I think the HG needs to incorporate the following:
- Non-Random cycles for accurate stats/framework
- Order or Position constant
- Dependency
- Multiple spin events
- Parallel streams, Hedging & Parachuting
- Minimizing negative permutations based on extremes
I think that's pretty much it!
This is how I discovered it:
When there's a dozens repeat there's 62% chance of order 1 or position 1 - but we don't know when it's going to happen
When there's a dozen unique there's about 62% chance of position 3 - but we don't know when it's going to happen
I attempted to play both Order 1 repeats and Position 3 uniques simultaneously across several cycles, i.e. my target was 2 x 62% variable events before adding in a gradual progression, but unfortunately I wasn't having much luck.
I then incorporated different streams and noticed something in terms of dependency - but the dependency was only detectable in hindsight or "when looking back" so to speak; that discovery led
naturally to a system that plays almost identical to one of Priyanka's videos:
link:s://:.youtube.com/watch?v=g1RWS1Ar_YM
I always wondered what on earth triggered Priyanka to place a single line bet in the midst of all those halves, dozens and hedge bets. Now I know why!
Here is a set of live spins from a single 0 wheel, 18 is oldest and 12 is newest
19
19
18
28
2
30
36
28
19
35
27
28
12
4
5
31
17
21
1
0
10
15
7
28
29
13
3
8
21
1
36
10
19
33
36
26
5
9
25
7
10
10
21
8
21
11
14
23
20
9
22
7
29
33
2
8
20
24
33
21
9
18
3
6
30
27
36
20
12
Can you walk us through an example
What did you crack ? Writing down numbers
????
27 of the starting 37 hit by spin 40.
6 of the remaining non-hit came in over the next 20 spins.
33 of the starting 37 hit in 60 spins.
The TROT & NON-HIT columns show. Up to the 19th non-hit have an average of 2 spins, up to the 26th non-hit have an average of 3 spins and up to the 30th non-hit have an average of 4 spins.
Quote from: falkor2k15 on Jan 11, 06:57 PM 2020I think the HG needs to incorporate the following:
Non-Random cycles for accurate stats/framework
Order or Position constant
Dependency
Multiple spin events
Parallel streams, Hedging & Parachuting
Minimizing negative permutations based on extremes
The term "dependency" is a bit ambiguous. There are various types of dependencies. Two streams of numbers can be dependent, when one depends on the outcome of the other. These are functionally dependent.
And there is statistical dependence which is linked to conditional probability. The well known dozen cycles example, where the end position of a cycle is statistically dependent on the starting position.
Or we can look at starting/ending halves of a cycle, where under the condition of a repeat we are more likely to see a number from the same half that started the cycle. And the opposite, under the condition of a unique, we are more likely to see a number form the other half.
Every spin is a new event, it can be either a repeat or a unique. Every new outcome is dependent on something. I believe this is related to "processes" that rrbb said we should look for.
We know what we need for a winning system, the problem is putting it all together and the lack of creativity. Nothing works straight out of the box.
As Pri said "carefully creating those events to make them dependent is in our hands" and that we need "creative applications".
Dyk said "sometimes we need to cleverly construct the pigeons and the holes"
red said we need to "construct" the bets
Well lots of words but no examples
There are no examples here, there is no system in this thread. In some threads we discuss theories and ideas, it's not always about systems with fixed set of rules that tells you what to bet when.
One can ignore it and move on, wait for the next thread to see what other people come up with. Or one can start thinking, invest time, energy, and do some actual work.
We need to learn about the concepts before we can come up with an example because there will be multiple applications that may lead to a better understanding. I think the best starting point is EC and Martingale.
If we bet just Low then we can encounter a whole set of losses - equivalent to a set of deadlocks in a Non-Random game - though the progression is irrelevant at this stage as it's all about bet selection:
19 - Lose
32 - Lose
27 - Lose
33 - Lose
25 - Lose
20 - Lose
27 - Lose
How might we know if this is the right time to hedge in a dozen bet or even switch entirely to just a single line so we can handle these situations better? Answer: we don't know because it's completely random!
This is what Priyanka meant when she said that we must find the opposite/parallel game to overcome a deadlock situation.
Now if you construct your ECs in cycles then you have a framework that can indicate when to hedge/parachute!
As Priyanka said we simply start with a fixed template:
It could be playing for the first repeat - or in my case playing only for Order 1 - equivalent to Position 1:
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/dt7VCgmm/ec.png)
Once we have our fixed template we then have to try to modify it to reduce losses (above a series of Order 2s) based on dependency - but for that we need a parallel stream alongside that is co-dependent and with good synchronicity.
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/Gtj331kv/ecdz.png)
The framework then provides a reference point where you can check on the best moment to hedge/parachute - but it's NOT on the next spin!
Quotewe don't know because it's completely random!
This is what Priyanka meant when she said that we must find the opposite/parallel game to overcome a deadlock situation.
If it's random, you're stuck at 1 in 37. You cant beat a random game if your bet selection has random accuracy. It wont matter what elaborate attempts you use, at least with nothing I've seen here or anywhere.
Quote from: bigmoney on Jan 12, 04:15 AM 2020
What did you crack ? Writing down numbers ????
Absolutely Nothing. Just recording spins.
Quote from: Steve on Jan 12, 09:12 AM 2020
If it's random, you're stuck at 1 in 37. You cant beat a random game if your bet selection has random accuracy. It wont matter what elaborate attempts you use, at least with nothing I've seen here or anywhere.
Yeah it's random, but this is not about the next spin - it's about betting on events instead of spins and understanding that events are dependent on previous events - contrary to individual spins that are independent.
We know that a quad (3/12 streets) has a 25% ratio with a payout of 1:3 on 1 spin;
however, we can stitch Quads out of 2 EC bets across 2 spins instead of 1 (still 1/4 + 1:3).
So now the game is based on every 2 spins, and if we get an early win then we have the option of missing out the next spin and don't need to parlay (or "let it ride") as one would normally - so 2 spins is a lot more flexible.
Likewise, order 1/position 1 for dozens is something that can happen in 1-3 spins;
so we aren't trying to win on the next spin - but on an event that has a variable number of spins.
So what's the difference between single spin vs. multiple spin outcomes? With multiple spin events overlapping in parallel, one outcome becomes dependent on a previous - not possible with static single spin outcomes.
So how do we know when to bring in the next stream - and is it to win the next event - or avoid a losing event in the future as part of our betting plan?
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/Gtj331kv/ecdz.png)
The answer requires Excel to find out:
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/QxxGnwHR/spreadsheet.png)
Falkor,
let's say I was an investor looking for opportunities. When I'd get to your ''pamphlet'', I'd see complicated formulas and, mostly, the far right column that claims: Lose! at every spin.
I'd skip to the next.
i think you should make it easier to understand, so we can all understand...
I don't know how to explain it any easier!?
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/28h0FgLN/d2.png)
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/Gtj331kv/ecdz.png)
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/VvcCYZfX/hedge.png)
I agree with what you are saying...in theory; however, I am also agree with BigBroBen I am not quite sure what you are talking about when you show your spreadsheet.
Can you walk us through the numbers that are spun and how you put those in the spreadsheet and then what you are interpreting in your spreadsheet?
I also agree that EC is a great place to start, but I am not sure about Martingale. I have been testing EC lately with flat bet and Martingale. So far I think flat bet is the winner.
Probably i didn't understand nothing. But i'm trying a thing based on what i think i've understood ( but i don't know). Bet 2 chips on 1-18 and 1 chip on 1st dozen ( or 19-36 and 3rd dozen ofc). Flat bet if hit consecutives, when a loss, flat bet again, after another loss, start with a super light progression. Until now 300 unit in one hour of play
This is about understanding concepts and how to apply them when making your own system. Which part(s) do you understand/not understand? Look at what's being presented and ask questions based on that - not open ended questions that show you haven't read the topic properly. Take note of what ati said:
Quote from: ati on Jan 12, 06:09 AM 2020
There are no examples here, there is no system in this thread. In some threads we discuss theories and ideas, it's not always about systems with fixed set of rules that tells you what to bet when.
One can ignore it and move on, wait for the next thread to see what other people come up with. Or one can start thinking, invest time, energy, and do some actual work.
Falkor, your explanations only make sense to you.
Falkor are you high buddy!? All the Guys here telling you that they dont understand a thing....The problem is only your "explanation".
Quote from: ati on Jan 12, 05:34 AM 2020
The term "dependency" is a bit ambiguous. There are various types of dependencies. Two streams of numbers can be dependent, when one depends on the outcome of the other. These are functionally dependent.
And there is statistical dependence which is linked to conditional probability. The well known dozen cycles example, where the end position of a cycle is statistically dependent on the starting position.
Or we can look at starting/ending halves of a cycle, where under the condition of a repeat we are more likely to see a number from the same half that started the cycle. And the opposite, under the condition of a unique, we are more likely to see a number form the other half.
Every spin is a new event, it can be either a repeat or a unique. Every new outcome is dependent on something. I believe this is related to "processes" that rrbb said we should look for.
We know what we need for a winning system, the problem is putting it all together and the lack of creativity. Nothing works straight out of the box.
As Pri said "carefully creating those events to make them dependent is in our hands" and that we need "creative applications".
Dyk said "sometimes we need to cleverly construct the pigeons and the holes"
red said we need to "construct" the bets
ati, looks like it's just you and me in this topic now, as I've lost the crowd...
It seems my strategy is based on the functional dependency as opposed to the statistical dependency. I've been unable to find an exploit for the latter. Let's take dozen cycles and position cycles.
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/HLMwJwb2/parallel.png)
We can bet a number of pigeons depending on the stage of each cycles stream:
Doz Spin 1: Order 1
Doz Spin 2: Order 1, Order 2
Doz Spin 3: Order 1, Order 2, Order 3
Pos Spin 1: Order 1
Pos Spin 2: Order 1, Order 2
Pos Spin 3: Order 1, Order 2, Order 3
That means we can bet between 1-6 pigeons at any one time; however, due to the triple dozen deadlock situation we can only bet 1-2 pigeons at a time. That being said: if 2 pigeons are represented by the same dozen then we could potentially cover up to 4 pigeons maximum?
When 2 or more pigeons are represented by single dozens then I've printed them on-screen in my sim, otherwise I've ignored 1 for 1 pigeons because the payout on those does not outweigh the risk:
d1p2 d2p1
d1p3
d1p1
d1p1
d1p1
d2p2 d1p1
d2p1
d1p3 d2p1
d1p1
d1p1
d2p2 d1p1
d1p2 d2p1
d1p1
d1p1
d1p1
d1p1
d1p1
d1p1
d1p3 d2p1
d2p1
d1p1
d1p1
d1p2
d1p2 d2p1
d1p2 d2p1
d3p3 d1p2 d2p1
d2p1
d1p1
d1p1
d1p2 d2p1
d1p1
d1p1
d2p2 d1p1
d2p1
d2p2
d1p2
d1p2 d2p1
Am I on the right track or do I need to dig deeper...?
Falkor thats more of the same. Its very unclear.
Guys, I know it looks messy at first, but Falkor has been presenting the data in this style for years.
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/dt7VCgmm/ec.png)
You see the list of numbers
8
3
19
33
8
18
28
left columns shows how many units to bet on what position
first column to the right from the numbers shows the High/low cycle. 2 means high, 1 means low
HLCL2o2 means High/Low cycle, cycle length is 2, repeat order is 2
second column to the right from the numbers shows the bet result
And on some table, dozen bets are also included. It's not that difficult, but you have to have some knowledge about the concepts discussed mainly in the "random thoughts" and the "different view on roulette numbers" threads
I understand enough of it to know it doesn't work. Progression, highs, lows, cycles etc.
If anyone is openly explaining their system, there is nothing to hide. So if they want people's attention, some options include:
1. Get someone to code the system on RX, then everyone with RX can easily test.
2. Test on MPR and show everyone the results.
There's no complete system yet as we are still trying to construct one based on the concepts we are trying to discuss:
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/dt7VCgmm/ec.png)
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/28h0FgLN/d2.png)
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/VvcCYZfX/hedge.png)
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/SRDRh1Lr/loss.png)
What comes next...?
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/JnTC7fgG/l4.png)
Don't bother with progression until a system wins flat betting.
Otherwise your testing gives bullshit results because any profits are based on random bet sizes.
It has all been said before.
Quote from: falkor2k15 on Jan 12, 09:49 AM 2020Yeah it's random, but this is not about the next spin - it's about betting on events instead of spins and understanding that events are dependent on previous events - contrary to individual spins that are independent.
It makes no sense. If individual spins are independent, then events - which consist of individual spins - must also be independent.
If you can't grasp the logic of this then look at the results of your tests, they all point to the same conclusion that any past event is independent of any future event.
Its the same contradiction many people struggle with.
If you start learning what others learned for themselves in decades, you'll save yourself a lot of time.
Take the shortcut. Its much easier.
Quote from: Joe on Jan 13, 06:17 AM 2020It makes no sense. If individual spins are independent, then events - which consist of individual spins - must also be independent.
Not necessarily if there are conditions. I have showed a very simple example in this post. (link:s://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=20115.msg230893#msg230893)
The next number within a number cycle has over 50% probability to be from the other half that started the cycle,
under the condition that it is not a repeat! You might not accept this fact, but it remains true. The bias is very small, and you never know when the repeat comes, so the wins and losses even out in the long run.
Yes, the next spin is independent, but the next spin event (repeat or unique) is
statistically dependent on past spin events.
There are many other biases / dependencies / imbalances that no one sees or considers. And bringing those things together could potentially produce positive results.
Quote from: Steve on Jan 13, 06:22 AM 2020If you start learning what others learned for themselves in decades, you'll save yourself a lot of time.
That's the mistake some of us tries to avoid. Old is not always right. New things are always being discovered, that can make old believes and facts invalid.
"Everyone knew it was impossible, until a fool who didn't know came along and did it."
Falkor with his yearly bullshit again.
(link:s://i.makeagif.com/media/6-12-2018/YVR-Hs.gif)
Quote from: Joe on Jan 13, 06:17 AM 2020
It makes no sense. If individual spins are independent, then events - which consist of individual spins - must also be independent.
If you can't grasp the logic of this then look at the results of your tests, they all point to the same conclusion that any past event is independent of any future event.
It's a kind of magic! :xd:
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Jan 13, 08:05 AM 2020
Falkor with his yearly bullshit again.
(link:s://i.makeagif.com/media/6-12-2018/YVR-Hs.gif)
This is the BEST topic in the last year! Brand new concepts never before demonstrated
right here...
Falkor if you are so confident, develop a "HG" and sell it, i think everybody here will buy ;)
You guys need to brush up on this... a HG is least of our concerns. If you can't raise the money for a plane ticket to Japan come June 2023 then you are finished!
link:s://:.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51086635
Quote from: falkor2k15 on Jan 13, 12:17 PM 2020
You guys need to brush up on this... a HG is least of our concerns. If you can't raise the money for a plane ticket to Japan come June 2023 then you are finished!
link:s://:.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-51086635
Is that because flat earth will finally be on a tilt and we'll all slide off?
Quote from: Steve on Jan 13, 08:08 PM 2020
Is that because flat earth will finally be on a tilt and we'll all slide off?
No, the elite ruling class are planning to genocide the whole of humanity starting on the 27th June 2023 by means of a weaponized plague (contagious via airborne or contact) and storms that end in flooding (by opening up a hole in the firmament to let in additional water). Only Japan and possibly a few other places will survive. Martial Law will be declared and the FEMA concentration camps will open up (many converted from former Walmart stores in US), so the military will lure people there with the temptation of food since all supermarkets will be raided in the first few months if not weeks with an increase in knife crime, etc. Airplane flights will be grounded and you will need transit papers to get past military checkpoints, say, towards the coast to catch a ship in the direction of Japan.
We know this is the case because the elite have been planning this project for at least 30 years with esoteric references deliberately planted in Hollywood movies, TV series, cartoons, video games, album covers, news articles... you name it. We learnt about this psychological technique from 911, which had hundreds of pre-2001 references detailing that project at it's most intimate level. In the many references to 2023, Japan is the only place that will be spared, so if you do not leave Australia in time you, your family (and your forum) will perish in the plague - if not from geo-engineered storms - so no bunker can save you!
Live or die - you decide - starting with just the title of this movie:
link:s://:.imdb.com/title/tt0844678/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
Falkor, I'm familiar with just about every conspiracy theory you have. I really think you go seriously overboard in believing too much too easily.
Take the flat Earth for example. I took a serious look at the "proof", and it was just a load of uneducated people with poor understanding.
Quote from: ati on Jan 13, 08:01 AM 2020Not necessarily if there are conditions. I have showed a very simple example in this post.
No that's not a dependency between one spin or series of spins and the next, it's a consequence of the way you have defined a 'cycle'. If it were a true dependency then you would be able to exploit it, but you admit yourself that there's no way to predict any better than random whether low or high will come next. That's the very definition of independence!
Quote from: falkor2k15 on Jan 13, 08:46 PM 2020No, the elite ruling class are planning to genocide the whole of humanity starting on the 27th June 2023 by means of a weaponized plague (contagious via airborne or contact) and storms that end in flooding (by opening up a hole in the firmament to let in additional water). Only Japan and possibly a few other places will survive. Martial Law will be declared and the FEMA concentration camps will open up (many converted from former Walmart stores in US), so the military will lure people there with the temptation of food since all supermarkets will be raided in the first few months if not weeks with an increase in knife crime, etc. Airplane flights will be grounded and you will need transit papers to get past military checkpoints, say, towards the coast to catch a ship in the direction of Japan.
We know this is the case because the elite have been planning this project for at least 30 years with esoteric references deliberately planted in Hollywood movies, TV series, cartoons, video games, album covers, news articles... you name it. We learnt about this psychological technique from 911, which had hundreds of pre-2001 references detailing that project at it's most intimate level. In the many references to 2023, Japan is the only place that will be spared, so if you do not leave Australia in time you, your family (and your forum) will perish in the plague - if not from geo-engineered storms - so no bunker can save you!
Live or die - you decide - starting with just the title of this movie:
Now I know you can safely be ignored. ;D
Quote from: Joe on Jan 14, 02:55 AM 2020
No that's not a dependency between one spin or series of spins and the next, it's a consequence of the way you have defined a 'cycle'. If it were a true dependency then you would be able to exploit it, but you admit yourself that there's no way to predict any better than random whether low or high will come next. That's the very definition of independence!
With this example you have missed the dependency:
(link:s://i.postimg.cc/28h0FgLN/d2.png)
Losing like a bitch depends on NOT betting that dozen 2!
So you now have another chance at understanding dependency - but come 2023 there won't be any second chances!
Folkner as said, he thinks he cracked and is in beginning of his analysis.Many who claims something found disappear, including pryanka, vaadi, etc, if something works ppl should post afterwards.How to achieve accuracy, is the question.
Quote from: Elite on Jan 14, 06:43 AM 2020Many who claims something found disappear, including pryanka, vaadi, etc, if something works ppl should post afterwards.
That's not how it works. If you have something that "works", the last thing you want to do is to share it with the whole world.
Imagine someone who works years on trading algorithms and bots that in the end produces him constant profit in the stock market. Why would that person go on forums, prove that he's right and give it away to everyone, essentially making it worthless?
Quote from: Steve on Jan 14, 12:50 AM 2020
Falkor, I'm familiar with just about every conspiracy theory you have. I really think you go seriously overboard in believing too much too easily.
Take the flat Earth for example. I took a serious look at the "proof", and it was just a load of uneducated people with poor understanding.
These flat earth lunatics take away from real conspiracies. And there’s no shortage of real conspiracies.
These flat earth videos are made by people who just really aren’t that smart
With a guy like falkor the elevator just doesn’t quite make it to the top. He’s an internet troll. He knows his graphs mean shit. I wish I had his free time.
Right on par for his yearly holy grail post. Even sadder is people buy it, they aren’t smart either.
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Jan 14, 09:04 AM 2020These flat earth lunatics take away from real conspiracies. And there’s no shortage of real conspiracies.
Spot on. It wouldn't surprise me if flat earth is a deliberate diversion.
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Jan 14, 09:04 AM 2020Right on par for his yearly holy grail post. Even sadder is people buy it, they aren’t smart either.
The scams are quite easy to identify. Anyone who follows the tips in the link i gave can easily avoid being scammed.
To summarise then: what's the biggest concept we learnt from this topic?
Doubling up/Martingale, Excel, dependency, flat earth vs. globe earth deception, laziness, logical thinking, psychology, 911, 2023 - or simply that winning Roulette is NOT about the next spin or even the next series of spins - but concerns our betting plan, personal permanence and being able to "look back" to find the solution?
wow this getting stupid... and boring as well...
Falkor does this once a year like clock work
He’s sick
He knows no one understands what he’s saying or understands his 1970s charts
I think it’s by design. It’s not that he can’t explain it, he chooses not to. His elevator doesn’t Goto the top
Best to ignore.
Yes, FALCOR is a little unusual, but he does his work and shares it, of course, you object to the fact that he writes inexplicably, but since you are too lazy to read the necessary branches, it sounds strange to you.
All those points can not help you improve the accuracy of the next prediction. Why are you trying to make 1+1=5