Hi guys! First of all I just wanted to thank all of the members here that constantly try to bring something interesting to this forum. I have to admit that this is by far a very fascinating forum and I find it very impressive to see how many people are trying together to finally beat the house. Who knows? Maybe someday magic will happen.
In the meantime I have something appealing to post here. I have been trying out a strategy in a land based casino near my city and to be honest I have been more than surprised with the results. Now I said to myself that it's time to share with others my experience. Now I want to specify that I'm not here to represent any casino nor I am here to sell any kind of advertising casino stuff. . . All I want is to discuss and verify with you people (perhaps someone could write it to test it for millions of spins) if my strategy might bring a possible small return in the long term. Obviously no system can win EVERYTIME. To be profitable we only need to win in the long run.
Well here I go! By the way the following explanations are done so that even a six years old could understand. Near two months ago I posted a bit of my thoughts concerning standard deviation but it never went somewhere. Now I have been trying this for a while (not too long unfortunately) and I have to say it has been a very positive experience. Before starting to actually explain what my system is all about I believe it's imperative that I talk a bit about what standard deviation truly is for those having question marks in their minds right about this second.
Standard deviation is simply a factor or a value if you prefer that determines the deviation from a standard event. In other words, it helps establishing how much variation there is from an average or a mean. It is mostly used in the world of statistics but could easily be useful in lots of fields and I believe it could bring an advantage in the game of roulette. Why should we care about standard deviation??? Well we should give a special attention to it because it is the tool that will guide us into think is this truly a bad streak that I'm having or is this normal? How many of you have though that a table was rigged simply because two zeros came out in a row when you were obviously expecting a BLACK or a RED number to fall? I don't know about you but I have. To be honest I'm only 22 years old and when I first started playing in a casino (4 years ago) I didn't know what I was doing. With standard deviation we know how many times a zero, a dozen, a black number, a red number and all the others sections should fall. In other words, we learn to expect. You might say that in the game of roulette the past does not influence the future and you're right because it doesn't but I would have to say that in the long run that is no longer true. Numbers do follow a certain pattern and I understand that it's not because 13 reds in a row came in that it automatically means a black will follow, but one thing is sure (unless the table is rigged) eventually a black will come because it's the law of averages.
Well enough said! The best way to explain something is by demonstrating it with an example.
This is what I meant by expecting what should fall:
Standard deviation in its simplest form has a formula that is: the number of events multiplied by the chance that the event has of happening and multiplied again by the chance that the event has of NOT happening. Everything squared root gives us the first level of standard deviation.
Example #1:
Lets say that we would like to calculate how many times every dozen is expected to fall in 12 spins. Well this is very simple.
Number of events: 12 spins
Chance of happening: 12/37
Chance of not happening: 25/37
First standard deviation = 1. 6216
There we go it is as simple as that! The number above represents the first degree or level in the standard deviation. There could be as many levels as you would like but mainly the most common ones are the first 3. Each one represents a percentage and that is when it becomes useful. The first level is 68%, the second is 95% and the third is 99. 7%.
Notice that when I first started explaining what the standard deviation was I mentioned the words ''variation from an average''. In this case the average would be how many times each and every dozen is expected to fall.
Mean: 12*(12/37) = 3. 8918
Now we must take into consideration that if there was no zero it would simply be 12/3= 4 but since we have 37 numbers and NOT 36 (something people tend to forget) the result is a slight lower than 4. Furthermore, if we want to know how many times should each dozen fall in 12 spins we simply add and subtract the deviation to the mean which in this case is 1. 6216.
3. 8918 - 1. 6216 = 2. 2702 ≈ 2
3. 8918 + 1. 6216 = 5. 5134 ≈ 6
This means that 68% of the time every dozen will fall between 2 and 6 times every 12 spins. If we were to calculate the second one (95%) we would only need to multiply 1. 6216 by 2 and finally if we were to calculate the third one (99,7%) we would only need to multiply 1. 6216 by 3.
Ok now that we have formally established what a standard deviation is lets get into the details of how I use it to make money. First of all I would like to mention that I'm not a person who likes to gamble, what I am is a person who likes making money. There is a HUGE difference. This means that whether I win or lose I treat this as a business and not as a ''lucky day'' at the casino. I always know in advance how much I am willing to lose and I also have a limit in my mind of much I will win before I leave. I believe that the majority of humans (myself included of course) have what I call a thirst for money and for the feeling of being wealthy and when winning that thirst increases and consequently affects our judgement making us vulnerable. The moment we stop being rational is the moment the real bad streak starts and that is why I never stop going by the book. If you have a system follow it to the very core and stick to it.
The system :
First of all I would like to mention that I lose very often, but I still win in the long term which is the only thing that truly matters. In fact I lose so often that it comes near to 32% of the time. To create my system I first calculated the first standard deviation for dozens and rows and found out that every 5 spins 68 % of the time each dozen or row will fall between 1 and 3 times. I then said to myself that I could start betting on a dozen that has been missing for two spins and then I could start betting and that's exactly what I did.
68% of the time between 1 and 3 also means that 32% of the time each dozen or row will fall between 0 times or more than 3 times every 5 spins. So for example if I want to bet on a single dozen I wait to have at least two dozens and then I bet but never exceeding 5 spins. Lets pretend the following sequence: ***(The following numbers refer to the dozen and the actual number)
1, 1, 2, 0, 3
In this scenario I would have win because it falls under the 68% category. Dozen #1, #2 and #3 all came up between 1 and 3 times in 5 spins. I would have started betting on dozen #3 after the third spin because dozen #1 and #2 had fall previously. Next sequence:
2, 2, 2, 3, 2
In this scenario I would have lost because it falls under the 32% category. Dozen #1 didn't show up once in 5 spins and not to mention that dozen #2 fell more than 3 times. I would have started betting on dozen #1 after the fourth spin because #2 and #3 had fall previously. Next sequence:
1,1,1,1,1
In this scenario I would not bet but it would still be in the 32% category since dozen #1 fell more than 3 times and dozen #2 and #3 never came out. Since no other dozen was there I did not bet.
As you can see, sometimes it's neutral, sometimes I lose (less than 32%) but most of the time (68%) I win. Now the second most important part of this system is the betting. Even tough I win over twice as much as I lose it's important to make sure the losses in the amount of money are not twice higher than the gains or else there is no profit left. You can bet as you want but I bet the following: (the casino I play have a minimum of 25$ per exterior bet)
The maximum that I bet is three times since I only bet after two dozens have shown their faces and I also stop betting once a fifth number is out. Therefore the sequence that expose me the most are those containing three bets.
First bet 25$
Second bet 25$
Third bet 100$
Like I said this system has been very profitable for me. When I win my first bet I have a profit of 50$. When I win my second bet I have a profit of 25$. Finally when I win my third bet I have a profit of 150$. On average you could say that when I win it's around 75$
When I lose the third bet it costs me 150$ which is exactly 2 times what I win. I am profitable only in the long term because even though I only make on average 75$ and lose 150$ I win 68% of the time and lose less than 32% of the time. Now lets pretend that I would lose 32% this would mean that I would win:
68/32 = 2. 125 times more often than I would lose. Therefore I win by 0. 125 which is more than enough. But it gets better!
When I only bet 2 times because a second dozen only showed up on the third spin I bet:
First bet 25$
Second bet 50$
Which means that on average I would win around 63$ profit and would lose only 75$ which is only 1. 2 times bigger. Now the difference is no longer 0. 125 but 0. 925 which is very attractive. And now even BETTER!
When I only bet 1 time because a second dozen only showed up on the fourth spin I bet:
First bet 25$
Which means that I would win 50$ profit and would lose only 25$ which is not even bigger than my win but in fact smaller. Risk ratio for this situation is 1:2 which means that for every dollar I risk I have a chance of winning two. That's a 200% return on investment.
Ok so now comment as much as you want. I think I have covered everything and if not. . . well I will have to write it in a separate post because I'm tired of writing and you must be tired of reading. I wish the best of luck to everyone and also NEVER EVER FORGET to be rational when betting or else you could lose it all in a glance, and never bet money you can't lose!
Cubano
PS: Please God let the criticism to come be a constructive one. . .
Thanks for posting. Been working on a system for Double streets think this will help. Like the way you play.
Good Luck
Phishalot
Quote from: cubanopro on Sep 13, 03:14 PM 2010
PS: Please God let the criticism to come be a constructive one. . .
Rest assured we usually do enjoy a calm environment thanks to the fellows.
Any case, you can remove them.
Here every person is the moderator of their own thread.
Thanks for sharing your interesting take on
Standard Deviation with us, cubano.
May your stay in our forum be an enjoyable, productive one.
My only question is: have you tried this approach in the American 00 wheel? If so, have you found the extra number brings in too much of a discrepancy?
Cheers!
I HAVE a question if you lose the first 3 do you continue on that same dozen and start the progression over thanx warrior.
Quote from: Phishalot link=topic=1309. msg11859#msg11859 date=1284416473
Thanks for posting. Been working on a system for Double streets think this will help. Like the way you play.
Good Luck
Phishalot
Thanks man! I wish you good luck as well in all your endeavors.
Cubano
Quote from: VLS link=topic=1309. msg11862#msg11862 date=1284417391
My only question is: have you tried this approach in the American 00 wheel? If so, have you found the extra number brings in too much of a discrepancy?
Cheers!
Hi! No I'm sorry I'm afraid I haven't. . . I find it to be a complete waste of time playing on a double 0 wheel since it means the house edge is even more unbeatable. It's already hard enough to beat the house on a single 0 wheel. . . I don't even want to imagine on american wheels.
Cubano
PS: thanks for my picture
Quote from: warrior link=topic=1309. msg11863#msg11863 date=1284420333
I HAVE a question if you lose the first 3 do you continue on that same dozen and start the progression over thanks warrior.
Nope! You forget about it and simply start over looking for new dozens to bet on. If you have other questions I have already aswered quite some question on another forum.
The forum is VLS and you can find my post under the same name as this one.
Have a good day!
Cubano
--And why are you directing us to another forum???????
I think you should listen to us here also/since you posted here/
and see what we have to say about your method.
---Very interesting and original method---
I like it and think that this could be even improved to better,
regarding staking plan.
Quote from: F_LAT_INO link=topic=1309. msg11955#msg11955 date=1284486961
--And why are you directing us to another forum???????
I think you should listen to us here also/since you posted here/
and see what we have to say about your method.
---Very interesting and original method---
I like it and think that this could be even improved to better,
regarding staking plan.
Hi F_LAT_INO! My apologies for making you believe that I wanted people to stop asking questions on this forum. . . Maybe I didn't express myself well. What I meant is that you might find on the other forum some quite interesting questions that I have already answered. Questions that you didn't necessarily had in mind but that are still very useful ones. Thanks for your comment saying that my method was interesting and original (I agree with you). Nowadays when you hear people talking about systems it always has to do with explanations of HOW the system works but never explanations of WHY the system works. . . I mean I'm not saying that my system works because unfortunately I haven't tried it for 1000 000 spins but still at least I tried to give an explanation to back up the system's success.
WE REALLY NEED SOMEONE TO CODE THIS SYSTEM!!! HELP PLEASE!
I think you will soon hear good news,as soon as
people/coders/realise potentials of this method.
----To be quite frank,this should be a regular.
----Take my word,as have tested it with 3000
past/my own/spins and the results are positive.
Quote from: F_LAT_INO link=topic=1309. msg11960#msg11960 date=1284491924
I think you will soon hear good news,as soon as
people/coders/realise potentials of this method.
----To be quite frank,this should be a regular.
----Take my word,as have tested it with 3000
past/my own/spins and the results are positive.
Wow are you serious!?! That is pretty amazing. . . but we really need someone to code so we test it for many many spins. . . Wow thanks again for your contribution man!
I like this one, many thx for sharing it.
I think flatino is right, with another kind of progression can be better :)
Cubanopro,
Glad you decided to post on this forum as well. I too have been scratching my head about your progression.
I was thinking 1-2-3 might be another sequence to consider.
Win on 1st = +2 VS Win on 1st = +2
Win on 2nd = +3 VS Win on 2nd = +1
Win on 3rd = +3 VS Win on 3rd = +4
If we lose all 3 bets, down -6 on both sequences.
Main difference is if we lose on the 2nd bet.
Cheers,
George
Since I, for one, hate tracking for betting opportunities, I prefer to begin tracking the two dozens immediately after a win or 3 losses. I just don't see that it makes any difference when you start the 5 spin sequence. How can it affect our odds? We could start on spin 4 of the last 5 spin sequence to minimize tracking.
Example:
Spin Bet W/L Total
1
1
2 Dozens 1&2 trigger to start betting on 3 for 3 attacks
1 1 L -1
3 1 W +1 Dozens 1&3 trigger to start betting on doz 2
3 1 L 0
1 1 L -1
2 2 W +3 The 1&2 don't know they just finished a grouping of 5 spins, so let's use them to start a new attack.
Am I wrong, confused or what?
The only thing I think waiting for the 5 spins sequence to finish is that you bet fewer bets in an hours time, but, if this is a winning bet, I want to bet more bets in an hours time.
I'm also struggling with your statement that it's not reasonable to wait until a losing dozen hits before starting a new attack. I know your logic is solid. I know that you will pass up a win everytime you do it. And you may pass up more wins than losses saved. Okay, that doesn't sound so good. The more I write, the more I agree with you. OK, you convinced me. Don't wait for a losing dozen to hit before starting a new attack because it could be your very next win.
I'm not challenging how you play your system, I'm just waiting to see if you have a rock solid reason for doing it one way over another.
Thanks for your patience,
G
Hello
Thank you for this interesting post.
You wrote:
"Each one represents a percentage and that is when it becomes useful. The first level is 68%, the second is 95% and the third is 99. 7%. "
Afraid you lost me on this statement. The levels suddenly appeared out of nowhere. (For a moment I thought I'd taken the wrond tablets)
Please clarify.
Quote from: cubanopro link=topic=1309. msg11819#msg11819 date=1284405282
First bet 25$
Second bet 25$
Third bet 100$
Like I said this system has been very profitable for me. When I win my first bet I have a profit of 50$. When I win my second bet I have a profit of 25$. Finally when I win my third bet I have a profit of 150$. On average you could say that when I win it's around 75$
Hi Cubanopro. Thanks for posting your system. Interresting! But I have one comment/question about the average win when you start betting at the third spin. Dont you win more often at first bet than the second bet, and more often at the second bet than the third??
Just an example to explain what I mean:
We bet dozen 1 for max 3 spins and we play 100 sessions
Win on first bet: 1/3*100=33
Win on second bet 1/3*67=22
Win on third bet 1/3*45=15
Lost sessions 100-33-22-14=30
So I think the average win will be a little bit less than 75.
(maybe around 9/19*50+6/19*25+4/19*150=63)??
Cubanopro,
Well, since I live in Western US, I'm usually up later than those of you who live Eastward, so I usually get the last post of the day.
I just did a test on the 1st 130 spins from Wiesbaden 11.05.2010.
The first test I did, I didn't wait until the 5 spins were complete before selecting my new dozen to bet on. As soon as I finished a 3 bet sequence I selected the last 2 dozens or if I won within the 3 bets, I used the last 2 dozens.
I had a couple of pretty good drawdowns. One for -50, one for -52 and one for -60. I recovered on all three and ended with a 26 unit win.
I was thinking about posting these spins to show Mr. Cubanopro how well my tweak was performing. But, then I thought, I'll play these same spins using his betting system.
I found out that there wasn't really that much waiting to bet and I ended up at +33 units.
Wow! Was I ever surprised. My lowest drawdown was -12 which I only reached once. My highest bet was 4 since that's his highest bet with no other progression than 1-1-4.
Tomorrow, I will post both sessions so all can see the difference in performance. It's a little surprising.
Sleep well comrades,
George
Quote from: GLC link=topic=1309. msg11989#msg11989 date=1284508455
Since I, for one, hate tracking for betting opportunities, I prefer to begin tracking the two dozens immediately after a win or 3 losses. I just don't see that it makes any difference when you start the 5 spin sequence. How can it affect our odds? We could start on spin 4 of the last 5 spin sequence to minimize tracking.
Hey man what's up! I'm glad to see you here as well! I have to say that I like your attitude it's definitely a positive one. Lol when I read your posts I have a smile on my face because you give the impression that you think I know everything when in fact I'm still a student (in finance) and my field of studies have nothing to do with roulette. I am very far from being a scientist but I do enjoy the feeling of respect that comes with it! So in other words, thanks for your kind responses my friend.
Ok now back to business! You can do as you want but I keep my sets for 5 spins. . . and if you ask me the waiting is not long at all. Now concerning your question about how could it affect our odds, the way I see it is that if you cut your sets to lets say 3 or 4 spins you're changing what is at the very base of all. The whole system is based on one simple sentence:
''Every 5 spins, each dozen will fall between 1 and 3 times 68% of the time"
Every 5 spins. . . not 3 or 4. Take this example that contains 10 spins or 2 set of 5 if you prefer:
1,1,2,3,2 2,2,3,2,1
According to your way of playing you would have bet after the third spin on dozen 3 and would have won. Next you would have automatically started betting on dozen 1 since 3,2 become first and second spin. . . . You would have miserably lose since dozen #1 only got out on the tenth spin. You would have a total of +2,-6= -4
I would have +2, +3 = +5
Not only that, I'm not even sure how you could use your method. . . Would you be betting always for a period of 3 bets?? How far back do you go? Anyways as always do as you please but I prefer being a bit more conservative and bet less. Besides it's not like waiting 25 spins. .
Quote from: esoito link=topic=1309. msg11993#msg11993 date=1284511840
Hello
Thank you for this interesting post.
You wrote:
"Each one represents a percentage and that is when it becomes useful. The first level is 68%, the second is 95% and the third is 99. 7%. "
Afraid you lost me on this statement. The levels suddenly appeared out of nowhere. (For a moment I thought I'd taken the wrond tablets)
Please clarify.
Hi Esoito! Those percentages represent different levels of standard deviation. . . If you would have continued reading you would have understand what they are when put in a sentence.
For instance the following sentence, every 5 spins each dozen will fall between 1 and 3 times 68% of the time.
That 68% was found with the first level of standard deviation. In other words, each level tells us useful information. I hope I was clear enough. . . if not simply google Standard deviation and you will definitely understand what I'm saying (I'm not a mathematician).
Quote from: Ekis link=topic=1309. msg12010#msg12010 date=1284519488
Hi Cubanopro. Thanks for posting your system. Interresting! But I have one comment/question about the average win when you start betting at the third spin. don't you win more often at first bet than the second bet, and more often at the second bet than the third??
Just an example to explain what I mean:
We bet dozen 1 for max 3 spins and we play 100 sessions
Win on first bet: 1/3*100=33
Win on second bet 1/3*67=22
Win on third bet 1/3*45=15
Lost sessions 100-33-22-14=30
So I think the average win will be a little bit less than 75.
(maybe around 9/19*50+6/19*25+4/19*150=63)??
Hello Ekis! Yes you are absolutely right! It is a fact that chances are I will win more often on the first bet and then on the second one and so on. . . the thing is that I'm not sure how to calculate this. . . would you mind explaining it to me how you got 63?
Thanks (good reply by the way, excellent comment!)
Quote from: GLC link=topic=1309. msg12018#msg12018 date=1284526172
Cubanopro,
I just did a test on the 1st 130 spins from Wiesbaden 11. 05. 2010.
The first test I did, I didn't wait until the 5 spins were complete before selecting my new dozen to bet on. As soon as I finished a 3 bet sequence I selected the last 2 dozens or if I won within the 3 bets, I used the last 2 dozens.
I had a couple of pretty good drawdowns. One for -50, one for -52 and one for -60. I recovered on all three and ended with a 26 unit win.
I was thinking about posting these spins to show Mr. Cubanopro how well my tweak was performing. But, then I thought, I'll play these same spins using his betting system.
I found out that there wasn't really that much waiting to bet and I ended up at +33 units.
Wow! Was I ever surprised. My lowest drawdown was -12 which I only reached once. My highest bet was 4 since that's his highest bet with no other progression than 1-1-4.
Tomorrow, I will post both sessions so all can see the difference in performance. It's a little surprising.
Sleep well comrades,
George
Interesting! But I don't think my method is unbeatable. . . at times your method will perform better than mine I'm am sure. . . Anyways I WOULD REALLY LOVE IT if someone could code this once and for all so that we can finally know if this a profitable strategy in both long term and short term.
Good night!
Quote from: GLC on Sep 15, 12:49 AM 2010
Cubanopro,
Well, since I live in Western US, I'm usually up later than those of you who live Eastward, so I usually get the last post of the day.
I just did a test on the 1st 130 spins from Wiesbaden 11.05.2010.
The first test I did, I didn't wait until the 5 spins were complete before selecting my new dozen to bet on. As soon as I finished a 3 bet sequence I selected the last 2 dozens or if I won within the 3 bets, I used the last 2 dozens.
I had a couple of pretty good drawdowns. One for -50, one for -52 and one for -60. I recovered on all three and ended with a 26 unit win.
I was thinking about posting these spins to show Mr. Cubanopro how well my tweak was performing. But, then I thought, I'll play these same spins using his betting system.
I found out that there wasn't really that much waiting to bet and I ended up at +33 units.
Wow! Was I ever surprised. My lowest drawdown was -12 which I only reached once. My highest bet was 4 since that's his highest bet with no other progression than 1-1-4.
Tomorrow, I will post both sessions so all can see the difference in performance. It's a little surprising.
Sleep well comrades,
George
Cause its in the frame of SD,and your way is continous betting
with no such rules,my friend.This will show very good George,and will suggest
staking plan after testing some more 3000x3 spins.
Cubanopro,
Unfortunately, I can't program. Those who can are often very busy with a backlog.
Even if someone does program this and run it through a 100,000 spins, I doubt that it will produce positive results. It seems like long sessions always end with a negative total.
Chopping it up into playable time segments, on the other hand, can give positive results.
If enough interested members test it, we can get a good idea as to how it performs.
George
Hi Guys,
Love this thread. I have tested it a bit and WOW! What a profit maker! I plan to continue to test this baby. Hopefully someone will be willing to code this one...I think it will really be worth it.
@Esoito...I think what he meant was he has a 68% chance of winning on the first bet...a 95% chance of winning on his second bet and a 99.7% of winning on the third bet.
Scooby Doo
VIVA CUBA, Cubano! Beautiful country, nice people.
Hermes
Quote from: ScoobyDoo on Sep 15, 10:59 AM 2010
Hi Guys,
Love this thread. I have tested it a bit and WOW! What a profit maker! I plan to continue to test this baby. Hopefully someone will be willing to code this one...I think it will really be worth it.
@Esoito...I think what he meant was he has a 68% chance of winning on the first bet...a 95% chance of winning on his second bet and a 99.7% of winning on the third bet.
Scooby Doo
MY EXPIERENCE IS THE SAME .
--I'm testing this all day/manually thought,but goes quick of its simplicity/
and so far 8000 spins/constant positive results.
--Suggest;
--1,2,3.progression after 1st.trigger
---- 1,2,progression-4th. and 5th. bet
-------1,--5th. bet.
--Any comments?????
This thread is really something, thanx for sharing :thumbsup:
I too am about to start testing :)
Regards
I too will get involved. Can't play for real yet, but hey, if it carries on bringing positive testing, then I can wait a week or two!
BW
F LAT INO,
I like the look of your progression there.
If you lose the 3 bets, do you start over from scratch with the same staking? Thanks
BW
Quote from: buffalowizard on Sep 15, 01:55 PM 2010
F LAT INO,
I like the look of your progression there.
If you lose the 3 bets, do you start over from scratch with the same staking? Thanks
BW
With the same stakings,and it recovers quickly after such lose.
--I suppose could be rised in cycles of 5 spins---2,3,4/3,4,5 etc......but first this.
I've been testing a different progression.
Performing very well.
1-1-2. If lose all three
2-2-3. If lose all three
3-3-4. If lose all three
4-4-5. Etc...
If win and you have reached even or a new high, start over at 1-1-2.
If win and you are still down, drop back 1 level and keep going with progression until even or ahead.
For those who are really conservative, it works also with 1-1-1; 2-2-2; 3-3-3; etc...
LOL,
George
George
thanks for the Progression
what's U're opinion on the 5 number streak ?
When you win, do you wait for the 5 numbers to finish or do you start counting from the previous
Example
123 (W on 3) bet 1 due to 2 3 showing ?
Cheers :thumbsup:
EDIT: Also what's the score with regard to a Dozen sleepin ? IE after 5 spins, and we dont win do we start over for the missing dozen or wait for it to hit and then start ?
sorry if that's been covered :-[ I have re read but cudnt see it
Yes George,
It could work in many staking ways,
and many different 12 number/instead of clasic dozens/
but we should first find out Cubanos idea of 5 cycle rule,
does it works or not.So far with my testings everything
is doing well.We'l see.
Quote from: F_LAT_INO on Sep 15, 02:45 PM 2010
Yes George,
It could work in many staking ways,
and many different 12 number/instead of clasic dozens/
but we should first find out Cubanos idea of 5 cycle rule,
does it works or not.So far with my testings everything
is doing well.We'l see.
FLATINO, Twisteruk
I agree that keeping everything in groups of 5 tends to work a little better. It definitely keeps the drawdowns much less, from my testing anyway. And, I seem to be missing a lot of losing runs and zeros that I would for sure hit betting every bet.
G
Thanks George :thumbsup:
And about the sleepers ?
Do we stop and wait for it to hit or carry on as before ?
Example
12222 STOP or Continue 12121 etc etc until 3 arrives ?
Cheers :thumbsup:
Quote from: Twisteruk on Sep 15, 03:36 PM 2010
Thanks George :thumbsup:
And about the sleepers ?
Do we stop and wait for it to hit or carry on as before ?
Example
12222 STOP or Continue 12121 etc etc until 3 arrives ?
Cheers :thumbsup:
Always a new cycle of 5.
Here is a session using 1-2-3 progression.
Spin Bet W/L Total
1
2 Two different Dozens so start betting
1 1 L -1
2 2 L -3
1 3 L -6 No win so. End of 5 spin cycle.
3
3
3
This is a question. Do we use the first 3 or can we use the 4th 3? If we use the 1st 3, the 1 ends the 5 unit sequence without a bet. I will use the 4th 3 for this test.
3
1 Two different doz so start betting
1 2 L -8
1 4 L -12
1 6 L -18 Another 5 cycle without a win.
1
3 Two different dozens so start betting.
2 3 W -12
2
3 This ends another 5 cycle.
1 The same question. Do I start the next 5 cycle with this 1 or can I wait until the 2nd 1?
1
3
2
2
I'm going to stop this post to get an answer to my question.
Even though this started out losing, it comes back nicely for a good win.
George
Quote from: ScoobyDoo on Sep 15, 10:59 AM 2010
Hi Guys,
Love this thread. I have tested it a bit and WOW! What a profit maker! I plan to continue to test this baby. Hopefully someone will be willing to code this one...I think it will really be worth it.
@Esoito...I think what he meant was he has a 68% chance of winning on the first bet...a 95% chance of winning on his second bet and a 99.7% of winning on the third bet.
Scooby Doo
Hi scoobydoo! I`m glad to hear that it is a profit maker! Now just to clarify... the percentages are not related to the bets at all. Those percentages represent the different levels of Standard deviation. Like I explained in my very first post, standard deviation is simply a measure of how much variation there is from an average or a mean.. Therefore it is expected for a dozen to fall 1.62 times every 5 spins but we all know that it won't happen. There is always a variance or a deviation if you prefer from the mean and that is what the SD is all about. Giving a value to that deviation.
68% = It's what the first level represents
95% = It's what the second level represents
99.7% = It's what the third level represents
I hope you got my point! I also wanted to mention that if you decide to continue testing my system I don't encourage using RNG because that is pure randomness and it is not backed by the law of STANDARD DEVIATION.
Quote from: F_LAT_INO on Sep 15, 11:19 AM 2010
--I'm testing this all day/manually thought,but goes quick of its simplicity/
and so far 8000 spins/constant positive results.
--Suggest;
--1,2,3.progression after 1st.trigger
---- 1,2,progression-4th. and 5th. bet
-------1,--5th. bet.
--Any comments?????
Hi! May we know from where are you taking these spins?? I mean I am very happy to hear you're having good results but if you are taking there spins from a RNG then it is completely useless... Also I think I can't say this enough but the only way to really prove this is by coding the system and trying for thousands of spins..
Quote from: cubanopro on Sep 15, 04:41 PM 2010
Hi! May we know from where are you taking these spins?? I mean I am very happy to hear you're having good results but if you are taking there spins from a RNG then it is completely useless... Also I think I can't say this enough but the only way to really prove this is by coding the system and trying for thousands of spins..
--These are all my own past played spins.
RNG-???NEVER-EVER,ONLY LIVE LAND CASINOS.
Quote from: Twisteruk on Sep 15, 03:36 PM 2010
And about the sleepers ?
Do we stop and wait for it to hit or carry on as before ?
Example
12222 STOP or Continue 12121 etc etc until 3 arrives ?
Hi Twisteruk! I never wait for a sleeper to hit before starting to bet again.. I always continue with my original plan that says every 5 spins each dozen will hit between 1 and 3 times 68% of the time. Besides waiting for a sleeper to hit doesn't mean that there won't be another one the second we start betting...
Hi cubanopro
This guy was very friendly and was offering his coding skills for free.
Why not leave a post or a message and ask for his help to code this?
link:://rouletteforum.cc/coding-for-roulette/offering-my-coding-services-for-free/msg10578/#msg10578 (link:://rouletteforum.cc/coding-for-roulette/offering-my-coding-services-for-free/msg10578/#msg10578)
Quote from: cubanopro on Sep 15, 04:50 PM 2010
Hi Twisteruk! I never wait for a sleeper to hit before starting to bet again.. I always continue with my original plan that says every 5 spins each dozen will hit between 1 and 3 times 68% of the time. Besides waiting for a sleeper to hit doesn't mean that there won't be another one the second we start betting...
Yes very true, thanks for the response :thumbsup:
I'm currently playing it with Dozens and Columns at the same time
If a Zero hits, while NOT betting, should I start my 5 count over again ?
Example 1210 Ignore those numbers and start over
Is this correct ?
Quote from: GLC on Sep 15, 04:31 PM 2010
Here is a session using 1-2-3 progression.
Spin Bet W/L Total
1
2 Two different Dozens so start betting
1 1 L -1
2 2 L -3
1 3 L -6 No win so. End of 5 spin cycle.
3
3
3
This is a question. Do we use the first 3 or can we use the 4th 3? If we use the 1st 3, the 1 ends the 5 unit sequence without a bet. I will use the 4th 3 for this test.
3
1 Two different doz so start betting
1 2 L -8
1 4 L -12
1 6 L -18 Another 5 cycle without a win.
1
3 Two different dozens so start betting.
2 3 W -12
2
3 This ends another 5 cycle.
1 The same question. Do I start the next 5 cycle with this 1 or can I wait until the 2nd 1?
1
3
2
2
I'm going to stop this post to get an answer to my question.
Even though this started out losing, it comes back nicely for a good win.
George
Hi GLC! Your posts are always appreciated! The thing now is that we do not play the same way... I for example would not have bet on the second or third set of 5 spins... I would be up at the end of the session by -6(first set), 0 (second set), 0 (third set), +6 (fourth set), +2 (fifth set) = +2 units after the 5 sets with a maximum drawdown of -6.
You had a drawdown of -18 at one point... Anyways CODE CODE CODE this system people !!!
Quote from: F_LAT_INO on Sep 15, 04:48 PM 2010
--These are all my own past played spins.
RNG-???NEVER-EVER,ONLY LIVE LAND CASINOS.
Great! By any chance may we see those results??
Quote from: Blood Angel on Sep 15, 04:53 PM 2010
Hi cubanopro
This guy was very friendly and was offering his coding skills for free.
Why not leave a post or a message and ask for his help to code this?
link:://rouletteforum.cc/coding-for-roulette/offering-my-coding-services-for-free/msg10578/#msg10578 (link:://rouletteforum.cc/coding-for-roulette/offering-my-coding-services-for-free/msg10578/#msg10578)
Thanks man! I will certainly look into it!
Quote from: cubanopro on Sep 15, 04:33 PM 2010
I hope you got my point! I also wanted to mention that if you decide to continue testing my system I don't encourage using RNG because that is pure randomness and it is not backed by the law of STANDARD DEVIATION.
Sorry, but this is just plain wrong. Any normally distributed set of numbers (the "bell curve") has standard deviation, including RNG. Don't just believe me, you can find that out for yourself.
Quote from: Twisteruk on Sep 15, 04:54 PM 2010
I'm currently playing it with Dozens and Columns at the same time
If a Zero hits, while NOT betting, should I start my 5 count over again ?
Example 1210 Ignore those numbers and start over
Is this correct ?
What difference does it make that a 0 hits or not? In the 68% chance of winning... it is expected that sometimes a 0 hits.. It is not a correct way of thinking. Always remember that before changing a system and adding new rules, it has to be backed by something. In this case why would you restart your count if a 0 comes in play??
Quote from: cubanopro on Sep 15, 05:09 PM 2010
What difference does it make that a 0 hits or not? In the 68% chance of winning... it is expected that sometimes a 0 hits.. It is not a correct way of thinking. Always remember that before changing a system and adding new rules, it has to be backed by something. In this case why would you restart your count if a 0 comes in play??
Sorry, you misunderstand me
I wasnt saying this is what we should do
I was seeking clarification as to what we should do, thats all.
Thank you for your time. Much appreciated :thumbsup:
I think I played this section right.
Correct me if I did anything wrong.
No. Doz Bet W/L Total
1. 1
2. 2
3. 1 1 L -1
4. 2 2 L -3
5. 1 3 L -6
6. 3
7. 3
8. 3
9. 3
10. 1 NB
11. 1
12. 1
13. 3
14. 1 2 L -8
15. 2 4 W 0 Re-set
16. 2
17. 2
18. 3
19. 1 1 W +2 Re-set
20. 1
21. 3
22. 2
23. 2 1 L -1
24. 1 2 W +3 Re-set
25. 1
26. 2
27. 2
28. 3
29. 2 1 L -1
30. 0 2 L -3
31. 3
32. 1
33. 1 3 L -6
34. 2 2 W -2
35. 2
36. 1
37. 2
38. 2 1 L -3
39. 3 2 W +1 Re-set
40. 2
41. 0
42. 3
43. 3
44. 3
45. 1 NB
46. 1
47. 2
48. 1 1 L -1
49. 2 2 L -3
50. 3 3 W +3
51. 2
52. 3
53. 1 1 W +2
54. 3
55. 2
56. 2
57. 1
58. 1 1 L -1
59. 1 2 L -3
60. 2 3 L -6
61. 1
62. 1
63. 3
64. 2 2 W -2
65. 1
66. 3
67. 3
68. 1
69. 1 2 L -4
70. 3 4 L -8
71. 3
72. 1
73. 2 6 W +4
74. 3
75. 2
Okay, this is about 2 sessions for Cubanopro.
I won 15 units.
Largest bet was 6 units.
Farthest in the hole was -8 units.
Cubanopro, any corrections?
George
Quote from: Bayes on Sep 15, 05:08 PM 2010
Sorry, but this is just plain wrong. Any normally distributed set of numbers (the "bell curve") has standard deviation, including RNG. Don't just believe me, you can find that out for yourself.
I'm sorry because I want to believe you I do... It's just that I prefer being away from RNG... I always have the feeling that someone is arranging the results so that we loose. In theory it's true that ''any normally distributed set of numbers have a standard deviation'' in fact everything has an SD it doesn't limit only to numbers. But I just don't like playing online I guess
Good post Bayes!
RNGs have no deviation at all, they are artificial. Deviation happens only at natural cycles. Lately, I don't trust even live online because of the changing screens. If there will be always the same screen it would be different. They play Hollywood pictures with the gamblers. Greed has no boundary. Even real casinos which use metal pockets are suspicious for magnet in play. In LV I didn't see any metal pockets but the old style deep wooden pockets roulette wheels. But in Canada are all metal and flat.
Hermes
Quote from: GLC on Sep 15, 05:17 PM 2010
I think I played this section right.
Correct me if I did anything wrong.
No. Doz Bet W/L Total
1. 1
2. 2
3. 1 1 L -1
4. 2 2 L -3
5. 1 3 L -6
6. 3
7. 3
8. 3
9. 3
10. 1 NB
...
Okay, this is about 2 sessions for Cubanopro.
I won 15 units.
Largest bet was 6 units.
Farthest in the hole was -8 units.
Cubanopro, any corrections?
George
Hi GLC! Ok first of all these 75 spins represents almost 3 sessions for me.. I played it like I do and at the end I have -1 unit with a drawdown of -9... Not too great! You I don't know how but you say you have +15... I found a mistake. On the 15th spin you got a win when in reality you're supposed to get a loss and be at -12. I also dont understand your way of betting... 1,2,3..then I thought it was 2,3,4..clearly I was wrong..
Man I'm all confused...I think I have been talking too much lately on roulette forums. I think I'm going to go play a bit right now just to cool off lol.. Wish me luck!
Sorry, Cubanopro,
I had made a mistake on spin #15, the dozen was actually a 2 instead of a 3 making it a winner.
Also, my betting progression was 1-2-3, if lose 2-4-6, if lose 3-6-9, if lose 4-8-12, etc...
If a bet progression wins on a series of spins, almost any bet progression will win. More aggressive ones will win more but also go in the hole more.
I was really wanting to make sure I was playing the bet selection correctly and handling the 5 spin cycles the way you wrote.
I was wondering when you were going to have to take a break from answering all the questions.
No hurry. Most of us have been testing and tweaking these systems for a while. We're not going anywhere.
When you get a chance is soon enough.
Good luck on your session.
George.
Quote from: Hermes on Sep 15, 05:44 PM 2010
RNGs have no deviation at all, they are artificial...
Hermes
That statement is factually incorrect. Deviation is deviation regardless of the device
producing it, as long as the device conforms to probability models, which RNG's do
notoriously well.
Hello, this is a great system.
I am here to promote my new system which is similar to this system here.
It is performing well. Check it out!
link:://rouletteforum.cc/full-systems/a-pair-of-evens/ (link:://rouletteforum.cc/full-systems/a-pair-of-evens/)
Quote from: GLC on Sep 15, 07:04 PM 2010
I was wondering when you were going to have to take a break from answering all the questions.
No hurry. Most of us have been testing and tweaking these systems for a while. We're not going anywhere.
When you get a chance is soon enough.
Good luck on your session.
George.
Hey don't worry about me George...I'm fine. I guess I just needed some time off the forums lol. So how are we on the system? Are there people that have tried it for some while now? Tonight was another positive night for me but then again this means absolutely nothing because there are not enough spins...
Take care guys!
Not to change the direction of this thread, but if this works on the dozens, it should work on the dbl streets also. 10 spin cycles. Once 4 have shown, bet the other 2 for up to 10 spins. Sometimes I prefer dbl streets or sgl streets to dozens.
It can give you a little more wiggle room with the bet progression.
G
Im gonna test today with Dozens and Columns to see if there is much difference.
Obviously is will be a small sample, not 100k spins etc
I will use the Original Staking Plan, and post Results for each seperately
Will posts Results later tonight :thumbsup:
What win goal do use for the day?
What is the loss limit for a day?
Thanks
Phishalot
Quote from: cubanopro on Sep 15, 05:05 PM 2010
Great! By any chance may we see those results??
--YOU MUST BE JOKING,CUBANO,
--I'm all manual man,old fashioned,and
to do what you ask from me,woul first have
to take evening classes.No man,you just have
to take my word.
Okkk here is my 1st set of results
No
26
15 T1
32 -25
18 -25
9 +200
= +150
8
30 T2
19 +50
3
35
= +50
8
15 T3
1 -25
29 +50
16
= +25
4
2
0
29 T2
32 -25
= -25
25
7 T3
29 +50
15
11
= +50
28
4 T2
28 -25
0 -25
19 +200
= +150
13
31 T1
15 -25
26 -25
26 -100
= -150
25
22 T1
12 +50
10
14
= +50
2
31 T2
12 -25
15 +50
35
= +25
24
8 T3
11 -25
11 -25
20 -100
= -150
Total +175
Would most ppl say this is a "typical session" ?
Hi fellas! I just wanted to say that I believe this is the end of our journey! Although this was an interesting post I have now mathematical proof that my system wonââ,¬â,,¢t work in the long run. Another person from another forum helped me out by explaining me why it could not work over many spins. I think itââ,¬â,,¢s imperative that I show you the message he wrote me so that you too can benefit from it. Perhaps you can understand why it wouldnââ,¬â,,¢t work in the long term.
ââ,¬ËœÃ¢â,¬â,,¢Iââ,¬â,,¢m sorry to disappoint you, but your system will not work. I will post this at the website as soon as the administrator approves my registration.
Your basic logic is sound, but your numbers are a bit sloppy. When you refine the numbers, the expectation turns negative. I donââ,¬â,,¢t doubt you have had success, but it was luck. Every five spins, this system loses an average of $1.82, but the standard deviation is huge, $87.64. That means it takes about 2,500 sequences of five spins before your negative expectation equals your standard deviation. Even at that point, there is one chance in six you will be ahead by luck.
To start with, your formula based on standard deviation is only an approximation. The chance of every column appearing between 1 and 3 times in five spins is actually 59%, not 68%. Things are a little better than that for your system, because 5% of the time only one column will appear, so only 36% of the time do you lose because two columns appeared but not three. If you ignore the 5% of the time you donââ,¬â,,¢t bet, you win 62% of the time and lose 38%. But that means you win only 1.65 times as often as you lose, not 2.125.
Next consider the amounts you win and lose. There are seven possible outcomes from your system, listed below with probability, result, reason:
9% +$150, win on third bet
31% +$50, win on first bet
19% +$25, win on second bet
5%, $0, donââ,¬â,,¢t bet
6% -$25, lose one bet
11% -$50, lose on second bet
19% -$150, lose on third bet
Overall, you win an average of $57.71 59% of the time and lose an average of $100.02 36% of the time (5% of the time is no bet). Your expected value from the series of five spins is -$1.82.
There is no way to adjust the system to make it work. Unless you think the roulette wheel is biased (which is bad for your system) or has a memory, each bet has negative expectation. Without some way to predict the next number, systems like this cannot work.ââ,¬â,,¢Ã¢â,¬â,,¢
Let this be an example of why systems using only statistics wonââ,¬â,,¢t work in the long run. **Each bet has negative expectation. Now I have the proof I needed to stop playingââ,¬Â¦eventually I will lose it all if I continue.
I wish you all a good day! And for those that genuinely believed I worked for a casino or something like that, well what can I sayââ,¬Â¦I guess itââ,¬â,,¢s not every day you see a guy that from its own good will wants to share a winning technique. Besides I never said it was the Holy Grail I simply said that it was, at the moment, working for me and I needed to know if it could work in the long term.
Cubano
Almost every system works at the start.
C.
If we could find a system that lost gradually and every now and then had a really big win that recovered more than you lost, we might be able to reverse that bet and be onto something really good.
Cheers,
George
Thanks cubanopro for sharing your new infomation, it will save some ppl alot of money ! :thumbsup:
What the guy told you is also only theory like yours. If you guys have a positive results that means you win more than lose than cubanos theory is the winning one. Test 2,500 spins and show results. If you are still winner forget the other guy.
Here is not going about holy grail but advantage over roulette game. I didn't tested it yet but as I can see the results you get are positive. Keep going don't stop just because somebody told you his opinion. Test 2,500 spins and tell the result! Nobody is perfect even that guy is not perfect.
Test more it is worth it. Tesla gave Edison homework and Edison missed 10,000 times until won forever.
Believe what you see not what you hear.
Hermes
Quote from: Hermes on Sep 20, 08:23 PM 2010
What the guy told you is also only theory like yours. If you guys have a positive results that means you win more than lose than cubanos theory is the winning one. Test 2,500 spins and show results. If you are still winner forget the other guy.
Here is not going about holy grail but advantage over roulette game. I didn't tested it yet but as I can see the results you get are positive. Keep going don't stop just because somebody told you his opinion. Test 2,500 spins and tell the result! Nobody is perfect even that guy is not perfect.
Test more it is worth it. Tesla gave Edison homework and Edison missed 10,000 times until won forever.
Believe what you see not what you hear.
Hermes
Hi Hermes,
Have tested this with my own 12000 spins-----and the results seems like
promessing at the start,but then it show it real face....but then I have tweak it
some,selecting it in diff. larger frame with some improvements,but still
no good....so gave up.
BTW---Edison stole my country man Tesla homework and become a winner at the
end.
Quote from: Hermes on Sep 20, 08:23 PM 2010
What the guy told you is also only theory like yours. If you guys have a positive results that means you win more than lose than cubanos theory is the winning one. Test 2,500 spins and show results. If you are still winner forget the other guy.
Here is not going about holy grail but advantage over roulette game. I didn't tested it yet but as I can see the results you get are positive. Keep going don't stop just because somebody told you his opinion. Test 2,500 spins and tell the result! Nobody is perfect even that guy is not perfect.
Test more it is worth it. Tesla gave Edison homework and Edison missed 10,000 times until won forever.
Believe what you see not what you hear.
Hermes
Thats a great point of view Hermes ! Thanx for sharing :thumbsup:
Twisteruk is still winning. Tweak it, tweak it, tweak it is the answer.
That's why I brought it here latino. Tesla was a genius and Edison plagiarist as usual but money and fame took Edison.
Hermes
Quote from: cubanopro on Sep 19, 04:29 PM 2010
Hi fellas! I just wanted to say that I believe this is the end of our journey! Although this was an interesting post I have now mathematical proof that my system wonââ,¬â,,¢t work in the long run. Another person from another forum helped me out by explaining me why it could not work over many spins. I think itââ,¬â,,¢s imperative that I show you the message he wrote me so that you too can benefit from it. Perhaps you can understand why it wouldnââ,¬â,,¢t work in the long term.
ââ,¬ËœÃ¢â,¬â,,¢Iââ,¬â,,¢m sorry to disappoint you, but your system will not work. I will post this at the website as soon as the administrator approves my registration.
Your basic logic is sound, but your numbers are a bit sloppy. When you refine the numbers, the expectation turns negative. I donââ,¬â,,¢t doubt you have had success, but it was luck. Every five spins, this system loses an average of $1.82, but the standard deviation is huge, $87.64. That means it takes about 2,500 sequences of five spins before your negative expectation equals your standard deviation. Even at that point, there is one chance in six you will be ahead by luck.
To start with, your formula based on standard deviation is only an approximation. The chance of every column appearing between 1 and 3 times in five spins is actually 59%, not 68%. Things are a little better than that for your system, because 5% of the time only one column will appear, so only 36% of the time do you lose because two columns appeared but not three. If you ignore the 5% of the time you donââ,¬â,,¢t bet, you win 62% of the time and lose 38%. But that means you win only 1.65 times as often as you lose, not 2.125.
Next consider the amounts you win and lose. There are seven possible outcomes from your system, listed below with probability, result, reason:
9% +$150, win on third bet
31% +$50, win on first bet
19% +$25, win on second bet
5%, $0, donââ,¬â,,¢t bet
6% -$25, lose one bet
11% -$50, lose on second bet
19% -$150, lose on third bet
Overall, you win an average of $57.71 59% of the time and lose an average of $100.02 36% of the time (5% of the time is no bet). Your expected value from the series of five spins is -$1.82.
There is no way to adjust the system to make it work. Unless you think the roulette wheel is biased (which is bad for your system) or has a memory, each bet has negative expectation. Without some way to predict the next number, systems like this cannot work.ââ,¬â,,¢Ã¢â,¬â,,¢
Let this be an example of why systems using only statistics wonââ,¬â,,¢t work in the long run. **Each bet has negative expectation. Now I have the proof I needed to stop playingââ,¬Â¦eventually I will lose it all if I continue.
I wish you all a good day! And for those that genuinely believed I worked for a casino or something like that, well what can I sayââ,¬Â¦I guess itââ,¬â,,¢s not every day you see a guy that from its own good will wants to share a winning technique. Besides I never said it was the Holy Grail I simply said that it was, at the moment, working for me and I needed to know if it could work in the long term.
Cubano
Nice to clarify the real math behind your system.
I´m not sure but the problems with these measures is that when you have already the 2 different dozens it happenned in the past and fall into Gambler´s Fallacy.
I guess, to have the real 68% you must play the 5 spins on 1 dozen each spin.
Because the SD is applied to the group of 5 trials you played.
Waiting for 2 different dozens to play the sleeper you must calculate only the time you place your bets, that´s why you missed in takkng the 68% instead of 59%.
Very nice of the guy who explained the real math.
BR
Cubano must live in Miami, Florida because I went through whole Varadero and didn't found a casino. There can be some in Habana but that's too far from Varadero.
About the deviation we use it in Forex trading in terms of Bollinger Bands of 2nd deviation. If the 2nd deviaton gets touched, pierced or overhauled by the price we place an entry for trade. If it is on support level we place buy and if it is on resistance level we place a sell orders. Deviation means overstretched. Deviation 1 is average.
What is overstretched must come in the middle after while, cannot stay overstretched, cannot hold the pressure forever.
Happy gambling
Hermes
Hi cubanopro,
It is really working,thank you for posting that O0
Its good to read all this post from all that time ago, from something that I m developing for some time...
Actually I'm using standard deviation and applying it to my betting logic (A bit different from what Cubano presented). Its being hard, but i don't want to say impossible, to get positive profit at long-term.
One thing I can say right now, for sure: it improve significantly the edge against house.
When I get something usefull to see I will open a new topic to show my software :thumbsup: