• Welcome to #1 Roulette Forum & Message Board | www.RouletteForum.cc.


WARNING: Forums often contain bad advice & systems that aren't properly tested. Do NOT believe everything. Read these links: The Facts About What Works & Why | How To Proplerly Test Systems | The Top 5 Proven Systems | Best Honest Online Casinos

Main Menu
Popular pages:

Roulette System

The Roulette Systems That Really Work

Roulette Computers

Hidden Electronics That Predict Spins

Roulette Strategy

Why Roulette Betting Strategies Lose

Roulette System

The Honest Live Online Roulette Casinos

Sorry there are no CAPITAL letters here

Started by TriCycle, Sep 10, 03:06 PM 2023

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.


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.
I don't have TheHolyGrail.


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 don't have TheHolyGrail.


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
I don't have TheHolyGrail.


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...
I don't have TheHolyGrail.


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?))))
I don't have TheHolyGrail.