In my time of learning there have been many words that jolt the mind. These words are put there for you to decipher of course, but they lead you to be the one that can or cannot.
Years have gone by and so too many so called friends.
This leads to dispair and, also teaches those of us who deserve what some people call the Holy Grail.
There is the crux which brings us to doing more than we ever did before, without it you will never win.
The Holy Grail is within the search itself.
The lesson of doing more then you ever done, will help outside roulette as well. And suddenly you don't need a consistent winner strategy, because self discipline and the willingness to work harder, has done it's work and you have a loved job, a beautiful life and a life time hobby!
I'm glad that I was so fortunate to register on this forum in 2015, and witnessed all those posts and discussions around Priyanka and rrbb.
In the aend if "you cannot.." you can still be a winner.
Have a nice day everybody!
Nice post Praline!
Any lost may give gain.
How many ppl never know roulette and happy?
And few maybe who have HG in life trouble.
That not panacea. Really who wanted help never posted so many posts, that already saying they have mental problem imo. I know ppl who spent years with help so called HG owners with zero outcome that true. My principle or help or shut up. Look on other forums why they created ...for help each other..just look on other forums.
But we need any hobby what we like. Our choice.
If something is isolated by placing a chip as a bet on that position does this change the movements you are working with?
If I were working with movements then a movement of 6 would be a repeat on lines.
Does this mean that I am only working with 5 movements?
If I were to concatenate these movements would I be able to produce more movements?
Would I be able to use series, cross combinations and mixed results to be able to lose apples or pears?
Quote from: TriCycle on Sep 10, 03:06 PM 2023This leads to dispair and, also teaches those of us who deserve what some people call the Holy Grail.
There is the crux which brings us to doing more than we ever did before, without it you will never win.
You reach a point where all hope is lost....
Quote from: TriCycle on Jan 14, 02:29 PM 2024If I were to concatenate these movements would I be able to produce more movements?
Would I be able to use series, cross combinations and mixed results to be able to lose apples or pears?
Yes it can be done but with what goal?the reason I ask; If you concatenate lines it will give you 36 movements.
If you play each as they show not all will be available so you lose some apples/pears but it turns into a waiting game. Some good cycles and some bad cycles but overall losing long term
Which angle are you looking at it from?
Can you share some more..?
If you concatenate them you have two results.
After that you have another two results.
If one were to look at the angles of those two results the movements would increase within the same parameters.
Repeats have to happen mostly from 123 within a cycle of six and others, why is this?
Does the actual game have to re-read the pages as if it were an almanac?
Hey, guys.
Just entered to post some of my thoughts, and I'm happy that I don't have to start a new topic with my nonsensens as you two have already done it))
However I'm always happy to read and decipher your thoughts and ideas, and thanks to all of you for that.
-----
Here they are, my raw thoughts written to a friend based on what I witnessed in this years of my roulette journey.
Praline:
Yeah. There were different universes involved. So the invariant is something that always happen independently from initial fruit arrangement: within, at the begining or in the end of fruit cycle.
I vote for "within"
But still we win if we have immediate repeat.
So all possibility must be covered, at least in the way that we loos less.
So, we can bet for repeats, while banking on uniques, sure we can't bet all of them, so we are choosing a subset that we are confortable with, and play according to erdos, ramsey or van der waerden
Seems a generalised version of erdos, and Ramsey, but not PHP. While erdos and Ramsey, van der waerden included go in parallel with what you posted, IN ANY SEQUENCE THERE WILL BE A "SET"",
all those "smart" guys have done is just some exercises with your quote.
PHP is something different, it's more mathematics involved.
Edsgar Dijkstra's notes could lead to more insights, I think. But I never examined those deeply.
However Dijkstra's generalization is mathematically more restrictive and precise.
----
I just want to make sure we are on the same page. Let's take double street(ds)for example and double street distance(dsd)
Ds ———————- DSD
4 ————————- 4
1 ————————- 3
2 ————————- 1
3 ————————- 1
We have 2 result streams. If we concatenate then this means we combine them.
Quote from: TriCycle on Jan 15, 01:11 PM 2024If you concatenate them you have two results.
After that you have another two results.
What do you mean by "after that you have another two results"?
Quote from: TriCycle on Jan 15, 01:11 PM 2024If one were to look at the angles of those two results the movements would increase within the same parameters.
Here I'm guessing you are referencing the two results I asked about above..??
Quote from: TriCycle on Jan 15, 01:25 PM 2024Repeats have to happen mostly from 123 within a cycle of six and others, why is this?
Does the actual game have to re-read the pages as if it were an almanac?
Repeats happen on 123 because they come from the most recent numbers
I'm not sure about the almanac reference but no whatever streams we add or create have no effect on the actual game of roulette itself.
If we combine Columns and streets do we have a game off 36 and two streams :question:
Quote from: alexlaf on Jan 16, 07:15 AM 2024If we combine Columns and streets do we have a game off 36 and two streams :question:
Yes
Quote from: MoneyT101 on Jan 15, 07:30 PM 2024Ds ———————- DSD
4 ————————- 4
1 ————————- 3
2 ————————- 1
3 ————————- 1
Lets say from Mel example we get the first Line & Distance and combine them:
If a=4 and b=4 we get (4||4) so what !
Same sh*t different year:
Quote from: alexlaf on Jan 17, 01:26 PM 2024so what !
Same sh*t different year:
With that kind of attitude who would want to take their time to show you anything?
No one is entitled to share what they have taken the time to learn. So it's upto the person if they want to give more detail.
You don't know what to do so might as well be nice about it. Giving ppl attitude with the information you need makes them not what to share anything to ungrateful entitled ppl.
So if you don't have a nice way to go about it just stay lurking in the background like everyone else does.
The obvious is 4||4 like you said. But what you do with the combination is what matters.
Tricycle is suggesting a cross referencing method by adding more streams. With his idea numbers move around so it's not always available to play. But this version makes it a waiting game for things line up.
What do we know about the HG? No waiting game is involved.
I'm asking questions to see if he shares which angle he is taking because there are a couple ways and possibly some that haven't been thought of yet.
The only thing I am getting is a waiting game until now.. no matter how y combine a and B..
Yes I mentioned a waiting game according to my understanding of what Tricycle is sharing. That's why I'm asking him questions to see if he can clear it up.
Quote from: alexlaf on Jan 17, 02:24 PM 2024The only thing I am getting is a waiting game until now.. no matter how y combine a and B..
Quote from: MoneyT101 on Jan 17, 02:16 PM 2024But what you do with the combination is what matters.
I'm trying to stay on topic with Tricycle. Maybe he will share some other forms of how to combine or what to do to the combination after it's combined...
At least with the waiting way as I am doing it the first element can determine what will come next but not constant!
QuoteHey, guys
Too simple I guess... also there is no milion trackers, and screenshots, so definitely a rubbish, I guess :thumbsup:
Also it's only 2 pages, topics with 100 pages are definitely better)) :twisted:
Thanks for your inputs, TriCycle.
It will take me a while to understand your way of reasoning. But everything seems to be in line with what I'm heading to.
Have a nice day everybody!
How many streams we need finally, do we keep adding streams like endless combinations!
Here is another stream!!!
Alexlaf, in my opinion all those new streams are needed to change the way we look at random, remember those constants within/with cycles of dozens.
After that i will look into limited events on that new stream and will try to apply some of "will definitely happen with in n spins" theorems to it. Somebody told once that vanderwaerens theorem is just betting the dominant or maybe I'm generalising it a lot, on the other side "betting the dominant" and "betting same defining element" is the same thing.
Quote from: praline on Jan 28, 06:53 AM 2024"betting the dominant" and "betting same defining element" is the same thing.
I know that betting on what y said is a weak structure so it is not the way to beat the game!
Not to be rude. I know that you don't "know" that, you just read that from rrbb's notes.
And if you remember, in the part you are referring to, there is also a word "maybe".
So just "maybe" you are right, and I'm going in the wrong direction, but i love this direction because its mine))) and as far as i know your and Mel's researches didn't bring you anywhere.
What is your way!
They reached to a point where it was safe to say that non of what they investigate was not the way!
I have no idea what Mel is doing..
My way is to try things even if "the others" said it's impossible. Maybe you will also conclude that that's impossible, but you will definitely learn more when you reach that point step by step and your conclusion will be more juicy))
I appreciate your input Praline, I for sure have tried what was pointed and the opposite.
There are things that you indeed see and impressive, but not what we call "solution", or it is and I can't see it.
There was one last Priyanka's post in august or July of 2013 (before she started random thoughts topic). This post is about singles and series on R/B. Recently i started from there, as Tricycle poined to series, and i found some iteractions with newest Priyanka's topics ("difference of 1 or 0"), so I'm investigating this path for now, of course by adding cycles and positions to it. Give it a try, it's fun)) but i don't promise it will make you rich.
Yesterday i ended reading a proof from Erdős-Szekeres two-player game for k = 5.
The authors present a winning strategy for player 2 and provide a proof that NG(5) = 9 and HG(5) = 9, indicating that the game will inevitably end in the 9th step. There are involved so many things that to us looks like impossible. It looks like Erdős is the key to understand things on the other hand hard!!
Quote from: praline on Jan 29, 04:34 AM 2024This post is about singles and series on R/B.
Are y able until now on this to find a continues betting, no waiting? By the way after so many reading as you said before i think even the waiting that is not the way if you don't play random is a key!
I'm not sure about waiting. If I'm correct, there were "no bets" in Pri's video examples.
Also when you play with singles and series, you place only one bet for each event, and then you wait for "change outcome" (f.e Red series finished, black starts). It doesn't mean that you loose if red comes 7 times in a row, because for you everything that is more then one is option 2 (series), and everything that is single is 1 (single).
So there is only one bet independently from what you choose series or singles.
And guess what?)))) It's 50/50.
But I will encourage you to look deeper in it, there are also some constants, and I think there is a way to obtain faster repeats and different stats by concatenating. You can also try to apply same approach (series, singles) to other partitions or groups or combination.
Erdos and vdw are creating dependency between outcomes (spins, partitions, events, cycle lengths, positions and positions under condition of repeat or whatever you like).
However, if outcomes are equally likely, it won't help.
- Spins are independent (myth busted)
- Outcomes are equally likely (depends on what you choose to play)
Now comes the simplest part:
How to ensure a monthly withdrawal from online casino))))
I was on this long time ago but when y start see other things, this is one way i was looking at it!
Here off course you have more then 2 groups .. And i was creating cycles with them !
I have the same problem, I abbandone my ideas when I read something interesting on forums or from friends, that's why i prefer to study alone. And who knows maybe I have my holly grail somewhere within hundreds of handwritten pages of tests stats and proofs.
As for singles/series, I see it a bit different. I have two games and each game have 2 possible outcomes, like Twins. The interesting thing occurs when you plot cycles from it and count the frequencies of positions under condition of repeat. Here comes the difference between normal R/B stream and single/series stream, until you start to place your bets))))
For today, the only winning method using series and singles is turning your computer upside down and watch for a beautiful upwards looking graph on rx)))) for now
Quote from: praline on Jan 30, 06:40 AM 2024I have two games and each game have 2 possible outcomes
By this you mean :
R = 1 or 2 & B= 1 or 2 ?
Do we then have to play for each game a separate "cycle"!!
Exactly. i keep them united. So 4 is max length. But you never have immediate repeat.
Don't blame if it won't help, I'm just exploring if there can be something...
Quotegeneralization is mathematically more restrictive and precise.
Sometimes I wonder if it's really me who wrote this posts ;D
Generalization - restrictive. Oh man...
Who remembers that movie about a guy that switched his lives while getting asleep?))))