Blocked

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Herb

  • Guest
Re: No... My Take On The Law.
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.

*

bombus

  • Top Member
  • *****
  • 1843
Re: No... My Take On The Law.
May 04, 2009, 03:18:49 AM
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!



*

Number Six

  • Top Member
  • *****
  • 706
  • COUNTER-SCAMTELLIGENCE
Re: No... My Take On The Law.
May 04, 2009, 09:37:26 AM
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.


Herb

  • Guest
Re: No... My Take On The Law.
May 04, 2009, 12:52:16 PM
Quote
It'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? 

*

Number Six

  • Top Member
  • *****
  • 706
  • COUNTER-SCAMTELLIGENCE
Re: No... My Take On The Law.
May 05, 2009, 09:08:29 AM
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.

Herb

  • Guest
Re: No... My Take On The Law.
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 due or that the numbers that have hit are more likely to hit because they are due?

*

bombus

  • Top Member
  • *****
  • 1843
Re: No... My Take On The Law.
May 05, 2009, 10:34:55 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.

*

Number Six

  • Top Member
  • *****
  • 706
  • COUNTER-SCAMTELLIGENCE
Re: No... My Take On The Law.
May 05, 2009, 10:47:39 PM
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.

*

simon

  • Medium Member
  • ****
  • 442
  • VLSroulette.com Member
Re: No... My Take On The Law.
May 06, 2009, 05:52:55 AM
Quote
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

............ what does "they are do" mean? 

*

bombus

  • Top Member
  • *****
  • 1843
Re: No... My Take On The Law.
May 06, 2009, 06:31:50 AM
............ what does "they are do" mean? 

I think he meant dew, I mean doo, I mean due. :good:

*

simon

  • Medium Member
  • ****
  • 442
  • VLSroulette.com Member
Re: No... My Take On The Law.
May 06, 2009, 10:57:02 AM
Quote
I 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.

*

Number Six

  • Top Member
  • *****
  • 706
  • COUNTER-SCAMTELLIGENCE
Re: No... My Take On The Law.
May 07, 2009, 09:35:56 AM
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.

 

Popular pages: