I've been learning now(?) that ordinary negative progression and martingale will lose badly sooner or later, i know,..anyway so i try a milder progression for a 50/50 bet. (+1u progression) and it *seems* to work pretty well,(?) drawdowns can be scary, but the betselection is good (the two last doz are bet, in a progressive bet), so from my first test, as you can see in the chart, it recovers ....This is played with 3+3 streets;
Procedure: Begin by betting the current dozen hit, with 3 street (the 3 unhit streets), if the same street repeat +1u bet. IF zero hit, STOP and wait for the next (or same dozen to hit) and +1u bet for the next new 3 streets bet. IF another dozen hits, (keep the old bet) and bet that new dozen hit also in the same way;--with 3 streets (the 3 unhit streets) so now 3+3 streets are bet... (the first 2 dozen hit -no progression-) IF lost, begin anew from the beginning with betting the 3 unhit streets of the current doz hit AND +1u bet, from now on, +1u bet for *each new doz bet* When HIT, also restart by betting the 3 unhit streets within the doz hit, *and no progression after hit* keep the same bet in progressionline. Continue procedure and the +1u progression until you reach a new high, then restart & reset to 1u bets.
It's really simple gameplay once you get it, hope my explanation was clear.
Ignatus, please write down few spins and explain by an example all the conditions you wrote above
Willie, i've made a video! :)
Test 2. Note, if you can't profit from a doubledozen system, but you can profit 400u in less than 200 spins from this???
Bankroll needed: 500u minimum playing with 1u bets.
OK this is notepad, and this idea has just failed. :-\ This loss is unacceptable...
Quote from: ignatus on Jan 04, 09:56 PM 2017
OK this is notepad, and this idea has just failed. :-\ This loss is unacceptable...
Hello ignatus,
This new idea is bad the progression is bad and the bet selection is bad.
What exactly are you trying to accomplish by using all this bad stuff?
Even I once had similar approaches that didnt work. I wasted a lot of time. And when I finally understood why the approaches lost, I wished I would have spent my time developing the right approaches. It doesnt need to be physics. Just not the same old stuff everyone in the gaming industry knows fails.
Quote from: Steve on Jan 05, 05:05 PM 2017
It doesnt need to be physics. Just not the same old stuff everyone in the gaming industry knows fails.
Such as.... can you give us a guiding point?
Ignatus,
Ever since I stopped playing negative progressions (especially long ones), my losses at roulette have plummeted.
It is still a hard game to make profits from on a consistent basis (both craps and baccarat are better options in that regard), but at least I lose very little at roulette now that I eschew negative progressions.
Quote from: DoctorSudoku on Jan 05, 08:10 PM 2017Ever since I stopped playing negative progressions (especially long ones), my losses at roulette have plummeted.
Thats because you decrease bets after losing. It limits the losses. But essentially all you're still doing is changing the size of bets on different spins that each have the same odds. It would be almost exactly the same as:
Making 10 independent losing $10 bets
Making 10 independent losing $5 bets
Making 10 independent losing $1 bets
QuoteIt is still a hard game to make profits from on a consistent basis (both craps and baccarat are better options in that regard), but at least I lose very little at roulette now that I eschew negative progressions.
There has never been an casino game that can give the player better odds than roulette, but it needs the right conditions.
"There has never been an casino game that can give the player
better odds than roulette, but it needs the right conditions."
Right Steve. But what are the right conditions?
The only way to detect the right conditions is to use
mathematics (including Standard and Average Deviations).
As Winkel so rightly said (re: GUT) "You have to know when
to bet".
Unfortunately most methods don't give you the tools to "know
when to bet".
It's much simpler than that. In most cases just check basic things like ball scatter (predictable bounce) and dominant diamonds.
Spins look random, until you know what to look for.
Most people think beating roulette is some huge feat. Its actually really, really easy to beat most wheels one way or another. The trick is avoiding detection.
Again if basic physics isn't your thing, then there are other options like:
Precog, telekinesis, chaos theory, fractals in random data
Think outside the box. Anything is better than something that is guaranteed to fail.
It might seem hard to think of something new but there are far more unexplored ideas than we currently know. Finding the new roads is part of the innovation.
Start with brainstorming. One technique is choose a random word and develop a theory.
For example, mirror. So develop software to see if particular sequences are now likely to spin within x amount of spins.
One more thing. Forget manual testing. You will never gave enough time to test properly manually. Use software.