The biggest hurdle to the Holy Grail?

[falkor2k15]

This could my best ever discovery in the game of Roulette! It's a freakin' stroke of genius that I even thought of it this morning on my way to work: my train was positioned in this exact spot as the idea formulated in my head:


Previously, when testing for impact, all spins were found to be independent of the previous spins.
Spin 1 > Spin 2 > Spin 3 > Event reached
Spin 1 > Spin 2 > Event reached
Spin 1 > Spin 2 > Spin 3 > Event reached

OR

Event (1) > Event (2) > Event (3) > Secondary Event reached
Event (1) > Event (2) > Secondary Event reached
Event (1) > Event (2) > Event (3) > Secondary Event reached

Every part of the cycle was found to be independent of the previous part. So let's say you want to find out what will come next after:

Spin 1 > Spin 2...
OR
Event (1) > Event (2)...

Even though there is more chance to get a repeat on the above outcomes when reaching the next event (in an uncertain number of spins), the next outcome in the sequence towards this uncertainty will always have the same odds of appearing, i.e. it appears independent of the previous outcomes in the sequence.

We are aiming to get from Spin 1 to the next event (or from Event (1) to reaching the next secondary event). The target event is dependent on what uniques came before the event was fulfilled; therefore there should be some dependency in the next spin. And I have thought about this problem for the best part of a year: how to play for multi-spin events 1 spin at a time?

The solution is not to focus at the start of the sequence, but at the end of the sequence. And here's how it's achieved:

Spin 1...

Spin 1 > (Spin 2 > Spin 3 > Event reached)
Spin 1 > (Spin 2 > Event reached)
Spin 1 > (Spin 2 > Spin 3 > Event reached)

We must first determine the most common sequence between Spin 2 and reaching the target event (the bits in brackets). Once we have the most common sequence we can then look at the outcome of Spin 2 specifically for that common sequence. So to reiterate: we don't look at the most common result for Spin 1 > Spin 2 because that will be independent; we first look for the most common finishing sequence and take the Spin 2 result from that instead, which will give us the impacted/dependent Spin 2 outcome.

So it is possible to play for next spin when playing for next event - but it depends on the testing framework/methodology for finding the spin-to-spin impact.

Again, that took a whole year to solve! And it could be the very key needed in finding edge since there are constant ratios (and therefore impacts) when playing for repeats - after correctly tapping into the dependency that is.

When I look back that has to be the most difficult stumbling block, yet it's really quite simple when you know how! Even so... it's sheer luck that I was able to solve it - but I doubt many others will understand the significance?

[maestro]

haha ..you better catch your train...

in finding edge since there are constant ratios

constant ratio is 2 dozens vs one...so what

[falkor2k15]

 

haha ..you better catch your train...


constant ratio is 2 dozens vs one...so what

It means: when we include sleepers then the impact is messed up between one dataset to another. Sometimes it will say outcome 1 was impacted - other datasets outcome 2 might be more favourable - so is totally erratic.

[falkor2k15]

IT WORKED! I was right....   

For example, here we have a running total of CL1-CL3 (Dozen Cycles) that are reset/retracked after 6 permutations:


The old way of measuring impact was to check column 2 after filtering column 1. So we would change spin 1 to a trigger, such as CL2 = 1, but spin 2 would always show the same stats for CL1-3, as independent results, regardless of the first column:
CL1 = 33% chance
CL2 = 44% chance
CL3 = 23% chance

So to tap into the dependency created by playing for a running total of 6 (and then retracking) as our target event - it could be any event i.e. after 100 spins or after the next repeat or when 3 uniques show - we first total up the finishing sequences then take the spin 2 result from the most common:





Above you can see the top 5 finishing sequences (with CL2 as a trigger on mini-event 1) began with CL2 followed by CL1. Therefore, after CL2... we expect not independent outcomes with the same stats as last spin/mini-event - instead we actually expect CL1 to follow (all the while we are playing for this kind of event that lasts for 6 permutations). In other words: the most common outcome for spin 2 depends, first and foremost, on the most common finishing sequence.

Again: CL2... =more chance to be followed by CL1! And this is what I long suspected but was unable to demonstrate through any testing methodology/framework - till now.

To say the above is an important step is an understatement... perhaps others could have done it quicker - but it took me 1 whole year to solve.

[falkor2k15]

This discovery is massive - you get me though!? 

Summary

• The most common sequence in 2 permutations without any event in mind is CL2CL2 (independent)
• The most common sequence in 2 permutations with a typical event in mind is CL2CL1 (dependent)

Both require different testing methods. The above is the basis and foundation of edge. So the challenge now is to improve on this basic edge by working different events and groups. Priyanka totally misled us. 

[falkor2k15]

I was sitting/standing right here in this spot about the get off the train when my brain suddenly stepped up a gear, and I was able to envisage everything I've explained above - within a split-second! That is really good brain power for me since my job only requires 5% - but that moment took all 100%! It could have easily been in 5-10 years time that this miraculous event would take place, but it happened at that very moment on 2nd February, 10:10 AM... I was only thinking about PA's topic regarding variance after 100 spins, but it was a very big step to get from there to the above understanding: based on the ending of a sequence instead of the start of a sequence. How I managed to figure that out was a milestone compared to figuring out something easy-peasy like the flat-earth... a no brainer! 



I doubt I'm savant material, but let me explain the visualisation process that took place via the pineal gland.

Firstly I thought about sequences of different lengths that arrive at the next event, say a repeat:

CL1 CL2 CL2
CL2 CL1 CL3 CL3
CL1 CL1

Then I imagined they were all being pushed towards the right hand side - being squashed against the target event.
CL1            CL2 CL2
CL2     CL1 CL3 CL3
CL1            CL1 CL1

Then I think a picture like this formed in my mind:
CL1         CL2 CL2
CL2     CL1 CL3 CL3
CL1         CL1 CL1

And within a split-second all the rest had been figured out! Best thing in the world when that happens!  

[RouletteGhost]

So let's assume for one second the fluoride and chemtrails haven't totally fooked your pineal gland, would you mind breaking this down?

Example

How is it played

For the love of all that is good and just, explain this in simple terms

I cracked open a beer and I am listening

[falkor2k15]

It's a very tough one to explain... words fail me... above is the best I can do. Old thinking was that impact could be determined by looking at the average for the next spin over thousands of permutations whilst playing for an event, but new thinking is that the next spin is actually calculated via the most common or average finishing sequence whilst playing the event - whatever the 2nd spin attached to that sequence happens to be. So we can use this technique to figure out the best impact for any given situation whilst playing for an event. For example:

Target event = 5 repeats

0 repeats = 10 numbers
1 repeat = 16 numbers
2 repeats = 9 numbers
3 repeats = 2 numbers

Using the same methodology, we can figure out which group(s) we should bet for the next spin - or which should be stitched for the next series of spins - towards the 5 repeat target event.

[mogul397]

So let's assume for one second the fluoride and chemtrails haven't totally fooked your pineal gland, would you mind breaking this down?

Example

How is it played

For the love of all that is good and just, explain this in simple terms

I cracked open a beer and I am listening

Or to put it another way......


Huh?