Well I will keep it up and give it some thoughts I will test some things but I have to say that I agree with Two Cat Sam, but at the same time I find it fun and interesting to play that way, I will continue this but every thing takes time because this is a new concept for me.

I will be back and maybe we can come up with a strategy that does work. Now I have to make some effort to the baccarat section.

Cheers LS

Well, I think there is something here, but if no one adds to what is already here, then we will have put on it hold for now. I am willing to entertainment any continued progress on this topic. It is unfortunate the thread author abandoned the thread

I think in part that is true. I personally think, if you review my last 6 post or so on this topic it is more about adding variables to the same.
I.e. you take an apple. it will always be an apple you can bet on it. However, if you factor in other variables about the apple like, shape, color, height, width, depth, texture, smell, etc. now you you are armed with getter distinction but the top level (apple) doesn't change. That's another reason, I created the L0W registry, to evaluate a more multi-dimensional change. The more dimensions you add to something the less subtle the changes are within itself. it is the interworking of all multi-dimensional subtle changes that causes the big top level change, like an apple gone bad in texture, shape, smell. I dont mean to get too metaphysical here but it does have its root in this application.
Also, for greater emphasis here, the work that Victor and Lanky have done on the LW methodology is fundamental here, however, it is only linear to this concept, its needs to be applied in a more dynamic or multi-dimensional fashion, again that is why I modified that concept with the L0W registry. its like tracking the LW for several interconnected games to give you one best case result of the overall game, because what manners most is the overall game. I hope I am making sense here. I feel I'm starting to write that the author of the thread. Scary!

Bloom

Yes, Sam and there maybe other acceptable patterns to capitalize on. The key is applying the fundamentals of the LW to a multidimensional structure (ie. b/r & e/o or b/r & h/l or more add one more dimension b/r & e/o & h/l), essentially we have to establish an out of balance pattern, that would otherwise be subtle to top level game.  So, we would have to look at more spins and maybe we should start a new thread in the testing zone to iron this out. These out of balance patterns to me are stronger than the typical 2 dimensional patterns we have been used to. If you agree, I will start a new thread and maybe LS and others will join in at some point. In reply #73, my 2 independent test, I up 800 u in 17 spins, using the L0W registry, now I dont know if this will hold up, but this is what I call exploitation from those results, even if short term. I could walk out the door with those results.
Bloom

yes, that is an acceptable start

Because when I do the math, I see indeed a tiny decrease in variance and an increase in the house edge, but I am not able to keep a reduced variance and standard house edge by "taking the square root of the original matrix".  Need some input here!

greetings rd