Tracking the L

[Coxx16]

This is my simple idea for tracking the L. Lets say that we wanted to track and bet the Ls only.  My idea is to track single L or wlw aginst a series of L such as LL,LLL,LLLL etc (the length of the series does not matter). I am wondering if there is a celing as to how many single L comes out before a series of L comes out. If there is max limit. Then is there a point at which the there is a series of L after x amout of single L about 50%,30%,20% etc of the time? (50% of a large number of results. Lets say 1 billion rng spins or so).
I will try to give and example below:

LnolinkswLnolinksLwLwLL

On this example we see that there is a series on the 5th L. So that would be a win while betting after 5 Ls in a row.

I am going to continue from the example above:

LnolinkswLnolinksLwLwLLnolinkswLL

Ok now our count is reset because we just saw a series of L. It just so happens that on the next non consecutive L, we have another series. This would be a win after betting on 1 L in a row.

  Basically, I want to see the percentages for each stage of the L. By that I mean what is the percentage of W to L one the first L in a row, the 2nd L in a row, the third L in a row etc....etc. Each stage being independant of the other stages. Each stage will form its own LW series. Here is a quick example of what I mean.

1.)LLWWLLLLLLLWLLLLWWLLWWLWWL

2.)LLLLLLWWWLLLLLWLLL

3.)WLLWLLLLWLLL

4.)WLWWLLLWLL

5.)WLWLLL

6.)LLWL

7.)LLW

8.)LL

9.)LW

10.)L

11.)W

These results were from a quick test of the idea and tell us absolutely nothing. I think a larger test could prove intresting. Once again, this is not a way of playing the LW, just my idea of another way that we could study them.

[gizmotron]

I need one more thing to determine these wL odds. Was this a coin flip test (50/50)? If it was 2 of 3 columns/sections then each bet choice was not 50/50. wL's are the result of the odds for each spin. For instance you can get good trends in the wL's if you bet the ECs. You will get more wins in the two columns/ two sections out of three. You will get more losses if you bet the single column or single section(dozens.) I think in the long run you can make changes by betting the opposite of all streaks of L's. You run a good chance of doing this when streaks run in packs of streaks. They actually do that at times. If you were to hunt dominance conditions that persist in trends of repeating groupings of more than four at a time then you can take advantage of that while it continuous. This is a common trait.

[Coxx16]

  Ah I see. These are the dozens. I read the wheel frequence analysis document and got the idea for this. I was actually using the 4 spin sequence system (turbo Genius).  I just wanted to see if there was a level that did not defy the odds, but lowered the volitility.  I was studying when the pattern actually does repeat (betting one dozen).

[Coxx16]

My idea is basically to study gamblers fallacy. Most guys say ok im going to bet every event for x number of events.

So I wanted to study each event individually.  so a 5 step progression would look like this:

1.)
2.)
3.)
4.)
5.)

Now if I won on the 3rd bet I would write:

1.)L
2.)L
3.)W
4.)
5.)

I won on the 3rd bet. So thats the end of the cycle. A new cycle begins. So lets say on the next cycle, I win on the 2nd bet:

1.)LL
2.)LW
3.)W
4.)
5.)

So on and so forth. I want to study volitility at each stage of a theoretically unlimited progression. How many times does each stage (on average) L in a row, how many times does it win in a row? If I took each stage and gave it its own secondary LW registry...what would it look like? What if I gave that registry a registry? I dont have a progression or system in mind. I just want to study and see what happens. Dunno, mabe this is stupid though.

Also, this allows me to look at each stage of a progression as though there were no progression at all. Each stage is independant of the other stages. I think this a good way of studying roulette, because each bet we make is independant of the bet before it. Hence, "no memory betting". (As spike might say)

[Coxx16]

-