For about 1 month I have thought of a unique way to record the deviations of the Ecs with a way that has never thought of before.
This way is based on the concept of the deviation balance (Marigny etc).
I m sure that Ego(that is an Ecs deviation guru will love this and will make him think of tweeking the concept(this is what I hope).Also math guys like Bayes will like it.
The only person that knows about it is Malcop.He is a person that I respect.
I explained him the concept and he made some Excel sheets to test it faster.I really thank him about his time and effort.
The concept works very nice most of the times but it has times that has some downs(not many).
It s based only the Ecs flat betting.
We experienced a lot of times wins of +40 chips with only a Br of 10-15 chips.
The reason I would like to expose this concept is because I would like to give new air to the forum and also chat each other to see if it can be more accurate....
I remember ego a lot of times saying that Marigny is like doing VB on the Ecs(as closer we can get) and this concept of mine is giving a 3d dimension to this betting accuracy.
I would like to please Malcop to expose the full concept because English is his 1st language and he will do it a lot better than I would.(sorry for asking you to do this Malcop , if you don't have the mood or the time I ll try to do it myself)
Gentlemen sit tight and wait for Malcop next post...I am sure this concept will be loved and will be discussed a lot over the next weeks/months/years.
I just spoke with Malcop and we both agreed that if there is a real interest from the forum members about it he will post the concept.
He told me(and I agree with him) that he hates topics that just have a lot of views but no responds and for this so unique concept it will be a wrong thing to happen.
So its in ur decision ppl to say if you would like it to be posted or not.
Let me tell you that I started playing with this concept in my casino with pen and papper and win lots of visits at least +10 chips with Br of just 5-6 chips and this is why I needed to have a program to test it faster and if would be proved a long run winner to make a mobile program and take it in the casino in order to play all the ecs together...(because the tracking of it is pretty hard and time consuming) ... this is were Malcop came in.
I need to tell you ppl that IF anyome will like to use this concept and play he will sure need a code/tracker to do so....it s not an easy and fast tracking.
The POINT of this thread is for all of us to think of the best way to apply this concept of when to bet in order to gain the best accurasy on the bets(if this can happen...because as we know spins are independent)
I also need to tell you that after Malcop post of the concept I will delete all the privious posts in order for having a shorter and clean thread to work on.
thank you.
ray after Malcop explanation post if someone would like to test our ways that we tryed to take advantage of this concept he is willing to post the sheets...because we made a lot of versions to see which one is working for the best...
He and I agree that the last sheet is the best so far
I want for 1 more time to remind that :
When the concept will be posted the prosedure should be like this
1)Comment the consept of if its good or not
2)Post opinions oh how we can take the best advantage of it by making a system
3)Then if you like you can test the sheets
But the priority is to find the best way to apply the concept...so don't wait for ready systems...(Sam hold your horses :P)although we have made a few and we will also post them.
The memebers that will follow the topic and understand the consept will see and witness of WHAT THE RANDOMNESS OF A ROULETTE WHEEL CAN DO.Meanning that you will be able to see how many and how much deviations the randomness can produce at the same time(you will underatdn when u will test and observe)
No recording concept has ever go so deep into randomness
So even if no winning system will be produced from this concept a sirious education will be made.
I for sure changed a lot in my mind about the deviations and i realised more than ever in my skin the how much indepemdent every spin is.
anyway lets hope all of us will make something good(system) from this
“It’s all in the Dot’s.......â€
That’s what MOP said to me when he introduced me to his Bet Selection concept.
I remember him telling me on Skype get a piece of paper and follow what I explain to you, I would be lying if I did not say I was totally confused, I sort of grasped what he was saying but not fully, so I told him the best way forward was if we just broke it down into stages, I would code the spreadsheet one stage at a time and by doing so learn and fully understand his method as we go along.
I typed up the instructions for this method in a word document, but when pasting into here lost all formating, so instead it is in a pdf attached at the end of this post.
Thanks
malcop
I could not attach all the files in last post so here are the rest.
Thanks
Malcop
forgot to say those that can look at the sheets, it is all controled from the first page that says "Hunter" When you enter the spin numbers it feeds the other three sheets for each of the ECs.
Been doing this for about 4 hours now, so going to bed now, any questions I wll try and answer before I go out in the morning.
Thanks
malcop
So if you have 6 runs and 3 changes you bet for changes?
Looks interesting however it isnt clear to me just yet. Will have a look tonight when I have a bit more time to digest it.
Thanks for you hard work guys.
MM
Hello ...
I just find this topic - can some one tell me in what page Malcop and MOP describe the method.
attached with reply 38 is a pdf named "Hunter" :)
really interesting idea.
I will analyze all this flow of information and come back with question or test result ^-^
Thanks for the sharing :thumbsup:
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?
Quote from: Tomla021 on Aug 22, 11:13 PM 2012
So if you have 6 runs and 3 changes you bet for changes?
No Tom, not that simple, you could have a situation where we have black, the colour we are going to bet on, and it is representing for examle you could have Black, as our selection, and it is representing 3 Runs & 2 changes, that is what is uniuqe about this method, we are only comparing Runs & Changes for each indivudual event, to get our colour for just that one event, that is most inportant thing to understand.
Quote from: Maui13 on Aug 23, 03:42 AM 2012
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.
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 (link:://rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=7786.msg89324#msg89324)“
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
Quote from: Maui13 on Aug 23, 03:42 AM 2012
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.
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.
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.
Quote from: Master_of_pockets on Aug 23, 06:29 AM 2012
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
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.
Quote from: drazen_cro on Aug 23, 06:46 AM 2012
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.
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
Quote from: Master_of_pockets on Aug 23, 06:50 AM 2012
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
So what You are saying is that an ecs can not deviate by a 5.7 STD? ;D
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.
Quote from: Master_of_pockets on Aug 23, 07:00 AM 2012
So what You are saying is that an ecs can not deviate by a 5.7 STD? ;D
If this is so...lets ask ego ecs guru about it.
I think You are missing something here.
Yeah, we should definitely... :)
Cheers
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.
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?
Quote from: Master_of_pockets on Aug 23, 06:29 AM 2012
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.
yes bayes this is what I thought too when I saw that the accurasy of the system wasn t the expected one.
So can u help in taking the best possible advantage that we can with this concept?
Since you've been overestimating the deviations, the results may be better if they're accurately measured. Apart from that, I'll give it some thought as to other ways of using the concept. ;)
thanks man.
You and ego was the 1st members that come on my mind for tweaking when I thought to post the concept.
For what it's worth, 5 STD's is about the limit. Of course you can get freak events like 32 reds in a row (-5.7 STD's) The worst I've seen on the EC's is 5 reds in 40 spins (-4.7). Even something like 700 spins without a number hitting is only -4.4. What you have to be careful of with chasing deviations is that because you're looking for them, you will see extreme deviations more often than if you weren't. Sadly, that's the case with all triggers, so often this cancels out any advantage you think you might get by waiting for the trigger.
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 23, 08:26 AM 2012
For what it's worth, 5 STD's is about the limit. Of course you can get freak events like 32 reds in a row (-5.7 STD's) The worst I've seen on the ECs is 5 reds in 40 spins (-4.7). Even something like 700 spins without a number hitting is only -4.4. What you have to be careful of with chasing deviations is that because you're looking for them, you will see extreme deviations more often than if you weren't. Sadly, that's the case with all triggers, so often this cancels out any advantage you think you might get by waiting for the trigger.
@ MOP
So in the end you are the one who got this a bit wrong, you see? ;)
Anyway mr. MOP to play with deviations (especialy Marigny) you will definitely need software tracker. Because to do that just by your skills is very very hard and "painfull for patience" in real conditions. Even for the one who have extreme patience, still need to obtain same level of concentration at the same time...
I realy hope forum together with you will develop something on Marigny base + tracker for it.
Will it be public? I dont care i have my own ;)
Cheers
Drazen
I have personaly witness z-score of 6.3 and as ego says he has too.If z-score is not STD then I was refairing to an other thing.
Anyway i just care for the bigger picture here and this is how to take advantage of this multytracking concept way.
Bayes an other way that I have though is to bet for the deviations to grow but only for a little number os spins...then reset and do the same...
it is supposed that by doing it we are catching the runs and the changes by only hunting the Runs.
think of it and tell me.
MOP
I too like this concept, thanks for posting, havent a clue if it gives any kind of advantage or not.
However a couple of years ago I was looking at something that could be a 3rd cousin to this whereby I was tracking 37, 18 pocket sectors on the wheel at the same time looking for patterns etc. what i like about your approach is in respect of using several columns that are deviating rather than just one, which is an obvious idea that flew right past me at the time. I may revisit it.
one other thing where can I find more information about Marigny de Grillaeus??? ideas as any search that I do across the internet seems to come up with incomplete threads on forums, or information in another language from english.
Thanks again
Mike
I found Malcop's explanation a little confusing so I'm not sure I understand exactly how you've been playing, but one way worth trying is to calculate the z-score for each event/stream of data and divide by the number of of events which are indicating a certain tendency, then compare this average with the other side. For example -
You have 10 events/streams recorded and each one has its own z-score. Let's say the z-scores are like this:
Event 1 = -1.3
Event 2 = +0.5
Event 3 = +1.1
Event 4 = -2.2
Event 5 = +1.6
Event 6 = -0.9
Event 7 = +0.8
Event 8 = -1.4
Event 9 = -2.4
Event 10 = +0.3
Now let's suppose you have defined Chops = +ve z-score and Runs = -ve z-score. You add up the the negative and positive z-scores separately:
For Chops - 0.5 + 1.1 + 1.6 + 0.8 + 0.3 = 4.3, and 4.3/5 = +0.86
For Runs - -1.3 -2.2 -0.9 - 1.4 -2.4 = -8.2, and -8.2/5 = -1.6
So depending on whether you want to bet for a correction or a continuation, you would bet against Runs or for them. Also, you may want to wait until the z-score reaches some predetermined value, such as +/- 2.5 or 3.0. Some trial and error needed here. ^-^
But the main thing is it's valid to add up the z-scores and divide to get the average, then you can make a decision based on the result.
Hi All,
WOW I have been away all day, and come back to a bit of a debate going on, can we all play nicely ;D
BTW MOP told me I made some mistakes in the PDF I posted, that may be true it was pretty late when I completed it, so as soon as I can get hold of MOP I will make any correctins needed.
Thanks
malcop
Quote from: Shadowman on Aug 23, 11:13 AM 2012
MOP
I too like this concept, thanks for posting, haven't a clue if it gives any kind of advantage or not.
However a couple of years ago I was looking at something that could be a 3rd cousin to this whereby I was tracking 37, 18 pocket sectors on the wheel at the same time looking for patterns etc. what i like about your approach is in respect of using several columns that are deviating rather than just one, which is an obvious idea that flew right past me at the time. I may revisit it.
one other thing where can I find more information about Marigny de Grillaeus??? ideas as any search that I do across the internet seems to come up with incomplete threads on forums, or information in another language from English.
Thanks again
Mike
Hi Shadowman,
This is the link I have found very usefull from the vlsroulette site : link:://vlsroulette.com/index.php?topic=18185.0 (link:://vlsroulette.com/index.php?topic=18185.0)
Thanks
malcop
Quote from: malcop on Aug 23, 01:33 PM 2012
WOW I have been away all day, and come back to a bit of a debate going on, can we all play nicely ;D
malcop
Hmmmmmm
I thought it was a very civil debate. Did I miss the mud?
Dang!
Sam
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Aug 23, 01:46 PM 2012
Hmmmmmm
I thought it was a very civil debate. Did I miss the mud?
Dang!
Sam
Hi Sam,
Yes it has been very civil, but you know how quickly these things can go south!
malcop
OK Turns out I did not make a mistake in my documnt :thumbsup:
Quote from: Bayes on Aug 23, 11:17 AM 2012
I found Malcop's explanation a little confusing so I'm not sure I understand exactly how you've been playing, but one way worth trying is to calculate the z-score for each event/stream of data and divide by the number of of events which are indicating a certain tendency, then compare this average with the other side. For example -
You have 10 events/streams recorded and each one has its own z-score. Let's say the z-scores are like this:
Event 1 = -1.3
Event 2 = +0.5
Event 3 = +1.1
Event 4 = -2.2
Event 5 = +1.6
Event 6 = -0.9
Event 7 = +0.8
Event 8 = -1.4
Event 9 = -2.4
Event 10 = +0.3
Now let's suppose you have defined Chops = +ve z-score and Runs = -ve z-score. You add up the the negative and positive z-scores separately:
For Chops - 0.5 + 1.1 + 1.6 + 0.8 + 0.3 = 4.3, and 4.3/5 = +0.86
For Runs - -1.3 -2.2 -0.9 - 1.4 -2.4 = -8.2, and -8.2/5 = -1.6
So depending on whether you want to bet for a correction or a continuation, you would bet against Runs or for them. Also, you may want to wait until the z-score reaches some predetermined value, such as +/- 2.5 or 3.0. Some trial and error needed here. ^-^
But the main thing is it's valid to add up the z-scores and divide to get the average, then you can make a decision based on the result.
Hi Bayes,
If you could tell me what part of the document you found confusing, then I update that part of the document with clearer instruction.
Also the Z-score has nothing to do with how the Events are updated, neither is z-score used to find a selection to bet on.
Those figures were from previous versions we tried, at the moment it is all based on the diffrence between the Run & Change for each event.
Thanks
malcop
Yes bayes my 1st idea was to add the z scores and then take out the one from the other and bet the biggest one....but it didn t work
Thanks for the link Malcop
Is there any more interest on this topic?
Anyone testing-thinking?
Master
I have to tell you, this is over my head. I'm going on vacation soon and I will print it out and muddle over it.
Sam
--Are you camping Sam and travelling around.....nice if so.
The topic is great I just need to understand it.
I found the best way to understand this concept is to take baby steps.
So first of all just forget and trying to get bet selections, just concentrate on updating the events after each spin, maybe for practice just use 6 Events or maybe just 3, once you can update the events after each spin with confidance, then get to work on getting a bet direction after you have updated the events after each spin.
Once you have got the bare bones of this method, then you can starter to play around with it, like is it better to use Z=scores, or just use the diffrence betweend the counts(dots).
Remember this is not a system, it is a concept that can be applied in many ways how many is upto you, if you want a ready made system then this is not for you, but if you want something fresh, that with a bit of imagination used in multiple ways then this could be for you.
When I first started on this project for MOP I could not get my head around it, it took me a few days for the idea to sink in, but once it did it was a bit like a light bulb going on in my head.
I have already said in previous posts how I want to move forwared with this concept, just to see where it goes, hopefully you will have in time your own ideas.
Wether there is a lot of intrest in this thread or not, I will still be looking to see if I can exploit the concept.
A lot of you guys know me, and I'm on Skype need help just ask.
Thanks
malcop
Quote from: malcop on Aug 24, 04:44 PM 2012
I found the best way to understand this concept is to take baby steps.
So first of all just forget and trying to get bet selections, just concentrate on updating the events after each spin, maybe for practice just use 6 Events or maybe just 3, once you can update the events after each spin with confidance, then get to work on getting a bet direction after you have updated the events after each spin.
Once you have got the bare bones of this method, then you can starter to play around with it, like is it better to use Z=scores, or just use the diffrence betweend the counts(dots).
Remember this is not a system, it is a concept that can be applied in many ways how many is upto you, if you want a ready made system then this is not for you, but if you want something fresh, that with a bit of imagination used in multiple ways then this could be for you.
When I first started on this project for MOP I could not get my head around it, it took me a few days for the idea to sink in, but once it did it was a bit like a light bulb going on in my head.
I have already said in previous posts how I want to move forwared with this concept, just to see where it goes, hopefully you will have in time your own ideas.
Wether there is a lot of intrest in this thread or not, I will still be looking to see if I can exploit the concept.
A lot of you guys know me, and I'm on Skype need help just ask.
Thanks
malcop
Thats nice words....put nicely Malcop....
I think I might be too stupid to get this...but Im gonna try..
Hi turnerfeck,
I think you can do it, maybe just use one event, then two, three, four etc.
One thing the number of events you use determins how many spins you need before you can start tracking and updating the events.
So if you use two events, you need three spins and so on.
Just break it down into very small peices.
Thanks
malcop
Quote from: malcop on Aug 24, 05:06 PM 2012
Hi turnerfeck,
I think you can do it, maybe just use one event, then two, three, four etc.
One thing the number of events you use determins how many spins you need before you can start tracking and updating the events.
So if you use two events, you need three spins and so on.
Just break it down into very small peices.
Thanks
malcop
Ok...Im gonna come clean here.....
My radar is going off....and Ill explain what I mean.
I get a feel for something is good...and a feel for something is leading to something....not neccessarily bad...but Im being groomed for something.
Its the way the first download is written....like its a preamble to something else....
MOPs completly changed character recently....hes gone all nice and understanding. thats twitching my radar too.
Statement......if I am way out....I totally apologise to you both but I cant help taking notice when the radar needle twitches. its served me very well with great accuracy for 50 years.
"""Remember this is not a system, it is a concept that can be applied in many ways how many is upto you, if you want a ready made system then this is not for you, but if you want something fresh, that with a bit of imagination used in multiple ways then this could be for you."""
This is exactly what I have posted 3-4 times in this thread before and after Malcop posted the explanation.
It s a very simple thing....If I would have a person here with me and show him with pen and papper he would understand this tracking of the Ecs(Runs and Changes) in just 1 minute.
The problem is that we are all far away and with words we are trying to explain what we mean.
In order to help you I will just say that :
We are taaking the Last spin spun and we are compairing with the Privious spins(Ecs only)
Eg.
Last spin 31
2nd spin before(penultimate) 32
3d spin before 2
so we are taking the Last spin 31 and we compare with the spin before(penultimate).
31= Black , 32= Red ...SO its a CHANGE
Next we are taking also the last spin 31 and we compare it with the 3d spin before
31=Black ,2=Black...So its a RUN
ITS REALY THAT SIMPLE
we do this in every spin for lets say 6 spins results....
On every new spin we are doing the same procces...
And after some spins we wll have something like this(every comparing I name it EVENT). So if we have 6 spins we are having 5 events.(because the last spin will always be the spin that we compare with the rest spins(privious ones)
1Event 2Event 3 Event 4Event 5Event
Runs - Changes Runs - Changes Runs - Changes Runs - Changes Runs - Changes
X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X
X X X X X
X X X
X X
This above is a example graph (result) of 5 events .....
In every new spin we are updaing the Runs and the Changes on each event....
I think this post was a great help for making u understand how we are recording
If you could add the resulting numbers to the above that would help more, I'm guessing the row of xs' down the page is
spin 1
spin 2
spin 3
etc etc
EDIT, After looking at it again, is it
spin 1 spin 2 spin 3 etc
I'm interested too.
"""MOPs completly changed character recently....he's gone all nice and understanding. that's twitching my radar too."""
turnerfeck I will tell you something now and please don't get it wrong...my intention is not to insult you.Its just make something clear to you....(if u won t understand I don't care at all)
You have attacked me a lot of times in the past and all the times was without any reason...so MY opinion is that your radar was always off ...at least with my case.
I was never bad in the forum....The only thing that may be seemed bad is that I couldn t stand reading topics/posts that were including same old losing systems and GFs.
So I was always telling in my posts to move forward and get over the old BS because they were proven losers....
Now I learned that some people will never change...because they don't want or because theor minds can t understand the maths,the odds,the common sense....
So from this learning I stopped trying to tell what is right and what is wrong(according to maths/statistics) to those kind of people because it was only a waste of time...
This is the reason why as you say I am good these days...
But it s not about being good....its a about stop caring to update the forum by explaining to some members(that are deep in the GF) what isn t working....
I would like not to chat this anymore...now I am calm or I don't care about explaining the Gfs to some members and i no longer make fights....(the fights I was making wasn t with intetntion...they just were the result of explaining what is correct)
Superman we are always comparing the Last spin spun(more recent) with the previous ones....
If we make the comparing for 4 spins we have 3 events
If we do it for 5 spins we have 4 events etc.
The explanation of this tracking has 2 steps..
the 1st step is the recording(the thing I posted above)
and the 2nd step is to understand HOW the events are alighned with the same bet
I would like most of you understand the 1st step and then we will move forward to the 2nd
QuoteI would like most of you understand the 1st step and then we will move forward to the 2nd
Then add the numbers to your above post so there is no question as to how you got the Xs
Add numbers to the events so we can cross reference the X markings, currently there's no clue to how you marked your table.
1Event = ? 2Event = ? 3 Event = ? 4Event = ? 5Event = ?
I have already given an example...I can t find any reason to do it again.
Here is the example I have already posted above:
e.g..
Last spin 31
2nd spin before(penultimate) 32
3d spin before 2
so we are taking the Last spin 31 and we compare with the spin before(penultimate).
31= Black , 32= Red ...SO its a CHANGE
Next we are taking also the last spin 31 and we compare it with the 3d spin before
31=Black ,2=Black...So its a RUN
event 1 event 2
Run -change Run -Change
X X
And so on.........
Quote from: Master_of_pockets on Aug 24, 06:04 PM 2012
"""MOPs completly changed character recently....he's gone all nice and understanding. that's twitching my radar too."""
turnerfeck I will tell you something now and please don't get it wrong...my intention is not to insult you.Its just make something clear to you....(if u won t understand I don't care at all)
You have attacked me a lot of times in the past and all the times was without any reason...so MY opinion is that your radar was always off ...at least with my case.
I was never bad in the forum....The only thing that may be seemed bad is that I couldn t stand reading topics/posts that were including same old losing systems and GFs.
So I was always telling in my posts to move forward and get over the old BS because they were proven losers....
Now I learned that some people will never change...because they don't want or because theor minds can t understand the maths,the odds,the common sense....
So from this learning I stopped trying to tell what is right and what is wrong(according to maths/statistics) to those kind of people because it was only a waste of time...
This is the reason why as you say I am good these days...
But it s not about being good....its a about stop caring to update the forum by explaining to some members(that are deep in the GF) what isn t working....
I would like not to chat this anymore...now I am calm or I don't care about explaining the Gfs to some members and i no longer make fights....(the fights I was making wasn t with intetntion...they just were the result of explaining what is correct)
I dont think I attacked you from my memory....infact i said this in your defense in July when Vile..or Flat, who ever....had the rope over the tree branch ready for your head
Quote..."My 2 peneth. I don't want MOP banned because i think he has roulette input of some worth. I think he can't resist conflict so its up to him. It may be too late now. I hope I'm wrong" unquote
I just type what Im thinking....sorry. its probably why many dont like me. That and because Im a bit stup1d.....no one likes a stup1d...lol.... :thumbsup:
I did say in my post "......if I am way out....I totally apologise to you both "
I think I remember 1-2 times that you attacked me but maybe i am wrong.
I think I haven t seen this post of yours above.
Anyway the point is that I no longer care for members that are deep in the GF and have also a thick head...I realised that if they don t want to learn ,then they deserve to stay in the dark and the GF...
This is also why I put this phrase in my signature.
Now did u underatand the tracking from my last posts mate?
Quote from: Master_of_pockets on Aug 24, 06:43 PM 2012
I think I remember 1-2 times that you attacked me but maybe i am wrong.
I think I haven t seen this post of yours above.
Anyway the point is that I no longer care for members that are deep in the GF and have also a thick head...I realised that if they don't want to learn ,then they deserve to stay in the dark and the GF...
This is also why I put this phrase in my signature.
Now did u underatand the tracking from my last posts mate?
MOP...Ill be honest....Im missing something...
I get what is happening in the text and explaination. I dont get why I am doing it....for what purpose.
I did say i am a bit thick.....but its like me saying "put the clutch in, change gear, let the clutch out, press the accellerator, put the clutch in, change to 2nd gear, let the clutch out"
but I didnt say its driving a car...If you dont know its driving a car...that stuff wont mean anything.
driving a car...is the reason for all that.
Do you get my point?
yes i got ur point but did u get mine?
1st learing HOW to do it and THEN the possible ways to bet are a lot.
Quote from: Master_of_pockets on Aug 24, 07:02 PM 2012
yes i got your point but did u get mine?
1st learing HOW to do it and THEN the possible ways to bet are a lot.
I get you....when I taught chess...we learned how a knight can get from one point to another in the shortest route...one knight on a chess board on its own. Thats not chess though.
Quote from: turnerfeck on Aug 24, 07:25 PM 2012
I get you....when I taught chess...we learned how a knight can get from one point to another in the shortest route...one knight on a chess board on its own. that's not chess though.
I learned chess the same way also, and then once I learnt all the moves of the chess peices, then I could start to put it all together and play a game of chess(did not say it was great chess but at least I understood the moves)
exactly...these are the moves that have to be understood in order for the final system to be made and eventually get played.
Quote from: F_LAT_INO on Aug 24, 01:37 PM 2012
--Are you camping Sam and travelling around.....nice if so.
FLATman
We are driving to Florida to see Winter, the dolphin with the prosthetic tail! And on down South to the Keys. Be gone nearly a month, but the computer goes with me.
Sam
Quote from: Master_of_pockets on Aug 24, 05:52 PM 2012
"""Remember this is not a system, it is a concept that can be applied in many ways how many is upto you, if you want a ready made system then this is not for you, but if you want something fresh, that with a bit of imagination used in multiple ways then this could be for you."""
This is exactly what I have posted 3-4 times in this thread before and after Malcop posted the explanation.
It s a very simple thing....If I would have a person here with me and show him with pen and papper he would understand this tracking of the Ecs(Runs and Changes) in just 1 minute.
The problem is that we are all far away and with words we are trying to explain what we mean.
In order to help you I will just say that :
We are taaking the Last spin spun and we are compairing with the previous spins(Ecs only)
e.g..
Last spin 31
2nd spin before(penultimate) 32
3d spin before 2
so we are taking the Last spin 31 and we compare with the spin before(penultimate).
31= Black , 32= Red ...SO its a CHANGE
Next we are taking also the last spin 31 and we compare it with the 3d spin before
31=Black ,2=Black...So its a RUN
ITS REALY THAT SIMPLE
we do this in every spin for lets say 6 spins results....
On every new spin we are doing the same procces...
And after some spins we wll have something like this(every comparing I name it EVENT). So if we have 6 spins we are having 5 events.(because the last spin will always be the spin that we compare with the rest spins(previous ones)
1Event 2Event 3 Event 4Event 5Event
Runs - Changes Runs - Changes Runs - Changes Runs - Changes Runs - Changes
X X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X
X X X X X
X X X
X X
This above is a example graph (result) of 5 events .....
In every new spin we are updaing the Runs and the Changes on each event....
I think this post was a great help for making u understand how we are recording
Hi.
Thanks for your interesting thread MOP.
I will give my advice and opinion about this concept.
The first thing we must remember when engineering these types of methods is that after all the mental gymnastics, and all the compilation and weighing in of data, and all the conflabulated rules are considered and it’s time to place a bet, that bet has a 50% chance of winning and a 50% chance of losing. Never lose sight of that concrete aspect of the game.
Because of this very important reality check, I would advise that MOP’s above example of 5 events is enough to provide the necessary diversity required for this concept. Any more than that and you are just over engineering something that will boil down to 50/50 anyway. Any less than that and you will probably end up with a strangled data flow that leads nowhere. Then you might as well toss a coin and decide the next bet.
5 spins is also probably enough data for the runs & changes registry for the same reasons.
I would consider charting the last 5 events and the last 5 spins on a rolling basis, always striking out older entries.
I would consider charting the runs & changes on every other line because the sequence of occurrences might hold equal importance to the number of occurrences. See Events 1, 2, and 5 for example.
1Event 2Event 3 Event 4Event 5Event
Runs - Changes Runs - Changes Runs - Changes Runs - Changes Runs - Changes
X X X X X
X X X X X
X X X X X
X X X X X
X X X X X
:)
"""The first thing we must remember when engineering these types of methods is that after all the mental gymnastics, and all the compilation and weighing in of data, and all the conflabulated rules are considered and it’s time to place a bet, that bet has a 50% chance of winning and a 50% chance of losing. Never lose sight of that concrete aspect of the game."""
I and any educated roulette researcher know this.
the 5 events charting or the 5 Xs charting isn t enough to make a decision.
This was just a short example to explain how we chart.
Quote from: Master_of_pockets on Aug 25, 06:57 AM 2012
"""The first thing we must remember when engineering these types of methods is that after all the mental gymnastics, and all the compilation and weighing in of data, and all the conflabulated rules are considered and it’s time to place a bet, that bet has a 50% chance of winning and a 50% chance of losing. Never lose sight of that concrete aspect of the game."""
I and any educated roulette researcher know this.
Yes we know it but it is often disregarded when conjuring up complicated systems.
Mr. Chips did all this a couple of years ago.
the 5 events charting or the 5 Xs charting isn t enough to make a decision.
This was just a short example to explain how we chart.
Yes I know it was only an example but you're wrong, it is plenty enough to make a decision. Did you forget that your final bet will be 50/50?
QuoteI can t find any reason to do it again
OK
QuoteYes I know it was only an example but you're wrong, it is plenty enough to make a decision. Did you forget that your final bet will be 50/50?
Agreed, anymore and it starts to dilute, whatever you were hoping for will have already started changing again.
Only MM and a sufficient BR can save our a.s.s. Stop-loss is a biggest misconception in roulette.
Walk away from a table and re-enter a next day ;D Give me a break.
So I would write down the first nine spins as to red/black.
R R B R B B B R B (I know that's not like the Hunter doc.)
Now my next spin (R) says--in effect--spin one and ten formed a run. I don't see it that way at all.
A run is two consecutive events. R and an R in the very next spin. What this is doing is saying--in effect--spins one and ten produced a "sorta run". Not really a run in the true sense, but some kind of run. (Not even sure it's any kind of run.)
Anyway............
Let's use an exaggerample: Say you have nothing but runs beneath your headings, and your headings were all R. That means red just came and came, maybe 25 reds in a row. All that says is we just had 25 reds in a row and I could look at the marquee and see that.
If I come to have that matrix or one with chops and runs throughout, how do I use either?
Aside: Exaggerample is an exaggerated example. Something invented at the TwoCat Think Tank. Can't wait until some mainstream professor uses it!! I'll sue, but youse guys may use it with immunity!
Sam
Somehow, I double-posted. It was bad enough the first time!! ;D
Quote from: malcop on Aug 23, 02:39 PM 2012
Hi Bayes,
If you could tell me what part of the document you found confusing, then I update that part of the document with clearer instruction.
Hi Malcop,
This is where I get confused:
[attachimg=1]
In event 2, you say change has the most x's but 2 out of 3 x's are under the R column, and in event 4 you say runs has the most x's but 2 out of 3 are under the C column?
Hi Bayes,
Looks like I made a typo, will go over my document and update it, then repost.
Thanks
malcop
If you just took the we subtract the maximum from the minimum which leaves us 1 with Red, this is all we used to do, but we also do is assign the difference for each event to the colour it represents, so lets amuse we are at spin 20 for the session Event 1 is represented by Black, Runs have 9 &
Changes has 2, take away 2 from 9 = 7, so Black is assigned a value of 7, for event 1, we then total
up all the assigned values for the 9 events, grouping all the Reds together and all the Black, in this
example spin 20, Black had 28 points & Red had 7 points, giving us a difference of 21, giving
Black the colour we will bet on in the next round.
One more thing, sometimes we could have a tie, where the Runs & Changes are equal, in such a
case no colour will be represented for that event.
|
This is also very confusing, to be honest I don't have a clue what it means. I think that's why the thread isn't getting much response. Sorry, I know it's more work, but you need to explain this part in more detail referring to an actual example...
The first part where you explain how to update the events is clear though.
Bayes,
Your right I should not have mentioned anything about previous we worked on, that just confuses the issue, I will be updating the document with hopefully clearer instructions, with a working example.
Thanks
malcop
Thanks, malcop. :thumbsup:
I think there's some potential in this idea.