0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Kan@am@

  • 50+ posts Member
  • **
  • 80
  • Member
  • Rated: +4
There is an edge in EC,but its created by Money Management and delivers win rate of 1 unit per 3.8 spins.It is not progression.

*

Kan@am@

  • 50+ posts Member
  • **
  • 80
  • Member
  • Rated: +4
Its not a flat bet either.

*

Kan@am@

  • 50+ posts Member
  • **
  • 80
  • Member
  • Rated: +4
Hi Kan@am@

Yes, you are correct, the EDGE created by the Triplets is very small indeed, but an EDGE none the less.

Have you or anyone previously seen a real honest to goodness mathematical EDGE in NZ Roulette, Baccarat or Craps or any other binary game?

Probably not and neither did I, until now.

What I am exploring is my theory of Group of Spins that create a DEPENDENCY rather than the INDEPENDENT single spin theory.

You can create a DEPENDENCY with a Group of 2 Spins (Doublets), a Group of 3 Spins (Triplets) or a Group of 9 Spins (VDW).

This DEPENDENCY created by the Group of Spins is the only way that I have found in the last 10 years that creates a truly mathematical EDGE.

So the question becomes would you rather continue to test systems that have a built in EDGE for the Casino (Single Spin Independence) or would you rather develop systems that have a built in EDGE for the player?

Although the EDGE is small you can still capitalize on it with smart progressions or by combining several other Group of Spins to run together or separately, etc.

In my opinion, we should be using the Group of Spins theory as a foundation for developing winning systems.

Cheers
Nick

No doubt there is potential in this concept.

luckyfella

  • 100+ posts Member
  • ***
  • 207
  • Roulette Forum .cc | Member
  • Rated: +14
The edge for group dependency is large. Just that you are scratching the surface
IGNORE LIST - STEVE, CALEB

Left the forum - 2 Dec 2018

 

Popular pages: