Thanks ati - read it. And Pri - nice to see you lurking here. I see your corrections - noted.
I need 24 hours to go back and analyse the first 6 pages and then the vids. The only thing that gives me pause is the veiled references to Parrondo's Paradox. I understand that well, and have tested it to the death. The actual mathematical phenomenon involved can not be applied to gambling systems - the odds will not allow it as there is no positive advantage bet. There are odds-on bets but they are still not positive advantage which PP requires for one of the B bets. Others have tried too and all have failed. PP itself is of no value to us.
So -where does that leave us? Well, I can only assume that the references to PP are only done as similes - not for actual use. That you use 2 non-random events and that you alternate them in some fashion that is for us to discover. Actually, we also have to discover the 2nd non-random event don't we? I know it is probably on the 6-lines but it can't be VdW because this would be far too complex - even the dozens have a sequence length of 27 and nobody is able to accurately find all the AP's in that on the fly. Does anybody have any idea what the 2nd non-random event might be?
Oh well, let the head scratching begin! There is way too much so far undiscovered for us to be able to derive anything useful.
Rog
This may help. Based on the 97 cycles I tested:
1. 38 ended on the first spin
2. 43 ended in 2 spins
3. 16 ended in 3 spins
4. Based on this, 39% hit on the first spin. If playing last 2 dozens on the second spin, I would've got a 73% rate.
Stats show better than expected returns. Not sure if it's due to varience or edge until further testing