maintain the reduced volatility while returning the house edge back to the original value. Thereby negating what you gave up in the first equation but keeping what you gained. (this is not what I am taking about in conclusion #4, that is even more complex)

I wish you all luck in your search. Maybe I will check back in a year or so to see if you have gotten anywhere.

Monte Carlo

Lucky Strike, thank you for the offer of that program. It is unnecessary. I already know what I do works. I no longer need to test it. The casino confirms that every time I go there.

rob567

-