Probability for 13 in a row.

[Ralph]

Sorry ralph but you are clearly on a different wave length and i know nothing can alter your mind or opinion. Even with facts presented i know your opinion will still not change, its fair enough, but you cannot argue with facts my friend.

Which fact? I do not mend things working!

[ego]

You can trap random events and isolate them into conditional probability events.
That way you can tell what will happen in the future, like having a crystal ball.

Random events still have the black swan, but this way you can get advantage if you develop a march or algorithm that catch does future events based upon the past results.
Yes you read it correct, past results influence future ones.

This can be proven with billions simulations and you will still get the same results.
If some one is interested in this kind of play, then i can write more about it.

Sure works out great for team play as tracking is a big part of this kind of playing model.
I pretty sure Drazen have something similar going based upon Bayes playing model, that might be a little different.

It might sound it contradict facts from fiction, but the truth is simple to handle.
The wheel has no memory and each spin is independent with one exception.

[Ralph]

We can never predict the coming spins using history. We can from overall knowledge of how numbers can fall, assume a number will repeat, a run of an EC use to come and other from all over common random states. I use to FTL and try repeater, some use sleepers and think it may chop after a few similar EC. We use rules while guessing.


On a noz the variance gives us win or loss, we need the variance in every game which not have positive expectation. A zero is able to kill in the longer run, especially on EC play.


The events are not conditional, there is allways the same numbers left. And the fixed odds never cahange.

[ego]

That is just silly ...

If you have 100 trails with singles and series of two as your selection.
Now for the next 200 trails you say that it can continue to be singles and series of two.

And i agree as nothing is due to happen.
That is pretty beautiful.

Now what i know that you don't know is there will be series of three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine after that.
I know that will come in the future and i don't need a crystal ball to state that.

If you isolate a window of events up towards 3.0 STD then you get a window of vacuum.
You isolate certain events.

So the wheel can produce independent trails for 100, 200, 300 trails or hitting 1.0 or 2.0 or 3.0 or 4.0 or 5.0 or 6.0 STD as the bell curve has no limit, nothing new about that.
But still i know that series of three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine will come after that, that is fact and not gamblers fallacy.

The expectation you can code and simulate over and over again with out proving me wrong.
I alredy have the simulation software’s, so i know what i am talking about.

You can take 16 to 50 trails with 3.0 STD as selection with only singles and series of two present.
Where singles has the value of 1 and series of two the value of 0 and series of three the value of 1.

Then you can see it grow to any value and you only observe and do nothing, because you know larger series will come.
When they do you play.

That is to use tendency towards tiny, small, medium, large waves of larger series.

Lets put it like this.

If i see 16 singles events and two series of two, then i do nothing.
Then it can continue to grow and come singles and series of two and i do nothing.

Why, because i know that soon series of three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine will show.
Then i will play.

So one way i know what will come, that is not woodo.
The black swan among does white swan is how to capture what you know will show in the future.

FTL and DBL is for kids ...

[Ralph]

What you do is using guessing, and knowing what it use to be, it is still not sure it will work.  We have to sometimes wait a lot of spins to see any change in SD to make it useful.


The black swan is never at the wheel, it is a creation of our mind. All spins in a certain numbers are equally to come, and if we expect something which never happen in time, we bet the wrong, our black swan has not to do with the wheel it is when we expect something much ditterent from what is happen.  Which order of numbers is a black swan per se?


Some events are not independent, like the number of unique in a row, the probability for a repeat increase every spin, I saw 21 unique today, and that's a rather rare event at the wheel, not the mind.

[ego]

No one need to guess as guessing has nothing to do with it.
And it will happen no matter what you say and there is nothing that can prevent it from happen.

So we all know what will happen in the future, if we see a window of 3.0 STD with certain events.
You can code it for a billion times and it will change nothing.

[Turner]

[size=78%]The black swan is never at the wheel, [/size]

Black swan?

[Blood Angel]

Black swan?

Black swan is a surprise or rare event Turner.
link:://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory

[kingsroulette]

What is the probability of 13 Evens in the row?


Prof Ralph says, 100%


Never heard such mathematics wizard, in my entire life.


Prof Bayes, please enlighten me.

[ausguy]

Further to the Black Swan reference. It originally came about by the  EXPERTS in England & Europe who for hundreds of years up until 1697 declared that black swans could never exist on the basis that none had ever been seen.. A Dutch explorer mapping part of the West Coast of Australia sailed up a river & 1st sighted black swans. Eventually the experts reluctantly admitted they were wrong.

The City of Perth is now there & the Swan River, with black swans,  has kept it's name from over 300 years ago.

The Black Swan financial term stems from the very same viewpoint in that because vast numbers of financial traders have refused to believed that a particular event could occur or repeat but they have.  E.G.  The well documented 1929 Stock Market crash & more recently the 2008 Lehmann Bros collapse & the Great Financial Crisis, GFC, that continues to unfold now & for years to come.

In roulette, could 40 reds in a row be regarded by many players as a Black Swan event ?

[Drazen]

Past spins have influence on future spins and that is end of discussion as I am concerned. They can't predict every next spin, but still through enough short sequences one can profit from that nicely.

I turned 250 units bank into 1700 in two weeks or so, with very low drawdowns on outside EC-s, bets with highest variance of all bets in roulette. And didn't lost single session. All because of asking past spins for prediction. It is far definitely the best betselection I have ever seen and I have seen almost everything I could come accros in this game.

But MM is important also.

Regards

Drazen

[ausguy]

Kingsroulette - probability of 13 in a row for 37 pocket wheel is 18/37 to the power of 13  (the square root thingo of 2 is replaced with 13).
The calc is then 18/37 = 0.486486 to power 13 x 100 = 0.0085%.  Some other repeats. 1 single spin = 48.65%  2 = 23.67%, 5 = 2.7% 10 = 0.074% 20 = 0.0020%
Each spin probability is reduced by 1/2> = 19/37 = .5135 x 100 = (100 [37 nos.] -51.35% = 48.65%). The actual calc is 18/37 (0.486) x itself, then the result is again x 18/37. You keep going for the number of same spins you want. The power calc thingo just fast tracks the answer

My calculator auto stores to 13 decimal places & has all the bells & whistles. I've just shortened some numbers to demo. the idea.
The chance factor of any result is always constant. In this case we are talking even chances. So on 37 numbers we have 18 chances of winning & 19 chances of losing because of Zero. The calc for losing is 19/37 = 51.35% & winning is 18/37 = 48.65%.
In the 13 in a row wins the chance of any spin losing was also always 51.35% & winning = 48.65%.

So as can be easily seen chance & probability are 2 different animals. Then the X factor of randomness is also in the mix. Randomness by its very nature cannot be calculated because it is a future event, thus impossible to predict. It's this fact alone that enables casinos to reap consistant fat profits from roulette.

As to the 100% view point, it is flawed thinking to equate that % to chance & probability.                                                                                                                                                                                                                If we do then we end up with 2 different number amounts for the same item ?     Totally illogical & impossible.

The only thing 100% can relate to is in the betting. If 1 equal bet was placed on each of the winning 13 in a row results then the player stopped betting, then it is true to say that the win profit was 100%.

DRAZEN - I assume you are betting live dealer B & M casino ?  Every dealers spin is an independent future event. Nobody can predict the future. Past spins are just that = recent history. They can't/don't influence where the white ball drops on the next spin.  The variance of the dealer pushing the wheel & spinning the ball sees to that. Add in the diamond hit factor plus ball scatter gives that well known factor RANDOMNESS.

Your bet management uses past results to control your betting decisions. A positive strategy  rather than relying on lucky numbers and/or emotion to control your bets.
MM complements controlled betting. What are the table limits for your play? How long & often are your sessions ? Your results so far show positive results.
However luck is also a factor in winning & as you say every spin can't be predicted. 

As I've already stated above the chances/odds of winning vs losing on even money bets is 48.65% to 51.35%. The odds/chances are with the casino by 2.7%.
In 2 weeks of play you say you've won every session. Good luck with your play and maybe post your play method & some results when you can ?

[kingsroulette]

Every spin is an independent event and completely unrelated to past spins. Ball or wheel doesn't have eyes or memory or emotions. What you see as a balance or correction is nothing but myth. Every number is equally likely to hit, unless biased, so gradually they all get almost equal in a large sample of data. This is called, "Law of large numbers".
                      It seems that every member here has his own set of fallacies and misconceptions and they are happy with that too.

[Drazen]

Kingsroulette you are very wrong and you are the one who is in fallacy.
The gamblers fallacy is just a consequence of independent trials and says that given 10 reds in a row, the next outcome is just as likely to be red as black.

However, independent trials follow distributions and exhibit regular patterns as defined by the laws of probability, which means to that extent they're not independent. GF is about the next spin, not the next sequence of spins. In fact, probability says that given a strong deviation over a certain sequence, the following sequence is more likely to be closer to the average.

That is my friend called regression toward mean, and that is real phenomenon in randomness. 
link:://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_toward_the_mean

The 'law of series' says that a double  is half as likely as a chop, a run of 3 is half as likely as a double, a run of 4 is half as likely as a run of 3 and so on as you said it too, but there is more to this as those are not only correlations between series. Same way you have runs of 2, 3 etc vs all other series (3,4,5,6 etc) and so on...

All those things must assert themselves for those „laws“ and probabilites to manifest in the  longterm expectations and if you say that doesn't have sense as that is „longterm“ which isnt few spins or human length session, I ll say that you are wrong again. IF probabilities don't assert  in the short run ( at least to some extent) they can't then in the longterm too. That is logical too if you think about it.

There is also one thing I do incorporate in my play which is diversification. IT also helps to reduce variance and you can read about that on wikipedia too. In other words the trick is not to rely on one single probability and surf on it. No.

This doesnt wins flat bet. But it reduces variance so it is easyer to profit using progressions and sharp MM. That is the point here.

I play only live B&M delaer to answer your question. Outside EC-s only. La Partage rule on the table.

Best

[ausguy]

Why do I feel I'm wasting my time giving reasoned answers on here when Kingsroulette fails to respond to my probability answer & Drazen attributes some of my comments to Kingsroulette ? The answers are LAME DUCK at best ?

I'm off to do some baccarat testing.