I haven't found a way to exploit this (or to beat roulette), but it certainly shows that we

a) don't have to look at past spins in order to create "cycles", and

b) that we can link them to certain betting positions by chosing our numbers accordingly.

Thanks for the great ideas Red.

I was thinking though for your cycles of how many #'s do I have to bet for a hit, u could also look at the opposite for an unhit, so...

Bet 35 numbers/ hit

Bet 34 numbers/ hit

Bet 33 numbers/ hit

Bet 32 numbers/No hit = cycle length 4

Yeah, there are probably many ways to create and define cycles. We could also rearrange the number in our cycle, after all past spins have no value, right?

Let's say for example the random stream we get is:

1

29

12

**11**30

32

3

25

**11**But after every spin, we could rearrange the numbers in an ascending order, so at the end the cycle would look like this:

1

3

**11**12

25

29

30

32

**11**We could also rearrange the numbers on the table after every spin, to create a desired pattern. But the issue is that the patterns would only be there after the spin and after our rearrangement, so we wouldn't be able to bet on them.

The question is, does this messing around with cycles have any use? I don't think so. Or at least I couldn't find any. All of this leads to waiting for a repeat or a trigger. So what exactly are the events or the repeats that we are looking for?

Perhaps we need to forget the numbers and not wait for them to repeat.

If I'm not mistaken the famous Dyk said that a repeating number is not an event we need to look for. Every spin is an event, and how you define those events completely depends on your perspective. The same event is a repeat and a unique at the same time. There are always opposite sides. So what else can repeat, other than numbers?

There has to be something, the HG supposed to be based on the pigeonhole principle, which is based on repeats.