I've run out of good names

[Robeenhuut]

Hello George

Very nice idea. Original Tiers et Tout like also Boffins bet that rely of not having 2 consecutive losses are tough with any bet selection. I would play it with some win goal though. 50 as Ralph suggested seems to be a good number.

Regards

[Ralph]

A bet selection may be needed, I did it again, lost the first four bets. Made a "shorthand" betting 15 for a fast recover. Won this bet, lost four again, won a shorthand bet, lost the first four again, lost the shorthand once, fla tbet  15 until even.

Will try again, but the wheel is not so friendly for now.

[TwoCatSam]

G

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I see RRR or BBB, I've lost that game.  I see that a lot on BV.  I mean a lot!

Sam

[GLC]

Okay folks,  I'm not really that interested in your hard luck stories.  Don't mean to me callous but we all know that RRR or BBB comes up a lot, and I mean a lot, that is unless you're playing for triples and then they don't come up as much as you'd like.

This is a betting scheme.  It can be manipulated a variety of ways with different win targets and different numbers of attacks before you cry uncle.

It's like flat betting one unit of Red only.  That darn Black keeps coming up.  That's not fair.  All I've got to say is, "Duh".

Alright, now that I finished that rant, another suggestion.  Let's say we're playing 1 and 2 to start with and we're shooting for winning 21 units.  If we have a double loss before we reach our target, we start over with 1 and 2 and if we win 3 units before losing 2 times in a row, we have recovered our loss.  Now, since triples come around a lot (by the way, I'm not recommending betting for chops as the best bet selection, use any that you like) you could wait until a triple or longer has stopped and begin betting from that point.  Not that I think it will make a lot of difference, but some may think so, reasoning that if you just had a double loss, the chances are less that you'll have another one right away.

I wouldn't recommend playing this long term.  Rather set aside a set amount of units like my craps playing friend who sets aside 7 attacks (he's got something going on with the number 7).  That's 21 units and gives him 7 chances to win his 21 unit target.  Like I said, if he loses 3 units, his goal is to recover those 3 units and then it's just like he just got to the table.  He waits until he has a double loss on paper and starts betting again.  His bet selection isn't playing for alternating results but I don't think it matters, really.

He doesn't keep track of his overall results, but he wins often enough that he gives it a shot every time he goes to play craps.

Good luck to everyone,

George

[Ralph]

If bet selections work, I do not really know. We have all seen it is streaks of chops and streaks of runs.
Old  gamblers discussed  this much.  On run follow on chops try to catch every second.

I still think I have some use of trying to read the past blending into now and future. What ever else we do I think we plan this way, even if the future are less than 50% sure. Just the way we are.

[TwoCatSam]

Well, G, maybe I should bet for a streak!  If'n I win a streak, I can buy a steak.

S

[GLC]

Okay, I appologize for my "Duh" comment.

Here's my favorite way to play this system.  I use the bet selection method I describe in the 1st post.  I use the 1 2 4 8 bet progression.  That's a 15 unit risk.  I play until I reach 75 units on the table which is what you have if you follow my progression posted above.

If I lose 4 times in a row before reaching my win target, I reset back to 1 2 4 8.  I play per the progression, but I only play until I recover my 15 units.  Once I recover the 15 units I reset all the way back to 1 2 4 8 and start again.  If I have time, I wait until I have 4 losses in a row then on the next win, I start playing again.  I only play until I reach 75 units on the table or lose 75 units.

That's 5 attempts starting with 15 units.

Test it before you play it for real money, unless you're playing for pennies or dimes, which in this case, isn't real money.

GLC

[Ralph]

If your target is 75 and you lose 75 if not win, then it have to win a fraction more than lose, to be better of than a single EC bet on 75 units.

That's I think is the answer a test can give.

Do not under estimate 1 cent  chips, some methods will never work using bigger stakes, this methods win 10000 and more, and can lose 100000, the average bet can be $$$.

In land casinos with min bet of 5$ (here about 7$) you have to use a method suited, I think this is one of those.

[Master_of_pockets]

Clever bet selection GLC. Thanks
Have u tested it flat betting in a LOT of spins?

[GLC]

Clever bet selection GLC. Thanks
Have u tested it flatbetting in a LOT of spins?

No.

I have found that the only reason to test any of these systems is to determine if you like the way they play and feel.  And the speed at which they move in and out of losing and winning.

As you know, we can test a system for thousands of spins and  it looks really good but what we didn't know was that those thousands of spins were not perfect in their distribution and actually favored your little system.  So you clean out your life savings, head to the casino. 

You win for a while and then you have the worst spin sequence you've never seen before for your system and you lose all your money.  What you didn't know was that the spins you just experienced were a little worse for your system than a normal distribution of outcomes.  So from a little better than normal to a little worse than normal equals disaster.

I don't test a LOT of anything anymore.

Hope this answers your question.

GLC

[Ralph]

Yes I think any method can win or lose, testing OK, but why zillions of tests? We know the answer it will fail in such a long run.  I look at the method, and I can every time see it can lose.

The simple case: You can never cover all outcome and stay plus in any spin.
You can win, if not every outcome is not covered.
If any outcome is not covered you can lose, many times in a row.
Every outcome will soon or later give a good streak, so you will win a lot, but the opposite is also the case.
Do not underestimate the luck! We tend to think its skill or a good method, it has a part, but the major reason we win is luck.

[GLC]

Yes I think any method can win or lose, testing OK, but why zillions of tests? We know the answer it will fail in such a long run.  I look at the method, and I can every time see it can lose.

The simple case: You can never cover all outcome and stay plus in any spin.
You can win, if not every outcome is not covered.
If any outcome is not covered you can lose, many times in a row.
Every outcome will soon or later give a good streak, so you will win a lot, but the opposite is also the case.
Do not underestimate the luck! We tend to think its skill or a good method, it has a part, but the major reason we win is luck.

There it is in a nutshell.
I agree with everything Ralph said completely except I am not against skill and experience contributing to someone who's a long term winner.
I think Flatino's system is like that.  It's a pretty static playing method, but he seems to make adjustments at times that the average player won't have enough savvy to make and it can be the difference between winning and losing.

Look how many sessions he has won and posted on this forum and he has testified to winning thousands of units in real play and I believe without any doubt that anyone who can swim a mile or more at the age of 73 won't lie to us.  (There's the answer to your yellow question, Sammy).

[Master_of_pockets]

In my opinion the only reason to adjast a bet selection to the opposite one is the profit/losing ratio.

Thanks for ur reply GLC...but if u aren t making a lot of tests then how are u gona know-find out if a system is good or bad?

I also agree to most of the things that Ralph said.

[Master_of_pockets]

I forgot to say that if there are no better bet selections than others ,then there also can not be a better hit ratio among diferent  bet selections either.
So if the 1st can t happen then the 2nd one can t happen either.

In my research I have seen that there are not better bet selections or worst ones. All are equal and all are behaving in the same manner.

But I always have an open mind in this subject and I hope one day something will be found
This is also the reason why I am still searhing and exploring the game.

I am happy that most of us are doing the same thing.
What we do is rare...there are not a lot of ppl on the planet that are doing what we are doing.(exploring the game)

[speed]

MOP is right every system designer should set the graph test results for his system at least 3000 spins, It should be enough to see the system had the potential