New consept that has never being seen before that may produce a flat EC winner

[malcop]

It really does seem like an epic system - BUT, and there is always a but, how on earth would you keep up with tracking something like this?

I could do this just using paper and only 1 EC, reducing the events to 6, as MOP did, but even so it would still take me over a minute to get my act together.

[malcop]

I just thought I need to explain the different spreadsheets I attached.

MAX RC - MAX DIFF = Maximum Run/Change & Maximum Difference.
MIN RC - MAX DIFF = Minimum Run/Change & Maximum Difference.

MAX RC - MAX DIFF - RESET +1 = Maximum Run/Change & Maximum Difference & Reset at +1
MIN RC - MAX DIFF  - RESET +1 = Minimum Run/Change & Maximum Difference & Reset at +1

MAX RC - MAX DIFF - RESET +1 â€" PLUSCOUP = Maximum Run/Change & Maximum Difference & Reset at +1 & PLUSCOUP Progression.

My favourite way of using the basic informations is MAX RC - MAX DIFF - RESET +1 = Maximum Run/Change & Maximum Difference & Reset at +1 and also  MAX RC - MAX DIFF - RESET +1 â€" PLUSCOUP = Maximum Run/Change & Maximum Difference & Reset at +1 & PLUSCOUP Progression, but I do not like how high some of the units can get, even though it shows  winning sessions in the 100+ range.  This is why I was asking about progressions for all EC’s in my other thread.  At the moment I’m quite liking GLC’s “Very controlled Progression for Even Chances “

As I said at the start I even applied this bet selection to TBL & OTBL, TBL = R & OTBL = C, of course you have to play a few more spins before you can start tracking but it works just the same, I did it because I wanted to see if you could apply this method to any type of Bet Selection and it can if you think in terms of the R = W & C = L, then you just have to calculate how many spins you would need for tracking.

And I just had a thought, you could even apply this to Ego’s Series & Singles idea each change would be the signal to record an event, I quite like this idea but this would have to be coded in some sort of tracker application.

The first 9 events would be something like this A B A B AAA BB AB AA BB.

OK think I have said enough but once you fully understand the basics of this method you will see that this is not just a one trick pony, it can be used in any way you wish to use it.

One more thing when Run or Change is moving away or towards each other the STD Deviation (Z score) is reflecting that, but we found just using the difference pretty much matches the Z Score as to what we would have selected.

Thanks

malcop

[Master_of_pockets]

It really does seem like an epic system - BUT, and there is always a but, how on earth would you keep up with tracking something like this?

Thanks Maui and guys.
Maui and the others keep in mind that this IS NOT a system!
This is a tracking method and from it we will come up with a system.
So do NOT ask questions like : Where do I bet in this situation? etc.

To answer maui question of how we can track this ...the answer is that it can only be tracked with a program...this is why i needed malcop in the1st place.
So if playing online(I don't) you can have a excel tracker , but when playing in a real casino(I do) we must build a mobile program...in most casinos allow to use mobiles as long as you don't stare in the wheel in each spin and pushing mobile buttons(because they are afraid of VB Rcs)

When I 1st came up with this tracking was to be able to find DEVIATIONS of the RUNS and CHANGES on the Ecs and bet the ones that were aligned with the same color(represending with 1 color the bigest deviation that was coming not from only 1 event but from more than 1).
It is supposed (if we leave out the GF) that the power of this tracking is coming from THE TOTAL DEVIATION OF MORE THAN ONE EVENT THAT IS REPRESENDED BY BETTING JUST 1 COLOR(OR E/O OR L/H).
My 1st thought was that 1 single event can get to a very big deviation(as ego has witness) and that by betting it we could lose....but if 3 or 4 events or more has come to deviation that can be bet with the same Ec then it would be safer to bet because it would be a rare thing for all of them to grow grow grow....

Malcop suggested to bet the grow of the deviations wile I suggested to bet the Correction of the deviations. 
Now it in your judgment according to your logic and experience on the ecs deviations to make a system with rules from this concept of recording.

[Master_of_pockets]

the ways of tracking the differences of the runs and changes are 2

1)z-score STD
2)just spin(runs and changes amounts) differences

malcop made both ways in sheets.

both sheets have adjastements of inserting HOW much deference we need to have in order to bet...

For example marigny system suggests to bet when 1 event has a 3.00 StD...
With my way of tracking it is supposed that we can have 3 events(that are represended with the same color for the STD to correct it self) that the one has 2.00 STD the 2nd 1.5 STD and the 2d 2.2 STD...so by adding all of them we are having a total deviation of 5.7STD.

Is this adding std events a real help?And what is the best way to play it? this is what we have to find out.

[Master_of_pockets]

This post is for explaining to you the why this tracking is being made and why it may have a potential

1 Event (Run - Change of an Ec) can grow and after this it is supposed that the growing will stop and the balance will come.
But there will be times that the growing will continue and may get to 6-7 or more STD.

But if we combine more than 1 events that are growing together and can be bet for the correction of the growing with the same EC then it should be harder for all of them to grow at the same time...

Lets say that we are tracking 6 events(this is what I was doing in the casino with pen and casino card)
we are recording all 6 and we see that 1 of them is starting to deviate a lot ,wile the rest are close to each other....this is a no bet because this 1 single event can grow as much as it wants.
  But lets say that we see 2-3 events that are growing together....
there will be spins that all 2-3 will be represented for the growing correction with the same BET(e.g. red) this is the time to place bet.....
Because it is supposed that its a lot more difficult for all the 2-3 events to grow at the same time...

this was the idea that made me come up with this concept .

I hear opinions.

[Drazen]

total deviation of 5.7STD.

This could be definitely interesting concept for some because deviation of 5.7 STD has NEVER SEEN IN ROULETTE HISTORY! lol

[Ralph]

You may bet numbers then, numbers which contain the movement of all EC: s
I have been looking to this, but found it a bit difficult to track.

[Master_of_pockets]

This could be definitely interesting concept for some because deviation of 5.7 STD has NEVER SEEN IN ROULETTE HISTORY!!!

Drazen a 5.7 deviation is happening all the time in roulette....as ego has posted a lot of times he had seen deviations of 9.00 and more...and i have also seen it....
Sometimes with the sheet we saw STD of 20-25 that were coming from 4-5 events at the same time.

The pont is to see IF this deviation adding (that is coming from a lot of events combined) can give us a bigger accuracy or not.

[Master_of_pockets]

With this way of tracking we can look DEEPER in the skin pf randomess because are are monitoring in every spin what happened in more than 1 events that are represended or not with the same Ec...so if the events are connected the we have incredible accuracy in the Ecs

[Drazen]

Drazen a 5.7 deviation is happening all the time in roulette....as ego has posted a lot of times he had seen deviations of 9.00 and more...and i have also seen it....

I wouldnt realy like to mock you, fight, make smart as* or something. You are older member and you have my respect as that.

But my dear mr. MOP you obviously don't have closest clue what you just wrote....

That is not possible not even in SF roulette movies

With no offense you can take on line courses in statistics, you are missing very basics of it..

Cheers

Drazen

[Master_of_pockets]

So what You are saying is that an ecs can not deviate by a 5.7 STD? 

If this is so...lets ask ego ecs guru about it.

I think You are missing something here or I didn t understand what u are trying to say.

[Drazen]

So what You are saying is that an ecs can not deviate by a 5.7 STD? 

If this is so...lets ask ego ecs guru about it.

I think You are missing something here.

Yeah, we should definitely...

Cheers

[Master_of_pockets]

search ego posts and u will see clearly that he has seen a lot of times a deviation to grow from 3.00 to 4.00 to 5.00 to 6.00 etc.

[Master_of_pockets]

The members posts before malcop explanation post are deleted in order to have a smaller topic.
I did it as I already told that.

Any ideas on the concept?

[Bayes]

With my way of tracking it is supposed that we can have 3 events(that are represended with the same color for the STD to correct it self) that the one has 2.00 STD the 2nd 1.5 STD and the 2d 2.2 STD...so by adding all of them we are having a total deviation of 5.7STD.

Is this adding std events a real help?And what is the best way to play it? this is what we have to find out.

MOP,

I like the concept and thanks to you and Malcop for your work. However, I have to point out that you can't simply add STD's in the way that you have and end up with a valid STD. The correct way to combine STD's is actually fairly complex. If you like I can explain it in the math section.

Alternatively, you could just define another measure of deviation (one which is simpler to calculate) and find out how extreme the deviations are according to this measure. It doesn't really matter how you define the measure as long as you stick to it  consistently. The point is you can't use the STD as it's defined and just add them the way you've been doing.