Most of the members in here thinks that there are more in roulette than pure Maths.
One of those things that they think that can help in winning consistently is the HIT and RUN gambling fallacy theory.
Ok I am here to help them understand the so SIMPLE WHY this can t help in any way....
Take a graph of any system that has been played in lets say 100.000 spins.
As we all know this grapf in the end it will end up with a DOWN(loser).
Even if the down is comming slowly and not instantly if you will observe the graph , after a point (and not only 1 point but after a lot of points) it can NOT recover.It can not get in a new Profit....and this is natural BECAUSE IF IT COULD RECOVER IT WOULDN T END WITH A DOWN.
Now take any spin from this graph and imagine that this is the spin that you are starting playing in the Real Casino play.....
You will see that in a lot of sessions you will be able to come up with just +1 chip and leave the Casno as winners(Hit and RUN).
BUT as you will realise later in the graph when u will start again in the next visit from where you finished the last visit, there will be a time-visit (or a lot of times-visits) that you will not be able to make +1 chip......and why is this???? SIMPLY BECAUSE THE GRAPH IS ENDING UP AS A LOSER.
Now If we have a grapg that the system were ending like a winner (UP) then u will realise that in every visit , or even not in every vistit , BUT in the majority of ur visits you will be able to come UP +1 chip.......
So If we have a sustem that is a loser in the long RUN , then we can t win with HIT and RUN.
But if we have a system that is able to win on the long RUN then even if we will play HIT and RUN, we CAN win....
I hope after reading this post the 10% of you will get our of the dark.
Thanks
Please let s all try to keep a polite attitude in this Topic because it s a VERY productive one.
Thanks
I think the reason why hit & run might seem plausible to some is because of:
1) the house edge.
2) deviation.
It's true that the longer you play, the more the house edge nibbles away at your profits. It's also true that if you keep playing the same system, sooner or later you will hit a really bad downturn. The hit & run brigade think the solution is to keep sessions short, but they forget that every short session contributes to a long session. X number of spins is no different whether you break it up into 10 sessions of X/10 or play the whole X spins in one go. If you knew when to end your session it would mean you have a bet selection which gives you an advantage, in that case hit & run isn't necessary - you just wait for the next opportunity.
""""""""but they forget that every short session contributes to a long session. X number of spins is no different whether you break it up into 10 sessions of X/10 or play the whole X spins in one go."""""""""""""
YES !!!!!!!!!!!! YES !!!!!!!!!!!!
Finally ! A person with education and coomon sence !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)
Ps. Let s hope that we are helping some members here.
Don't know if I dare post on this thread, as they tend to get deleted, but here goes....
For me, the New trick is...... Variance. (Variability to U & Me)
The Hit & Run thought must rain in everyone's ideas, and play traits, and they do in mine too.
If U stick to One system, and play Hit and Run.... U WILL one day get burnt.
I think that's taken as a given, except maybe for One or Two members who would argue the toss.
If U stick to Two systems, and play Hit1, Hit2, & then Run, u will get burnt.....a little later.
But if u adapt your game, and play like this:-
- Hit 1 ....reset
- Hit 2 ....reset
- Hit 3 ....reset
- Hit 4 ....reset
- Hit 5 ....reset
- Hit # ...reset
- Hit 2. ...reset
- Hit 4 ....reset
- Run.....reset
[reveal]Each "Hit" is a different method, system in play, and achieving a Net Increase in BR.[/reveal]
your much more likely to have a more comfortable Journey through your roulette play.
Variance is key.
Adapt to the trend of the results, don't return to bad "Numbers" too soon.
and...
try new ideas, new systems, new methods, every time U play, till You have a bag full of "Weaponry", and your disposal, so when U come up against the "Downward Ski Slope", You can change tactics, and approach the game from a renewed perspective.
Delete if "Irrelevant". ::)
No its not irrelevant...its a very nice post for the ppl to see what to AVOID..... ;D
"""your much more likely to have a more comfortable Journey through your roulette play."""
No you will NOT.
Its the exact same thing !
Simply because you do NOT know WHEN the systems will be favoured or RUINED by the outcomes(Randomness)
So you are playing blind again and the house edje is there !
Quote from: Bayes on Sep 25, 12:04 PM 2011
I think the reason why hit & run might seem plausible to some is because of:
1) the house edge.
2) deviation.
It's true that the longer you play, the more the house edge nibbles away at your profits. It's also true that if you keep playing the same system, sooner or later you will hit a really bad downturn. The hit & run brigade think the solution is to keep sessions short, but they forget that every short session contributes to a long session. X number of spins is no different whether you break it up into 10 sessions of X/10 or play the whole X spins in one go. If you knew when to end your session it would mean you have a bet selection which gives you an advantage, in that case hit & run isn't necessary - you just wait for the next opportunity.
let's put it this way. "Bad downturns" are not everywhere. they are more likely to be encountered
if u "ask for them", playing long sessions. that's what experienced players know.
it does not mean of course that betting cold numbers will win on a long run if u use it as hit-n-run. but it can lose significally less if u do. if u play hit-n-run like 20 spins in a few days and u play
200 spins in one day, after long time u will see a huge difference in results. it does not mean of course that u win with hit-run on a long run, but u will lose significally less. u will get in serious trouble less. that's a fact of gambling.
and there is a rule for any serious gambler "quit while u r ahead". it is kind of hit-n-run also, if u think about it
"quit while u r ahead". it is kind of hit-n-run also, if u think about it
Yes sure ...but it can t garranty to you consecitive wins-money as you think. ;)
Quote from: RouletteExplorer on Sep 25, 12:28 PM 2011
""""""""but they forget that every short session contributes to a long session. X number of spins is no different whether you break it up into 10 sessions of X/10 or play the whole X spins in one go."""""""""""""
YES !!!!!!!!!!!! YES !!!!!!!!!!!!
Finally ! A person with education and coomon sence !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)
Ps. Let s hope that we are helping some members here.
You basically saying people who dont agree with you dont have education?? You must treat people properly chap your really rude!
Quote from: RouletteExplorer on Sep 25, 12:44 PM 2011
"quit while u r ahead". it is kind of hit-n-run also, if u think about it
Yes sure ...but it can t garranty to you consecitive wins-money as you think. ;)
i never said about any "guarantees". u can't have them in roulette. but generally the difference in real life is huge. those who keep pushing their luck for hours end up losing a lot, and those who follow this rule do not always win, but for sure lose significally less.
of course using hit-n-run is no guarantee to win in a long run, but at least u reduce your chances to lose a lot. thus making more chances to win
Quote from: iggiv on Sep 25, 12:42 PM 2011
if u play hit-n-run like 20 spins in a few days and u play 200 spins in one day, after long time u will see a huge difference in results.
Yes, but that's not what I understand by hit & run. Say you play 900 spins in a month. Do you believe that playing 30 spins a day for 30 days is better than playing 300 spins per day for 3 days?
"""You basically saying people who don't agree with you don't have education?"""
Its not about agreeing with me or not....
Its about not understanding the basic principals of Maths
Bayes,
basically roulette hates any patterns. so playing 30 spins each day for a month on the same wheel is a pattern. it can be dangerous.
i would say playing less in the same amount of time (with no patterns, regularity etc) will make u lose less than playing huge sessions of 300 spins.
all this of course does not include biased wheel playing, where more u play certain numbers-- more u win
Iggiv what you say in ur posts is this:
Play less spins in every visit for ur BR to last longer... LOL
This is true ofcource...but it doesn t give you any advantage .....so HIT and RUN can t help you win more
Quote from: RouletteExplorer on Sep 25, 01:07 PM 2011
Iggiv what you say in your posts is this:
Play less spins in every visit for your BR to last longer... LoL
This is true ofcource...but it doesn't give you any advantage .....so HIT and RUN can t help you win more
no, that's not what i am saying. but doesn't matter. u r right, u won this argument already. i am not arguing with u anymore bud
The dark is leaving slowly.....
Will you come to the light with us iggiv? :)
Quote from: pratikpop on Sep 25, 01:12 PM 2011
iggiv i don't think hit and run would benefit..i agree with bayes..playing 300 spins in one day or 30 spins in 10 days is the same..losing streaks are bound to come...that's i recommend a big BR with lowest initial bet :)
well that's my opinioun..no offences to anyone
basically there is more stuff than just hit-n-run.
but anyway most of professional system players would agree that such regular long sessions are not a smart way to play. let's say that in certain period of time u have 5 winning streaks, 5 losing streaks, and 1 very bad losing streak which is gonna kill u. they don't happen all the time. so let's say u came in the middle of this period of time and played a short session. u got most likely either
winning or slightly losing streak. u left a table with a slight win or slight loss. but if u played all this period of time u got this losing streak and u r done.
so finally yes, u will encounter a bad losing streak no doubts about it. but if play shorter sessions with some other rules included in your play u don't encounter those losing streaks as frequently as with this 300 spin plays. it does not mean that u will stay a winner in a long run. but it does mean that most likely u will lose significally less
i hope i made myself clear. and i want to bail out of this subject, thanx. wishing all the best to u guys
but if play shorter sessions with some other rules included in your play u don't encounter those losing streaks as frequently as with this 300 spin plays. it does not mean that u will stay a winner in a long run. but it does mean that most likely u will lose significally less
Its the same
Quote from: RouletteExplorer on Sep 25, 01:19 PM 2011
The dark is leaving slowly.....
Will you come to the light with us iggiv? :)
thanx god we are not in the dark ages anymore. or u would of course have burned me on the stake as heretic which does not accept light but rather deals with dark. only the holy fire would have to clean my soul. and i do admit that this kind of threat would make me accept your holy light
;D
iggiv
It isn t funny....
Its important for a Mod not to be in the dark about the subject of the forum that he moderates....
And that s why "speed" got upset....because you are not just a newby member...but a DODERATOR.
I feel the same way about stop losses and win targets too. It comes down to knowing WHEN to implement them. Say you set your stop loss at -100 units, the next 10 or 20 spins after you quit might well have produced the winners you needed to recover. Or suppose you set your win target and 10 units. Some sessions might take you 100 or 200 spins to achieve it, and other times you might never get into the black - you hit your stop loss before it happens.
It's true that each bet selection will generate the same results and in that sense no particular bet selection is better than any other, but if you have multiple bet selections and switch from one to another based on the statistics which are common to all of them, this reduces the variance. "Don't put all your eggs in one basket". There is mathematical proof that this reduces the variance. You could argue that this method of choosing your bets is itself a bet selection and should be no better than any other, so it might seem as though I'm being inconsistent. I have to concede that this would be a fair comment, but all I can say is, give it a try. You might think that doing this is subject to the same weakness as stop losses and win targets; ie - how do you know WHEN to switch from one to the other?. My results show that it doesn't much matter, just so long as you keep switching. The probability of hitting a bad deviation is less when you are using multiple bet selections because it depends on you repeatedly choosing each BS at the moment it enters the sequence from hell (and the sequence from hell is relatively rare even for one bet selection). But don't take my word for it, try it and see.
Quote from: RouletteExplorer on Sep 25, 01:34 PM 2011
iggiv
It isn t funny....
Its important for a Mod not to be in the dark about the subject of the forum that he moderates....
And that s why "speed" got upset....because you are not just a newby member...but a DODERATOR.
bud don't try to push too hard. mod or not we all entitled to our opinions, and u or Speed or anybody else has to accept this fact.
being a mod does not have to do anything with your opinon on roulette. i can practice a voodoo trying to defeat roulette and still be a mod. i have RIGHT. as You have rights. so don't try to make it look like i have less rights than u because i am mod. some people just think it. if u r mod You have
to bow before other opinions and admit that they are right, otherwise being against means you
use your power to go against holy light.
no holy lights here. don't' push anyone into your believes be it religion or math or nature or space or helicopter flying. REmember ANYONE IS ENTITLED TO HIS/HER OPINION as long as his opion is not of a kind of personal insult to others.
i am not insulting anyone with my believes about roulette, so i am entitled to it be mod or bot.
OK? accept it and live with it! i am a free man in a free world just like u!
It's true that each bet selection will generate the same results and in that sense no particular bet selection is better than any other, but if you have multiple bet selections and switch from one to another based on the statistics which are common to all of them, this reduces the variance. "Don't put all your eggs in one basket".
I agree with ya Bias and this is what my systems want to have inside ;)
iggiv
don't't to push anyone into your believes
This is what you fail to understand!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
They are NOT my believes ! Its the ABSOLUT MATHS !!!! In Maths there are NO believes!
Maths aren t like if i like this girl u have to like it too !!!!
Maths are ABSOLUT....when will u understand this....Roulette is nothing else than maths....
OK u convinced me.
i was wrong. i don't wanna be burned on the stake.
hit and run doesn't help, stop losses do not help, and win goal doesn't help.
what does help in roulette is exceptional knowledge of trigonometry, algebra,
integrals and of course probability laws. when u know that well,
u don't need stop loss or win goal or bankroll or hit-n-run
byyyyyyeeeeeee
hit and run doesn't help, stop losses do not help, and win goal doesn't help.
well done you have just been developed into the nest level.....its the level where you left the Gambling Fallacy behind.
So, lets ask a question of our expert Host here.
U get to your game, and U see this on the Marquee.......[attachimg=1]
What do U do?
Play for the Obvious colour that's missing, or Look for something else? HUH?
Quote from: RouletteExplorer on Sep 25, 01:48 PM 2011
iggiv
don't't to push anyone into your believes
This is what you fail to understand!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
They are NOT my believes ! Its the ABSOLUT MATHS !!!! In Maths there are NO believes!
Maths aren t like if i like this girl You have to like it too !!!!
Maths are ABSOLUT....when will u understand this....Roulette is nothing else than maths....
The problem I have with this post, you can not be talking/posting regarding methods AND at the same time, preach about math. F**k math, I do just fine at this game (and playing 00) and I could careless......WHAT'S SUPPOSE TO HAPPEN. :-[ Means nothing to me.
Ken
that's what i find real weird. talking about unbeatable game then trying hard to beat it accepting the fact that You can't. Well, i got no problem with that. as Ch.arles Bronson said in one of his movies:
in this world there are lots of people with weird ideas.
True, you cant have BOTH.
A) Roulette is not beatable because of the math
AND
B) Posting methods.
Ken
I like it Ken.
Quote
and I could careless......WHAT'S SUPPOSE TO HAPPEN. Means nothing to me.
Good response. :thumbsup:
After all, your there playing the game at the Cutting Face.
I applaud your attitude Sir.
It is one good topic RE. To potential creators of roulette systems it is what these systems should be based on if u think they can win in long run because no one wheels is perfect random;
1. MATH (some light progresion with combination with little bias(that have about 80% of whels today) may be able to work in long run)
2. BIAS ( The problem is that most modern wheels no bias to overcome the house advantage)
3. DS (this is only can work short period of time, because dealers are changing)
4. VB (this only can work on land casinos if whels have tilt(and it is very hard to find because casino see this before u) because online we can't get ball and rotor speed on time.
This fact only affects the game roulette to overcome house edge. People can't build nothing that gives 100% random results.
Please on this fact u must based your system when u create them.. Other things is GAMBLING FALLACY... I hope some understand me ;)
I’ve tried a whole bunch of systems and tried hit & run with a lot of them. Time and time again I saw little to no difference in the results except that with hit & run the results were more spread out and took longer to eventuate.
So far only 1 of my systems has shown any promise in regard to a positive hit & run outcome.
The system I designed has a very random bet selection method coupled with a light progression. After a lot of testing I thought it might be suited to hit & run so I studied the graphs of many thousands of spins to see if there was any consistency to the variation within the results.
I am of the opinion that’s the only way to discover if hit & run can be implemented. The deviations and variations within the long term results of your system eventually form semi-reliable waves that might be advantageous, but you will never know if you don’t deeply look for them and try to decipher them.
What happened eventually with my promising hit & run system is that I came up with a hybrid system that uses the parent system as the bank manager, and the bank manager’s results or performance dictate the hybrid systems timing of bets - jumping in and out of action (hit&run).
It actually worked and the hybrid system ALWAYS finished EVERY session with more units that the bank manager. Sometimes a lot more. I was and still am much chuffed with the results of my study as it showed hit & run can be successful with the right combination of elements.
The problem with my particular creation was that there needed to be two running accounts of the current bankrolls, one for the bank manager and one for the hybrid. At the same time the betting procedure needed to be recorded after each spin. So it became a little too impractical to actually play for real. Too much paperwork was required, and some very confusing situations would arise if both sides of the ledgers were not accurately recorded for whatever reason.
May be I didn’t play it long enough to consolidate my study, but it was good to see a positive result for hit & run even if it can’t be used.
P.S.
Forget about botting this one too because I haven’t got 3 months to explain how it works to anyone. Besides, I've moved on to fry bigger fish. ;D
I am happy for you skakus.
Its seems like an unusual method...and unusual is something good in roulette systems because all the usuals are failling.
I agree with Chrisbis. This has a better chance of winning.
Bet > reset > mix it up > bet > reset > mix it up > bet> etc.
Let's take this literally re: hit and run.
Been hit by a 'hit and run'. Went over the bonnet in 3 lanes of rush hour traffic. Twisted ankle. Sore knee. Got up and got the bus home.
Was a motorcycle courier in London on and off for over 11 years. In total I worked for about 7 of those eleven years doing other things in between (hit and run)
For those seven years I worked about 240 days a year, taking off weekends and holidays (5 day periods of hit and run).
During those days I would be on the bike for about an avg of 9 hours a day, interspersed with a couple of hours off the bike-waiting for a collection, lunch, coffee, fag -(the european, not the american!) On the bike for about 1-3 hour stints (hit and run).
After work I'd go home and sleep, eat chill for 12/13 hours a day which would break my time spent on the bike (hit and run).
Only ever hospitalised once.
For arguments sake, lets round it down to say 8.5 hours a day,
240 days a year.
For 7 years.
14280 hours riding 500/550 cc m/c in central London or on a motorway.
14280 hours = 1.6 years.
So...Are you telling me that hypothetically if we took tiredness, and physical need to stop i.e eat, toilet etc, out of the equation, that I would be able to attempt to ride a m/c 24hrs a day non stop for over 1 and a half years solid in daytime London traffic, and when I had an accident, got up and continued to ride for 24hrs a day for the remaining period of days left, that in all that time i would only have had one accident that could hospitalise me?
Of course you are!
And I know that you know what (in your head) that makes me.....
One hell of a lucky son of a b..t...d.
Personally I beg to differ.
Woods.
QuoteOnly hospitalised once.
LOL Woods, funny way to look at it.
QuoteSo...Are you telling me that hypothetically if we took tiredness, and physical need to stop i.e eat, toilet etc, out of the equation, that I would be able to attempt to ride a m/c 24hrs a day non stop for over 1 and a half years solid in daytime London traffic, and when I had an accident, got up and continued to ride for 24hrs a day for the remaining period of days left, that in all that time i would only have had one accident that could hospitalise me
No but if you had ridden for 24 hours a day you could have saved a lot of time, petrol, tires, fags etc waiting for the
random hospitalisation period that was coming sooner or later.
Sure- I could of worked as an accountant and got run over by a bus on my lunchbreak!! ;D
That's why continual play shows us what will eventually happen, as many have said before, its a debate that will never be over, if it works for you, up to now, go with it, heck, martingale worked for everyone at some stage, until the bus came anyway.
Quote from: superman on Sep 26, 04:39 PM 2011
...as many have said before, its a debate that will never be over, if it works for you, up to now, go with it, heck, martingale worked for everyone at some stage, until the bus came anyway.
I agree. Though sometimes the bus never comes.
I suppose my point is what is sometimes probable (getting knocked off a m/c) just doesn't happen, and what is fantastically unlikely (getting run over by a bus) does. What I find lovely, comforting and amusing all in one, is that all of us here accept a probability (that we can and will lose playing roulette long term) but we route for the improbable (that we may win in the long term). Why? Probably because we all have personal experiences of the probable not happening and the improbable (or almost impossible!) happening at certain times in our lives.
If you've been 'getting away with it for years' either with hit and run or gamblers fallacy or whatever, then maybe you've experienced a natural imbalance of improbable events.
As my old man always says- " I don't believe in miracles - I rely on them!"
......BUT.... my m/c analogy is enough of an experience to validate for me the value of not taking a risk all the time continuously.
When I take a look at quantum physics and uncertainty principle as an example, then mathematics means nothing.
What you believe means everything.
Now spin me heads a 100 times in a row will you? ;)
Woods
Woods i sympathize u about hit-run accident.
I was thinknig bout this from hit and run point of view
when we just gambled for fun most of the time well almost all of the time we would be up at some stage till we lost it back am correct here at least in my experiance i am
Can we take hit and run method from that point of view
Of course there is always that time when you walk into just to gamble and you are never up
that's exactly what's goin on, Stormy. by using hit-n-run i mean of course not only hit-n-run, i mean using all the usual rules like money management, quit while u r ahead, don't play for too long time and so on. it is not only about hit-n-run, i wonder why people pick on this term so much. why they don't protest implying stop-loss, win goal limit, bankroll requirement etc. why they are so upset about
the statement that short sessions are safer than long ones.
Thanks for your thoughts Iggiv. It's all learning and a long time ago now. I agree - what is hit and run but a short session that is stopped when you are up. If 70% of people that enter a casino are in profit at some stage then can we not be Mr. Average and leave when we are up also? (or are they all Blackjack players?)
We would/should lose only 30% of the time hence as Iggiv says a good stop/loss point prevents further losses.
Money management is key coupled with a big BR, a relatively playable system and a good stop/loss mechanism, i.e. know when to walk out, i.e hit and run.
I favour repeaters and some times you will get repeater 'droughts' for up to 300-350 spins a time (a days worth of spins). Most systems prob have periods where the conditions aren't favourable at all. In these conditions to play on repeatedly is to lose all your BR.
Walk out and come back another day when conditions (luck for want of a better word) are/is stronger saves my BR.
Playing a system based around mini-games alows you to test the water.
With all of this in mind, to dismiss Hit and Run is simply non-sensical, maths or no maths, but not only that- It makes exceptionally bad advice to a noobie to say to them "walk into a casino with your BR and play continuously- It makes no difference!"
At what cost such reckless advice?
Here's a torch- now stick some batteries in it and turn it on.
Woods
thanx Woods. u are able to express things better than me. totally agree.
""""""""We would/should lose only 30% of the time hence as Iggiv says a good stop/loss point prevents further losses."""""""
Yes it prevents further losses IN THE SAME DAY.
But in the next visits as the total number of played spins are suming up the loss will be exactly the same as if we would play continiously.
So as I have posted above hit and run just makes the br last longer NOT in the number of played spins but in the TIME.
"""Walk out and come back another day when conditions (luck for want of a better word) are/is stronger"""
This is the biggest gambling fallacy ever !
There is no such thing as luck in a mathematical game...there is only good and bad fluxuations that are affecting our play. So no matter how much good or how much bad the fluxuations are , we are always under the mathematical disadvantage of -2.7.
"""""With all of this in mind, to dismiss Hit and Run is simply non-sensical, maths or no maths, but not only that- It makes exceptionally bad advice to a noobie to say to them "walk into a casino with your BR and play continuously- It makes no difference!""""""
It would be a very possitive thing if all newbies knew this.
But as you can see its not only the newbies that don't know it....but also some old and experienced members.
What you ppl fail to understand is that the LONG RUN isn t the continous play...but its the total spins played....
1000 spins continious or 100 spins X10 visit games is exactly the same
Good.
The more ppl that understand this gambling fallacy , the better systems we are gonna make. :)
I already made the best system.
Check out the Chompskyhonk.
I think the problem of understanding is related to the term hit and run itself.
Nearly every system relies on some event either happening, or not happening in order to return a profit.
It is in your interest to know what event this is and how long a period it may take for this event to either happen or not happen and therefore turn a profit.
If you have a system that employs a BR large enough to get you through the longest period of your profitable event(s) either happening or not happening then congratulations. You must be a very rich person as you have the holy G, which you can play at anytime, perpetually in which case I bow down at your feet.
If you have a system that means you stop when you have either lost enough, or won enough and then walk away, then I hate to disapoint you, but you're playing a form of hit and run.
Or....do you play for your stop/loss goal and lose. Play for another stop/loss point and lose again, get annoyed your continuous form of play is not working so well today and then reach for the credit card? (be honest now).
As far as I'm concerned continuous method of play is more of a fallacy than that of the 'gamblers' as it is the fallacy of the holy grail - to be able to play continuously without hitting conditions that will kill your entire BR.
And remember the gamblers fallacy is actually a truth- if you wait long enough for an event to happen, it eventually will happen but normally other factors come into play that restrict you capitalising on it such as time limits (can you wait days, weeks or even years?), BR (do you have enough BR- thousands or millions?) and table limits as well as being able to hold your bladder, survive starvation etc. Mathematically this is true.
Can we be sure any system will survive perpetual continuous play?
Mathematically there is no such thing.
God bless maths.
I am a believer in hit-and-run. We can't control the wheel or where the ball will land, but we can control the amount of bankroll we bring to the table, we can control the time we spend on a session and control the type of progression. The challenge is to begin betting when the numbers favor us and leave when that changes.
P.s. Its only dark because the curtains are closed. Oh..and long live the chompskyhonk.
Proof sees the light! And remember kids, seeing is believing!
""""""I think the problem of understanding is related to the term hit and run itself.
Nearly every system relies on some event either happening, or not happening in order to return a profit.
It is in your interest to know what event this is and how long a period it may take for this event to either happen or not happen and therefore turn a profit.
If you have a system that employs a BR large enough to get you through the longest period of your profitable event(s) either happening or not happening then congratulations. You must be a very rich person as you have the holy G, which you can play at anytime, perpetually in which case I bow down at your feet.
If you have a system that means you stop when you have either lost enough, or won enough and then walk away, then I hate to disapoint you, but you're playing a form of hit and run.
Or....do you play for your stop/loss goal and lose. Play for another stop/loss point and lose again, get annoyed your continuous form of play is not working so well today and then reach for the credit card? (be honest now).
As far as I'm concerned continuous method of play is more of a fallacy than that of the 'gamblers' as it is the fallacy of the holy grail - to be able to play continuously without hitting conditions that will kill your entire BR.
And remember the gamblers fallacy is actually a truth- if you wait long enough for an event to happen, it eventually will happen but normally other factors come into play that restrict you capitalising on it such as time limits (can you wait days, weeks or even years?), BR (do you have enough BR- thousands or millions?) and table limits as well as being able to hold your bladder, survive starvation etc. Mathematically this is true.
Can we be sure any system will survive perpetual continuous play?
Mathematically there is no such thing.
God bless maths.""""""""
I am not playing Roulette right now because I am trying to engineer a nice system
I do not have a long run winning system and everybody know it because they all can see that I am searching for it (IF it can exist).
HIT and RUN can work ONLY if the system that you are playing can also win in the long run....
Continious play and hit and run have NO deference at all......Its matter od education for a person to understand it....
Unfortunately you wil always be in the dark....
But that s ok ... I did my try to help you. but guess what ! ppl that do not want to be helped they can t be helped.
Good luck with ur hit and run theory....and try to run as fast as you can ... LoL
Strange.
I provide some valid points regarding this discussion, illustrating my beliefs from many different real and hypothetical situations and no-one is prepared to discuss the specific points I have raised.
14,000+ hours riding a m/c in city traffic continuously 24hrs a day. One bad crash. Does this sound real/normal?
- sure this could be luck- the luck of about 1000 people all in one.
"...I favour repeaters and some times you will get repeater 'droughts' for up to 300-350 spins a time (a days worth of spins). "
...as I stated earlier on. I play systems that win more than they lose (so far) but with such systems, if I were to play those systems through one of these droughts then I would lose my entire BR. I wait till the drought passes and I then I win some more. If I were to play on losing my mini BR of 500 units at time, then going back for more sessions during one of these periods, I would have lost all my BR(s).
Believe me when I say to you I have played into a drought and lost all my BR.
But you would advise me to do this because I could lose my first game every night in a row for twelve nights and it would be the same.
The difference between the two takes?
If I play continuously then it is guaranteed that I will hit that losing streak as there is more or less one every 1200/1500 spins if i play the same wheel.
If I play hit and run (on the same wheel) then I may never encounter losing the first game each night twelve nights in a row because -get this- I may be lucky! (Dirty word!)
And think about this before you respond -your gonna keep trying to beat a negative outcome game with mathematical systems which you know are flawed and then call me mad for bringing luck into it?
Think again.
I'd rather 'chance my luck' than play continuous 'suicide'.
Again I state -
"As far as I'm concerned continuous method of play is more of a fallacy than that of the 'gamblers' as it is the fallacy of the holy grail - to be able to play continuously without hitting conditions that will kill your entire BR.
And remember the gamblers fallacy is actually a truth- if you wait long enough for an event to happen, it eventually will happen but normally other factors come into play that restrict you capitalising on it such as time limits (can you wait days, weeks or even years?), BR (do you have enough BR- thousands or millions?) and table limits as well as being able to hold your bladder, survive starvation etc. Mathematically this is true.
Can we be sure any system will survive perpetual continuous play?
Mathematically there is no such thing."
I have provided a mathematical argument above as to why the 'gamblers' fallacy is more valid than one presented in this thread. Where are your comments (all of you) regarding the above statement?
Again all I hear is silence. Just to say I'm wrong and your right all day long isn't much of an argument is it?
How about addressing the above issues themselves before anything else.
Or....if you can't then maybe silence is the best action for all you naysayers to take once and for all.
Bravo. let's keep it that way.
Dark ages indeed. Oh yeh and remember the world is flat. Mankind will never fly and there is only one God. his name is Steve. He owns the forum.
;)
"""""""" if I were to play those systems through one of these droughts then I would lose my entire BR. I wait till the drought passes and I then I win some more. If I were to play on losing my mini BR of 500 units at time, then going back for more sessions during one of these periods, I would have lost all my BR(s). """""""""
This is the point that you will never understand !
You said you will wait till the drought passes .There is NOTHING to wait about!
When you will reach the spins(total played) that the -2,7 will kill you then having played in sessions(hit and run visits) or continious play makes NO DEFFERENCE at all ! Its the total spins played that counts and not the WHEN you will play them......
You are a person that explain his thought very very good and analitic...I really like you for that.
But my friend unfortunately your thought is very wrong.
It would be a very nice thing if what you say was correct...it would be a very nice weapon that we could have against Roulette and I can garanty that I would also use it for sure !
But its mathematically wrong....and Roulette is a mathematical game....luck or passing droughts doesn't exist.
Ok I will really not bother again to post in here....
You know my point of view of the hit and run . (although when i say MY POINT OF VIEW of this subject kind of makes to my own eyes look like an unintelligent because its not my point of view at all...its the point of view of the ultimate absolte Maths that can be changed....but because you can t understand it , that s why I am telling you that its my point of view)
And this point of view will not change until maths will change.
Fair enough RE.
I understand your point of view fully. I used to believe it myself not long ago.
I would like to think of your view point as wrong (as you do of mine) , but I can't - I just think of it as different, because we are discussing probability 'theory', not something called probability 'fact', and your opinion is as valid as mine.
In reality both can be proven to be true.
A believe held by some is that hit and run means that you are just losing more slowly. So far I'm winning but I believe if I played longer sessions, I certainly wouldn't be 'winning quicker', I would be losing.
We are all entitled to believe what we want. The last thing I will say though especially to anyone new to this, is that you will lose less and learn more about roulette through playing many sessions hit and run (and be happier for longer), than one long session, for as many hours as possible.
All the best RE and thanks for responding.
Woods
Woods, u express things better than me as i said. sometimes i can see u saying things i am thinking about but somehow miss them in expression.
very good point: "waiting for an event to happen". Yes, u said it. the longer u play the same method, or even a few methods, the more likely u ask for a trouble. the event is coming. total disaster for the method. it's there. when u play for long time u call for it to happen. what is less likely to happen at your first spin is much more likely to happen after 100 spins. as simple as that.
Hi Woods,
Quote from: woods101 on Sep 27, 07:11 PM 2011
We are all entitled to believe what we want.
True, but that is irrelevant to whether the belief is true or that I'm justified in believing it. I'm "entitled" to believe that I can jump off a cliff, flap my arms and fly like a bird, but no-one in their right mind would do such a thing.
Just because probability is called probability "theory" doesn't mean that it's speculative in the way that you normally use the word "theory" (which really means "hypothesis"). The results of probability theory can be demonstrated by anyone and proven to be true, it's not a matter of opinion.
Probability can even quantify "luck", which is just standard deviation.
There seem to be some differences in how people interpret Hit & Run, I think that's why there is so much disagreement. To me hit & run simply means keeping sessions short (in terms of the NUMBER of spins played in any session) in the belief that you will somehow avoid losing streaks. So if you played IDENTICAL systems but one was played hit & run and the other played "continuously", there would be a difference in results. Are we agreed on this?
Until we have a clear definition which we all agree on then it isn't really possible to show one way or the other that hit & run "works", and that's what I'm interested in doing. We can argue back and forth for eternity, but surely there must be a way of proving whether it works or not using real data. Otherwise, it's just a battle of egos trying to "win" arguments, which isn't very satisfactory.
If you don't agree that there is no TRUTH of the matter one way or the other, I don't see that there's any point in continuing the discussion. This isn't an argument about the existence of God or any thing which can't be shown one way or the other, so can you think of an experiment the results of which would convince you that hit & run does (or doesn't ) work?
Quote from: woods101 on Sep 27, 10:26 AM 2011
As far as I'm concerned continuous method of play is more of a fallacy than that of the 'gamblers' as it is the fallacy of the holy grail - to be able to play continuously without hitting conditions that will kill your entire BR.
Woods, you deny that such a system can exist, but at the same time suggest there is a loophole - hit & run!
The fact is that in order to create a successful hit & run strategy you have to create a system which wins continuously. There is no difference, and to believe otherwise is an illusion. To play hit & run means that you are simply skipping spins, but if you know which spins to skip and when, then you have created a system which can be played "continuously". See what I mean?
Quote from: Bayes on Sep 28, 04:19 AM 2011
The fact is that in order to create a successful hit & run strategy you have to create a system which wins continuously. There is no difference, and to believe otherwise is an illusion. To play hit & run means that you are simply skipping spins, but if you know which spins to skip and when, then you have created a system which can be played "continuously". See what I mean?
Bayes, I couldn't agree more. :thumbsup: One should know their bets Strike-rate, it's LW Registry!
Bayes, u admit that different bet selections help but deny that hit-n-run helps. that's a contradiction.
because different bet selections are kind of hit-n-run. u stop playing one method and start another.
it does not matter how u call it but it's related.
Woods is right. if u state that a certain method may work for long long hours with the same success rate...that's a clear gambler fallacy. such a thing does not exist in nature. We are not talking VB or biased wheels now of course.
on another hand if u use different bet selections for short periods of time, u may win -- call it luck or whatever.
Quote from: iggiv on Sep 28, 07:00 AM 2011
Bayes, u admit that different bet selections help but deny that hit-n-run helps. that's a contradiction.
because different bet selections are kind of hit-n-run. u stop playing one method and start another.
it does not matter how u call it but it's related.
iggiv, well, that's why I wanted to find a definition of hit & run that we agree on, so that it can be tested.
What I understand by it is that using a system (same bet selection over all spins) works better if you skip spins (short sessions) even if you don't care what spins are skipped. Just the fact of skipping spins is enough.
If there is a REASON for your entry and exit points (stop wins and losses) then it's not hit & run. Others may disagree on the definition.
QuoteWoods is right. if u state that a certain method may work for long long hours with the same success rate...that's a clear gambler fallacy. such a thing does not exist in nature. We are not talking VB or biased wheels now of course.
on another hand if u use different bet selections for short periods of time, u may win -- call it luck or whatever.
The idea of "long hours" is a red herring. What's important is the NUMBER of spins played, don't you agree? I agree that if you play more spins you're more likely to hit a sequence from hell, but why does it matter if you skip spins if the total number of spins played is the same?
Do you see what I'm getting at?
I guess it all starts with the question-
What exactly is hit and run?
........
link:://rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=7547.0 (link:://rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=7547.0)
Do U think my Bet Selection looks big in these 200 Spins? :-X
[attachimg=]
Will this do as a Classic example of Hit, Hit, Hit and Run to make the excel file?
(thank U David, for the spins/result)
Its got plenty of those Hits in it, though not many Loses.
Then again, we are discussing :- Hit & Run, and not its Arch Enemy- Lose & Cry!!
Quote from: Bayes on Sep 25, 12:04 PM 2011
I think the reason why hit & run might seem plausible to some is because of:
1) the house edge.
2) deviation.
It's true that the longer you play, the more the house edge nibbles away at your profits. It's also true that if you keep playing the same system, sooner or later you will hit a really bad downturn. The hit & run brigade think the solution is to keep sessions short, but they forget that every short session contributes to a long session. X number of spins is no different whether you break it up into 10 sessions of X/10 or play the whole X spins in one go If you knew when to end your session it would mean you have a bet selection which gives you an advantage, in that case hit & run isn't necessary - you just wait for the next opportunity.
Thank you Roulette Explorer for introducing this much debated ( and misunderstood) subject and Bayes for providing such lucid explanations and definitions.
May I suggest that Hit and Run methodology should be avoided as it is flawed.
Those current practitioners who currently credit their good fortune through this approach however, may actually be using other (successful and valid) methods.
As you say, when to end a session is critical, and I would suggest the two extremes might be in the worst case a stop-loss where the towel is thrown into the roulette 'ring' temporarily at least, and (on the hopefully most common event) a suitable profit has been obtained. Positioning of the stop-loss, whether in the financial markets or in the roulette banking business is essential.
Through heuristics a bet with its unique characteristics may be engineered and after substantial testing via live spin results ( and a substantial sample means a suitable statistical sample) a net result can be observed. Through this work though various cycles of bet performance will be observed - short, medium and longer where there may be valid observations made for relatively optimum return ( both profit and loss variables). By timing exits to suit this will assist more favourable returns. In other words you know the typical peaks and troughs of the bet cycles.
What may influence the end result more though may not only be the judicious timing of
the exit but the timing of
the entry.
Some bets enable ( bet selection is critical and that is a subject in its own right), peering through the mists of random behaviour, a glimpse of the Ecart/Equilibre cycles which are well understood in European Roulette circles.
These may be able to be measured ( and one way I use is
a moving average based on result outcomes which transform spin outcomes to some other measurable return) and in many instances cyclic behaviour may be observed. Please note the qualifications inserted here.
Thus
timing of entry and exit can be improved with the results able to be objectively tested by random stop/ start ( ie hit and run) or reasoned interventions.
These work sometimes.
However if the net improvement in results is relatively consistent and exceeds (say) a +10% improvement overall based on large samples, then surely that is a step forward. As long as you are consistently making profits that is good.
Even though the bet may be a zero sum, break even, type deal, the opportunities are still available
to
more consistently make profit.
If you have a bet that can demonstrate a consistent edge, despite the Ecart cycle overlaid, then all the better. But that's another debate and I suspect some of the participants here have their minds already firmly set on that (non ?)possibility (LoL).
Quote from: XXVV on Sep 30, 06:29 PM 2011
....By timing exits to suit this will assist more favourable returns. In other words you know the typical peaks and troughs of the bet cycles....
You HAVE to know this. XXVV- You've hit the nail on the head! You have to know your system or else all other observations are fruitless. You have to know how long the avg and extreme lengths of a wait for your system to work. If you play a waiting game on the dozens for example then you HAVE to know that you could wait for 25+ spins for a dozen to show in extreme cases. if you never knew this and you play dozens then you will more than likely lose very big at some point!
Know your system inside out. This is the claim JL makes with each of his that is something that seems to be passed by until now.
There are cycles within randomness, absolutely, and if your system capitilises on certain requirements then over time you will recognize them. This is the key.
What this is reflective of is exit point and stop/loss. How this relates to hit and run? Well with hit and run you exit when the cycles of randomness are immediately against you. If they are in your favour then you surf the waves for a bit and then get out the water.
Hang ten.
Woods
By the way, and I have given this some thought, it is necessary to comment upon the humourously flawed nature of the title of this thread to which, in spite of the overtone, I did reply as the general subject interests me.
Implicit in the title is the hint that there are some members who are not 'in the dark' and that they may 'help' the 'others'.
We are not dealing with a subject which is polarised into black or white, right or wrong, light or dark, the saved and the damned, and in fact in dealing with matters random, it pays to be extremely modest and if possible prepared for just about anything.
My own attitudes have shifted a lot in twelve months and although there are methods I use which sometimes work, in all honesty there are many times when it is very difficult. Ways have been found by much hard work to soften or mitigate the difficulties of loss or exposed risk, and enhance
the opportunities to win, and when winning to accentuate those events. I have changed my mind and my views several times.
The exponents of hit and run, at best, are applying heuristic methods that over large samples do work, and much of that has to do with timing and reading of a game which skill comes through experience. We agree that if there were no other skills involved the hit and run approach alone is an empty and flawed mistake.
Instead, it is a fuzzy business and the shades of grey may not appeal to some minds and disciplines/training/backgrounds. However this fuzzy logic is increasingly a way forward that deals with realities that are far more complex than many have previously admitted.
We are fortunate in the B+M casinos that the variables are kept relatively fixed and known. We are not in the bigger wider world. There certainly is no need however to expose yourself to extra risk such as double zero or RNG or internet live streaming unless your methodology is very very simple and your aims very very modest.
Please accept that any offerings from myself are qualified ( in the fullest sense) and that the suggestions offered are merely acting as red flags and a lamp in fog that can vary from fine mist to pea soup.
Yes, the way forward is to know your bets, strengths and weaknesses, tune your timing,and do your best with dignity and modesty - no fanfares.
I don't mind pea soup, as long as the bread is hot, and the spread is REAL butter.
Don't like imitations! :o
There are so many "Imitators" on the forum these days. :yawn:
@XXVV
Absolutely everything you just said!
@Chrisbis
Absolutely on the real butter. It's like when you're given 'light' mayo - IT'S JUST NOT MAYO!
after following this topic I wonder if the question "does hit and run work in the long run?" is a really a question of wether you believe in the phenomena of a personal permanence.
those who say it works seem to somehow deny the existence of personal permanences.
and those who say it doesn't work do somehow rely on the existence of personal permanences. ???
what do I think about it? I must admit I haven't come to a final conclusion, yet.
cheers
hans
Quote from: hanshuckebein on Oct 02, 03:57 AM 2011
"does hit and run work in the long run?"
if u have constant long run winning system hit and run will work otherwise, not.
"if You have constant long run winning system hit and run will work otherwise, not."
;D
I absolutely love this point that gets put forward repeatedly all the time.
It is always presented by a type of person that says that "hit an run won't make a difference because of maths. Mathematically it is the same as playing continuously".
So quite simply the maths says it is a myth, unless....you have a consistently winning system that will win in 'the long run' in which case hit and run will work?!?
So....the thinking must be something like this:
"I as a roulette player who applies maths to try to create a system with which to beat roulette which is mathematically proven to be impossible to beat (unless you have the Holy Grail) will continue to state that something else that is impossible to be true ('hit and run') can only be true if you apply the impossible state of a Holy Grail, which I will continue to try to find even though it is mathematically impossible!" (?!?!)
Which means:
My impossiblility is only ever allowed to be true if your impossiblity is allowed to be true first!
This is fine except I think that there is a certain arrogance/ignorance ratio to claim one thing doesn't exist whilst searching for the other.
If you belief that a Holy Grail doesn't exist and hit and run doesn't work either, no worries I have no beef with ya- have a good laugh at all of us! A bit of advice though -you might consider that fact that this site is a complete waste of your time then or your a VB player. If you're not, then go and do something worthwhile you crazy fool!
But.....if you spend hours of your time trying to fashion a way to beat the hallowed game of roulette with maths and you KNOW it is a negative outcome game, then you'd be wise to look within before you tell someone else their ideas are ridiculous, else you might just be painting yourself as a crazy fool also! O0
Go figure (mathematically speaking).
Woods
@ hanshuckebein
I think you can work to personal permanences as well as those of a singular wheel, say.
@ woods101
What I think I have explained on reply # 33..
And what u think?! You write a lot of text, but few answers, ok tell me is this your teory;
we have losing system, but we can turn him in winning on long run with hit and run?
Pl dont write whole story only answer on this question ;)
Hi Speed,
I guess by your reply #33 that makes you a physics player so you may enjoy laughing at all of us! ;)
My perspective is illustrated in my past posts also, but my point above is that it is contradictory for a system player to claim a point of view is wrong because the maths doesn't work, when they themselves are investing time and effort to beat a mathematically negative outcome game. Does this make them a masochist? I don't know. I'm just happy to throw the maths back at them and see if they wear it. ;D
The title of this thread, as an example (as XXVV politely pointed out), is something of an oxymoron:
Hit and run doesn't work mathematically, and let's try to beat the game over 1,000,000 spins er...mathematically.
Kinda doesn't make sense.
Woods (a believer in hit and run theory who does not have ANY issue at all with how anyone else wants to play the game of roulette, be it maths, VB or black magic voodoo but will happily defend his...sometimes!).
Hi Speed,
The other thing worth noting which is being debated elsewhere is what exactly is hit and run?
Is it merely employment of stop/loss/profit point etc.?
This is something that not everyone can agree on.
Woods
ok woods101, what is your winning teory or u think roulette cant be defeated? U must have some teory, it is important that all present their theories. More teories make more systems and with much systems we have better chances to find winning one ;)
just been reading through the thread.
i dont play hit and run. im with RE on the view that to get a true look of your system you must play continuously however i do see how some of us can see the advantage of hit and run although this is purely down to luck.
if you play continuously for 1000 spins you may encounter your bad run after say 300 spins. if you play 10x100 spins your are still playing the same amount of spins however just because you stop playing it doesn't mean the game stops. that bad run you may have met in your 3rd game can now possibly be avoided because the situation arises when you are no longer at the table. the next time you do play the situation has gone.
this however doesn't not make your system unbeatable. you could enter a game at the exact moment the bad spins occur. so its purely down to just being lucky.
Quoteyou could enter a game at the exact moment the bad spins occur. so its purely down to just being lucky.
Spot on, but the hit n run guys don't seem to agree with this.
Watch out for that bus lol
hit and run to me is a session predetermined by spins played or games played not profit achieved. spins played or spins played per game must be short though...
Quote from: woods101 on Oct 03, 04:12 AM 2011
Hi Speed,
The other thing worth noting which is being debated elsewhere is what exactly is hit and run?
For me hit and run is Gambling Fallacy. Maybe here is some people who win on short term on this GF, and they think that work.. In long run there is no diference between this and constant play..WHY? I think RE and now frost and some others have a good explanation.
Hi Woods,
I see where you're coming from with regard to the inconsistency, but 2 wrongs don't make a right. ;D
The issue is confused by lack of agreement as to what hit & run means, but as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't involve stop losses/win targets or bet selections, only the belief that keeping sessions short SOMEHOW means you will dodge the bullets.
Let's eliminate your charge of inconsistency by supposing that we're playing a game with no negative expectation. For example, suppose a VB player were to play hit & run style, does that mean he/she will do better? I think you'd agree that it's irrelevant. The Advantage player looks for conditions which are advantageous, and only then makes his move. Keeping sessions short doesn't enter the mind of this player; if the right conditions persist, he can play all day in the knowledge that he'll win. On the other hand, if the conditions are NOT right, then he won't play at all.
So if we can agree on that, doesn't it show that hit & run (as I've defined it) makes no difference to your results? and this is the case whether or not the game has a negative or positive expectation.
but doesn't 'hit & run' imply speed, quickness? sitting around all day at a table wouldn't give you this
Quote from: Bayes on Oct 03, 05:30 AM 2011
Hi Woods,
I see where you're coming from with regard to the inconsistency, but 2 wrongs don't make a right. ;D
The issue is confused by lack of agreement as to what hit & run means, but as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't involve stop losses/win targets or bet selections, only the belief that keeping sessions short SOMEHOW means you will dodge the bullets.
Let's eliminate your charge of inconsistency by supposing that we're playing a game with no negative expectation. For example, suppose a VB player were to play hit & run style, does that mean he/she will do better? I think you'd agree that it's irrelevant. The Advantage player looks for conditions which are advantageous, and only then makes his move. Keeping sessions short doesn't enter the mind of this player; if the right conditions persist, he can play all day in the knowledge that he'll win. On the other hand, if the conditions are NOT right, then he won't play at all.
So if we can agree on that, doesn't it show that hit & run (as I've defined it) makes no difference to your results? and this is the case whether or not the game has a negative or positive expectation.
I agree Bayes. In this instance it makes no difference
except when you decide to pull out (fnar fnar!). This is the deciding factor firstly, and secondly that decides when you start playing again (in my mind). Yes what I play is tied to stop/loss. Is this also hit and run? It depends on who you talk to but this is not what I feel this topic is about.
We have a provocative title that has been created to inspire debate. Moving the thread back to the original debate it is contadictory, nay hypocritical, nay non-sensical, nay non-mathematical to say hit and run doesn't work (as the title does) and lets beat a million spins with a 'mathematical' system (as the title does).
If you're gonna knock the theory of hit and run then you can't realistically say lets beat roulette with a mathematical system at the same time and fail to see how wrong such a statement is, surely?
Now if we apply the 'mathematical' argument to hit and run theory then we should apply the same mathematical argument to all mathematical systems as well no?
What do we end up with after six months of that?
Probably another forum of negative comments and arguments and a (maths or VB) majority saying that all systems fail, blah blah blah, i.e. not a very nice forum, full of not very nice people.
Why are we all here instead of somewhere else? Because we like it.
Lets keep it that way. if someone plays differently to you, let them. If it works for them then great yeh? Even if you don't see it.
When does an advocate of h/r theory ever start having a go at another players way of beating roulette? But how often is it the other way around?
Increase the peace, let the fighting cease. Spread love brothers and sisters.
Woods.
Quote from: frost on Oct 03, 05:49 AM 2011
but doesn't 'hit & run' imply speed, quickness? sitting around all day at a table wouldn't give you this
I don't know is the simple answer, and if you're asking the question then neither do you.
This is the point - what are we debating here?
i was under the impression that hit and run in a nutshell is more like hitting more when you're "lucky"
and running away when you are "unlucky".
:-[
hamsup
Quote from: superman on Oct 03, 05:01 AM 2011
Spot on, but the hit n run guys don't seem to agree with this.
Watch out for that bus LoL
Randomness contains cycles that can be recognised. Your decision to play or not play is based on these cycles. Though I guess this does not qualify as hit and run. So really I'm defending a method of play I don't even employ! :'(
So far it's Woods 1, Buses 0.
Quote from: hamsup_sotong on Oct 03, 08:32 AM 2011
i was under the impression that hit and run in a nutshell is more like hitting more when you're "lucky"
and running away when you are "unlucky".
:-[
hamsup
Mine also. In a nutshell.
You can hit a bad run from the start ,and you will lose even your underwear .
Stop playing if the gods aren't smiling then.
QuoteStop playing if the gods aren't smiling then
1 point to the bus in that case.
Quote from: superman on Oct 03, 03:31 PM 2011
1 point to the bus in that case.
--And I point to PWCBus...to the winning seat....Good luck
QuotePWCBus
LOL threads too long to read, cant you make a shorter version?
Quote from: warrior on Oct 03, 09:52 AM 2011
You can hit a bad run from the start ,and you will lose even your underwear .
.
thats where the mm comes in. :D. Whats important is winning more money than losing isnt it? What we should be looking for isnt something that beats the mathemical edge of 2.7 and wins every session. BUt a bet coupled with an mm system that allows us to win more than it loses.
You may lose your underwear now and than, HOWEVER that's why u have spares!!!! looooooool
cheers
hamsup
..or play 'in commando'...
I have a policy. If I win anything over my £100 I stop and cashout, come back later, even if its £112. I play for repeats in 24. They do happen. I do win.
Its all too common to get a rush of blood and your ego whispers something like " its working, lets carry on"
The biggest thing to get over is that any system you play will ultimatly lose.
You are stood in a hole in a disc. Below that disc is another disc rotating, with the same hole. At some time the holes align and you fall through. Thats with every red, black, marty, dozen repeating odd streaked, column elliminating, turbo streeted, Code 4, matix system you could ever invent.
If someone said to me, jump on that disc, the holes align every 30 mins. Stay on for 10 seconds, Ill give you £5, stay on for 2 mins, Ill give you £40, I would take the £5 every time.
But Ive read Code4 post and you guys are staying on that disc for 20 mins. Its insane to believe that the sockets in a disc that someone has drawn numbers on and painted red and black would someway follow some pattern for a long time.
The only thing nature told us is this. The ball will fall in 24 pockets during 37 spins leaving 13 empty.
That is your only clue. Thow dice 6 times...same.
Last night I looked at columns and dozens. 1A is doz 1 colA. i.e.1,4,7,10. (I put 0 in 1B)
Look at this in 9 spins. 36, 14,8,14,12,22,32,23,13
1A=0, 1B=1, 1C=1, 2A=2, 2B=3, 2C=0, 3A=0, 3B=1, 3C=1
6 hit, 3 didnt
That fascinates me, but its our only clue to whats happening . Not coloured odd even mirages, just good old law of the third for random numbers.
Ok I read a lot of times in here members telling that :
" Playing the same pattern eventually will lose " or "Playing the same system eventually will lose "
The result of what they say is CORRECT.
BUT the loss isn t comming because we play the SAME patter or the SAME system!
The loss is comming because the more spins we play the more the HOUSE EDGE is comming.
So even if we change patterns or systems during play we will still lose with the same rate(-2,7)
Its NOT what we play....its how many spins we play...
And the hit and run can t work with that because the spins are added in every play and the thing that counts is the TOTAL spins played....
I hope at least 1 member to get out of the dark in this thing
Thanks
Quote from: turnerfeck on Oct 04, 05:15 AM 2011
The only thing nature told us is this. The ball will fall in 24 pockets during 37 spins leaving 13 empty.
On average... I checked a sample 100 sessions and after 37 spins unique numbers can be anything from 18 to 28.
Jeromin
We are grateful for our friend Roulette Explorer to be holding the torch that (we hope) keeps us on the path. However where is this path leading? If the true story is that there is no avoidance of this dreaded -2.7% edge, what is the point in playing roulette - to experience the thrill of temporarily 'cheating' a negative expectation?
It seems a perverse use of our valuable resources if that were the (only) case.
But I guess the gamblers do that. Like bashing your head against a wall in a sad and dangerous addiction. If that rings any alarm bells get out now! Its your choice.
But what of the others? And other ways? Are there other pathways?
It is very likely most if not all members of this Forum would rather make genuine headway than throw their goodwill and resources into the void with all those negative social consequences to follow. It certainly is a downhill path and I can say that I have been there and done that as part of my education.
One of the delightful opportunities playing roulette is that we have to come to know ourselves, our strengths and weaknesses, sooner rather than later, if we are to progress.
Facing the realities of the house edge and true odds is essential for any intelligent 'investor' looking to learn.
However please let's assert that there are approaches to money management, to self management, to research and construction of bets, that are worthwhile and successful.
As in any field you take seriously, you must start with passion, with energy and resources to research all you can find on the subject. Then to apply that knowledge slowly and effectively.
Also its a matter of association. Where do you stand and who do you associate with?
These are all considerations.
There are bets that in short cycles and in relatively modest expression can provide profit and a neutralisation of house edge or even a positive edge which will vary with Ecart cycles.
If that were not the case what would be the point of this work? To research and find that your lifetime's work was flawed or pointless? How sad would that be, but there are some in various fields who have encountered that, and it is an occupational hazard for researchers.
Our connected-ness now, our wired society, our speed of research, and the exponential growth of knowledge in specialist fields (such as roulette) is working to help us.
Dont let glib assertions stop you.
I view 'the house edge' as fact, a reality that like tax or gravity or friction, something that is taken care of with appropriate knowledge, skill and invention.
Anything is possible. The winner of the Nobel Prize for Chemistry this year, Daniel Shechtman, is living proof of that.
Hopefully these comments may provoke some constructive work.
Quote from: RouletteExplorer on Oct 04, 06:49 AM 2011
" Playing the same pattern eventually will lose " or "Playing the same system eventually will lose "
The result of what they say is CORRECT.
BUT the loss isn t comming because we play the SAME patter or the SAME system!
The loss is comming because the more spins we play the more the HOUSE EDGE is comming.
following this line of thought than all we'd need is a no zero game? the house edge is gone and we'd never lose? ???
cheers
hans
Of course the house edge is a factor, but in my opinion the greatest enemy is not the zero effect, but deviation or "drift". Try playing a no-zero game and see how easy it is to win - NOT.
Find a way to tame the deviations and you'll be a winner. There is no speculative activity which doesn't involve some kind of house advantage. Forex traders have to pay brokers the "spread" - the difference between the bid and ask price - on every trade. And don't try to tell me that short-term technical trading isn't essentially every bit as random as roulette, yet there are traders who make consistent profits.
I prefer roulette because the outcomes follow the normal distribution (bell curve) very closely and consistently, which isn't always the case with currencies, stocks etc. There are just too many variables to consider (same for sports betting). And yet roulette and other casino games are not considered by "serious" speculators to be legitimate opportunities - they're purely for gambling and entertainment.
@ RE, if you're so disillusioned with roulette, why not take some time out to see if you can make money at sports betting or trading?
You may do well, or maybe you'll come to the conclusion I did: that roulette is easier to beat.
All methods,systems and strategies based on non confined testing tent to loos at the end.
Playing one system in a short session ,KNOW WHAT IS THE STRONG AND WEEK POINTS .
Let the method play against it self and turn it to your advantage.
Regards
Max
@Bayes
Thank you so much for this very clear and accurate overview. Totally agree. It is fascinating to read Nassim Taleb's take on the true complexities for the traders and the relative ignorance of handling randomness. Life in the casino is so very much easier and actually roulette offers remarkable opportunities as yet not recognised by many at all.
"""""@ RE, if you're so disillusioned with roulette, why not take some time out to see if you can make money at sports betting or trading? """""
It s not me that I am disillusioned....it s you Bayes that you are illusioned :D
"""Life in the casino is so very much easier and actually roulette offers remarkable opportunities as yet not recognised by many at all."""
So XXXV have you recognized those "opportunities"?
If yes why are you still in here?
Anyone that looks in a forum or participate means that he DOESNT have a winning way...
Only words can t make anything....when we put those words to the test its always the same....loss of -2.7
Quote from: RouletteExplorer on Oct 09, 06:20 PM 2011
Anyone that looks in a forum or participate means that he doesn't have a winning way...
Only words can t make anything....when we put those words to the test its always the same....loss of -2.7
dear RE
you are damn wrong. participation does not reflect the status (winner or loser) of forum members. some people i now who are winning consistently. you get negative attitude, you get negative outcome!
catalyst
participating in a roulette forum while having a winning way to make unlimited money is something that no one would do.
And if someone would do that it would be for trying to help the other members to come to the right path as he is.
Here and in any other forum when a member had topics about winning systems was either scams or people that hadn t tested their methods in a lot of spins to realise that they fail.....
I am in roulette forums more time that you can imagine and I have explored roulette more hours that you can dream of.
The only real way to win is VB or Bias....but here we aren t talcking about those methods as its not that kind of forum.
Open your eyes and don't beleave any BS that some people are saying.