Sir
I really take exception with your statement that I might be jerking you around. (my words)
I have spent many hours studying this system and the others you posted. I quickly built my own mechanical tracker and spent hours learning to use it. I ran three old sheets of mine with tremendous results. I posted each sheet. You were complimentary then!
I paid $50 to have a splits clicker made that would put down the splits in quick fashion.
You honestly think I did all that just to come back and jerk you around?
Frankly, in spite of your vitriol, I think you very well may have a winning system--if the player can stand the progression.
And, FlAtMaN, you stated that we must use a tracker. I am not the only one who thought a tracker was already programmed and ready to use. Who would want to make you a tracker when you get so angry when a person tries to understand?
When time permits, I will check a couple of your latest trots and see what I come up with.
Sam
I never try the flats systems, the post is some few words and Excel sheet which as usually here are to much buggy, the discussions goes how to read and understand to that level the poster find he has post some which the poster has to make correction in. Checked against history I do not have so much trust in, the real numbers speak, the test numbers will never repeat.
Frankly! if I do not get it explained first time so I get it, and besides think I will try, I just do not give it a futher thought. We see everything, bet so, and bet opposite may all works?
Some of GLC is very sophisticated but done for an Amercan casino using 5 dollar bets and go for a few.
I saw once a posted method (flat?) which says play on ALL cols but double in the middle, That is just a signal to not pay more attention.
Rolling system on 50% or more of the table works with small winnings, until Lady Luck wants it back with interest. F and JL have used that.
@ FlAtMaN
Sammy is as honest as the day is long ;)
It probably all just been a bit "lost in translation" 2Cats is here to help, of that there is no doubt :thumbsup:
O0
P.S. Don't watch the film "lost in translation" it's 2 hours of your life your never getting back 8)
Sorry Sam if you understand it thatway...I didn't get angry at all,it's just our medditeranian way of expression.We just couldn't understand each other....and I got tired of repeating over and over the very same thing...you didn't get that follow the last 9 IS ONE BET.....and follow the last/further 9
IS ONE DIFFERENT BET.After all it was clearly explained in my first introduction rules excel.
You are quite right that I have here a winning method......the reason it was post/otherwise wouldn't/couse such where conditions ruled by a guy for whom I posted it.....that all my winning
sessions there must be tested with a tracker.......and should match my results...as doinb this by a hand there are possibilities of making errors.......and in replay 31 you can see all my winnings,
in other words I should get that money from him after the testing is done...I can't openly talk about
it here but you can p.m. Sogget/as he is my countryman/and he will tell you all the story behind all
this.Never the less I might find someone to do a tracker,but again condition of our bet was couple or more trackers so that each matches each....wee see.And don't worry am not a guy to have issues with anybody,let alone you.....man two of us almost 140 years
The problem is sam, Flat is how we say in my neck of the woods, a 'grumpy old git'
He also finds any criticism hard to bear
Quote from: Ralph on Nov 19, 04:20 PM 2012
I never try the flats systems, the post is some few words and Excel sheet which as usually here are to much buggy, the discussions goes how to read and understand to that level the poster find he has post some which the poster has to make correction in. Checked against history I do not have so much trust in, the real numbers speak, the test numbers will never repeat.
Frankly! if I do not get it explained first time so I get it, and besides think I will try, I just do not give it a futher thought. We see everything, bet so, and bet opposite may all works?
Some of GLC is very sophisticated but done for an Amercan casino using 5 dollar bets and go for a few.
I saw once a posted method (flat?) which says play on ALL cols but double in the middle, That is just a signal to not pay more attention.
Rolling system on 50% or more of the table works with small winnings, until Lady Luck wants it back with interest. F and JL have used that.
Ralph,
You,as far as I'm personally concern,are indirectly insulting me.Why????
Suggesting that my excel numbers are fabricated......can't you read and check it with Wiesbaden,
you also can check/or any body else also/that i have downloaded each and every excel over 300 spins,all bay date,table,and suggesting something like against me can only man that is probably able to do something like that.Case finish.
Quote from: ddarko on Nov 19, 04:23 PM 2012
@ FlAtMaN
Sammy is as honest as the day is long ;)
It probably all just been a bit "lost in translation" 2Cats is here to help, of that there is no doubt :thumbsup:
O0
P.S. Don't watch the film "lost in translation" it's 2 hours of your life your never getting back 8)
I know that much longer then you.....he addmited the other day that as he gets olgder he is forgeting things.......lol.....I am drinking MUMIO to get younger.
its a well documented fact that when a person gets slightly emmotional in their second or third language, they dont have enough knowledge of that language to be subtle or diplomatic.
Flat would say, "its in the exel sheet, go and read it, Im not explaining it again."
I would say " before I explain it again, just take another look at my exel sheet, Im sure I explained it correctly"
Drazen_Cro sounds aweful when he tries to push an issue in English.
When a true English speaker is arrogant, he cares not to fill in the words with politeness. Thats because he is arrogant. When a foreigner speaks english, he doesnt have the knowledge to fill in the words with politeness. Thats why he sounds arrogant.
Turner
Quote from: FlAtMaN on Nov 19, 04:57 PM 2012
I know that much longer then you.....
Your making assumptions there FlAtMaN :o :o :o
O0
Turner
What if a foreigner is a grumpy old git on top of English as third language - surely a recipe for disaster!
Quote from: Turner on Nov 19, 05:02 PM 2012
its a well documented fact that when a person gets slightly emmotional in their second or third language, they don't have enough knowledge of that language to be subtle or diplomatic.
Flat would say, "its in the exel sheet, go and read it, I'm not explaining it again."
I would say " before I explain it again, just take another look at my exel sheet, I'm sure I explained it correctly"
Drazen_Cro sounds aweful when he tries to push an issue in English.
When a true English speaker is arrogant, he cares not to fill in the words with politeness. that's because he is arrogant. When a foreigner speaks English, he doesn't have the knowledge to fill in the words with politeness. that's why he sounds arrogant.
Turner
Poor me.What would you expect.If I write book and give you to read it,you also expect me to explain meaning of each word of the book.It beats me.
Quote from: buffalowizard on Nov 19, 05:11 PM 2012
Turner
What if a foreigner is a grumpy old git on top of English as third language - surely a recipe for disaster!
--Bravo......hope you get my years...with your insulting behaviour you surely wont.
--In my country they shoot ppl.like you........and if you told me this in my face you would
be gone you jerk.
Quote from: FlAtMaN on Nov 19, 05:24 PM 2012
--Bravo......hope you get my years...with your insulting behaviour you surely won't.
--In my country they shoot people.like you........and if you told me this in my face you would
be gone you jerk.
:o Take a chill pill dude. :o
Quote from: FlAtMaN on Nov 19, 05:16 PM 2012
Poor me.What would you expect.If I write book and give you to read it,you also expect me to explain meaning of each word of the book.It beats me.
No need to be like that
Well if it beats you then it can only mean that you think your explainations of your systems are easy to follow
OK gentlemen
I think I finally understand where the FlAtMaN is coming from on this system. The test is to run his numbers as I understand the system and see if I get the same results. If I do, then I've got it.
If any of you guys have ever studied Neuro-linguistic programming, you would know that people hear things differently than they are spoken. Some people can't hear things at all--they are visual people and must see it in writing.
I must see it in a picture that suits my brain. I will work on this tonight and post my results.
Sam
Well, well.....
All of the Excel sheets from FlAtMaN's thread have been removed. What kind of deal is this?
TwoCat
Iboba always was a hothead.
Did anyone save even one of those Excels to disk? I'd like to have it as I have set aside the whole evening for testing.
I have the "rules" excel file if that's any good to you :thumbsup:
O0
Ooops sorry I deleted it :'( :'( :'(
Sam, I have the "rules" sheet. That's it - and not even sure if I can save it/send it. Just opened it and haven't closed it yet.
Quote from: Turner on Nov 19, 05:02 PM 2012
When a true English speaker is arrogant, he cares not to fill in the words with politeness. that's because he is arrogant. When a foreigner speaks English, he doesn't have the knowledge to fill in the words with politeness. that's why he sounds arrogant.
Turner
What?! Not be this thing i think you are not with that knowing what is the true! How can what is not this when you are that thing??!
I would like to get a copy of the secret rules too! (gimme the rules!)
OK
A lady named Ann Onymous sent me two of the sheets. That's all I need to make my life complete.
I feel a movie coming on!!
(how do you guys stomach me???)
Sam
PFFFFFFFFTttttttttttttt
After about 7 hours of hard labor, I've come to the following conclusions you will see in the video. It is L v F-16. I do wish some of you who are interested in this would print the thing out and follow along with me.
Sam
Sam's Explanation of L v F (link:://:.youtube.com/watch?v=4_tfWaSXPbQ#)
Sam, your just to funny ;D
"We dont need a 9+"
"What i'm doing ??" :D
always love your reactions in your videos :xd:
Thanks, Stepkevh
It occurred to me some of you don't have the excel sheets. I'm attaching two. The modified one is trimmed to fit a sheet of paper.
I better get some help on this!!
Sam
This is in fact the last 9 / furthest 9 splits system that has been explained before ?
The system that i made a partial tracker for ?
Sam, I love your videos ;D
I see what is bothering you
Let me see if I can explain
ok
lets say we have the last 9: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
and the furthest 9: 10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18
all in that order,ok?
and we are betting furthest
lets say 5 comes in
now that is a loss
we now switch to betting last 9, BUT
you must update the last 9 properly and that is where you get it wrong
the last 9 are now: 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9,5
because the 5 is the newest
thats why the 4 in your video doesnt match
you always have to keep changing the newest 9 splits regardless of what you bet cause after every spin the 9 last changes - if nothing else their order changes
hope this helps you, hope I written it ok, english is not my first language
any other questions, please feel free to ask
soggett,
you explained it good :-)
the only time that the splits are'nt updated is when the last split equals the one that has been spun.
Quote from: Stepkevh on Nov 20, 01:41 AM 2012
soggett,
you explained it good :-)
the only time that the splits are'nt updated is when the last split equals the one that has been spun.
ty
yes, if the last 9 splits are 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 and then 9 comes - that's the only time you don't do a thing, just rebet ;)
Playing FTL on any EC instead of sectors/splits or lines would be much easier ;D And they do also usually repeat within 300 spins. Flat thinks that his bet is more balanced but its more about getting clusters of wins at the right moment in the progression. You can win 50% or more of bets here and still be in a negative territory.
Quote from: FlAtMaN on Nov 19, 04:54 PM 2012
Ralph,
You,as far as I'm personally concern,are indirectly insulting me.Why????
Suggesting that my excel numbers are fabricated......can't you read and check it with Wiesbaden,
you also can check/or any body else also/that i have downloaded each and every excel over 300 spins,all bay date,table,and suggesting something like against me can only man that is probably able to do something like that.Case finish.
I never say it was any fabricating, just the spins are done and will never come back. If you play the spins they should win, but the spins were never played by you it were other at Weissbaden, they were tested aginst numbers wich will never repeate ever or almost ever.
Quote from: soggett on Nov 20, 01:47 AM 2012
ty
yes, if the last 9 splits are 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 and then 9 comes - that's the only time you don't do a thing, just rebet ;)
JUST ALSO ERASE,CROSS OFF ABOVE SPLIT 9...SO YOU ALWAYS HAVE 9 SPLIT
IN YOUR VERTICAL LINE OF LAST 9.--thanks Sogget
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Nov 20, 01:54 AM 2012
Playing FTL on any EC instead of sectors/splits or lines would be much easier ;D And they do also usually repeat within 300 spins. Flat thinks that his bet is more balanced but its more about getting clusters of wins at the right moment in the progression. You can win 50% or more of bets here and still be in a negative territory.
Wrong,very wrong......do some testings with any outside E/C bets than compare it
with LvF-9---and you maybe notice great difference between these 2 bets.Flats doesn't think that my
bet is more balanced....HE KNOW THAT.......be a real tester then compare all those 34 winning session with any outside E/C bets then you will find out what am I about here.
Quote from: Skakus on Nov 19, 06:21 PM 2012
Iboba always was a hothead.
That is why I merried 7 times...lol
Quote from: Ralph on Nov 20, 04:13 AM 2012
I never say it was any fabricating, just the spins are done and will never come back. If you play the spins they should win, but the spins were never played by you it were other at Weissbaden, they were tested aginst numbers wich will never repeate ever or almost ever.
--I play it every day/just returned/and the results are same.and a method tested got nothing to do with past or present numbers,but the method as a whole.
Quote from: soggett on Nov 20, 01:09 AM 2012
Sam, I love your videos ;D
I see what is bothering you
Let me see if I can explain
ok
lets say we have the last 9: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
and the furthest 9: 10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18
all in that order,ok?
and we are betting furthest
lets say 5 comes in
now that is a loss
we now switch to betting last 9, BUT
you must update the last 9 properly and that is where you get it wrong
the last 9 are now: 1,2,3,4,6,7,8,9,5
because the 5 is the newest
that's why the 4 in your video doesn't match
you always have to keep changing the newest 9 splits regardless of what you bet cause after every spin the 9 last changes - if nothing else their order changes
hope this helps you, hope I written it ok, English is not my first language
any other questions, please feel free to ask
Bravo Sogget......that's where Sam and me differ......26 times,all documented have
told him that very same thing...hope he gets it now,really do.
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Nov 19, 06:15 PM 2012
Well, well.....
All of the Excel sheets from FlAtMaN's thread have been removed. What kind of deal is this?
TwoCat
The deal is Sam that after You oppened this thread/don't get the point why nor the reason for it/
and since it's your thread and you can there delete irrelevant posts out of topic,posts that some are spitting me all over,see this BUFFALLO posts where he openly and sarcastically offended me,you as
thread maker should either deleted it or forewarn him/as I always do that in my threads/remember
when I deleted your post in my thread...you where openly ask why and you got my unswer.
This Turner calls me arrogant,couse he can't understand clear explanations of a method,and offended couse my replay to him was read carefull is all there on the plate....and now I become
arrogant and unpolite.You know how we call it here;never spit on the plate from which you eat---
and now finalmente------Should I LEAVE ALL THESE HARD WORKING EXCELS UNDELETED.....
No Sir...a man gives them life bet and they offend him......these that never ever contributed to
this community,but only sarcasam,insults,so called English humor.....why should I swallow all that.
No more....am changing ambient/could 7 vifes/and going where some BUFFALLO OR OTHER JUVENILE DON'T EXIST.
FlAtMaN
You and I do not differ.
We do not disagree.
You explained it 26 times but you could have explained it 2,600 times and I still would not have gotten it. I have to see things in real time in a two-column format or I can't get it. That's no reflection on you and it doesn't mean I'm ignorant. If a man spoke only Greek, you could speak to him all day in Spanish and he would still not get it. Speaking slowly or loudly just doesn't help.
soggett
Thanks for your explanation. I don't understand why you do that as of yet, but it's 4:30 A.M. in my world, I have just had three hours sleep and I'm not at my best.
Stepkevh
Yes, you built a fine tracker. Only trouble is--when you look at the new splits on your tracker, how do you decide who is old. That is where my Redneck Tracker comes in as you move magnetic pucks from square to square. If there's a puck, it's new; no puck, it's old. Now I have the splits clicker and I just move the numbers on the clicker!! It's simple--BUT--I have to know the rules. Thanks to soggett, I do.
Perhaps FlAtMaN will put the sheets up again and we can all have a go at it.
Sam
FlAtMaN
I opened this thread because you said you wanted to lock yours, but could not. Out of courtesy to you, I did not post any more on your thread.
Sorry, I am not a person who believes in deleting posts. People have the right to express themselves. "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."
I understand what Ralph is saying. It would not insult me. He is saying these numbers are old and dead. If you were playing live and real, he would not say that. I disagree with him and agree with you; I think testing cold numbers is valid although that exact trot will not appear again throughout eternity.
Whether you believe it or not, I'm on your side. Geez, what kind of fool would want anyone to fail?? I even want Jl to succeed!
So now, my brother from another mother, I'm off to try to understand soggett's post.
Let's be friends! It's so much nicer!
Sam
@ soggett
Of course I understand!! If you update last when you're betting on it and it wins, you must also update it if you're NOT betting on it and it wins. I don't know your first language, but your English is fine.
All
Even though soggett wrote out his splits horizontally instead of vertically, I was able to see the change when he made it. You simply must speak in the "language" your listener understands. Explain a triangle! Even worse--explain the color red. Worse yet--explain a red triangle! Now show me a picture. Get it?
Let's all "chill", as they say, and prove FlAtMaN has a winning system and go make some darn Eruos!!
Sam
Sam,
The last 9 uniques are the last new,
so its easy to understand that all the rest are the oldest.
Stephan
Stef
Sure it is. Not knocking your work. Sorry if it sounded that way. I'll have another look at it tomorrow.
Sam
Sam,
Glad your understanding it now. It took a while for you and me both to get through all the confusion.
Now I get it, it looks so straightforward.
This splits clicker you mention. Is that your own private thing or is it somewhere on the forum?
Trebor
trebor
I have just made another (yet another!!) movie which I hope soggett and FlAtMaN will stamp with their seal of approval. It is uploading as I type. I have killed the other one as I don't want some poor soul to come across it and think it's right.
As to the clicker, in a few days it will be released. Yes, I paid some money for it. Everyone who uses it should, also. More on that later.
The clicker makes it beastly easy to play this as you merely switch splits from last to furthest and vice-versa when the time comes. (You have opened the clicker twice; once for last and once for furthest.) Then hit "click" and watch it bet.
I think when you watch my latest production, if it's right, you will easily see the way to bet.
Sam
Sam's Explanation of L v F II (link:://:.youtube.com/watch?v=ppSd1hOUFIM#)
yep, you finally done it right, time to celebrate :D :D
you got the hang of it TCS, good job
PRAISE THE LORD!!
Now, can we get on with the testing?
FlAtMaN, will you please put your sheets back up and let's conduct the test. I'm sure someone will now write a tracker.
I will-----you guessed it!!------make a video showing how easy it is to use the clickers.
soggett
Thank you for your help. When you use words like "yep", you have English down pat. I'll teach you some Oklahoma Redneck someday!!
Sam
If you've ever farted so loud your neighbors called homeland security.............you might be a redneck!
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Nov 20, 07:30 AM 2012
I'll teach you some Oklahoma Redneck someday!!
you're on ;)
no problem TCS, we are all here to help one another after all, right?
looking forward to your tracker/clicker
Quote from: TwoCatSam on Nov 20, 07:33 AM 2012
If you've ever farted so loud your neighbors called homeland security.............you might be a redneck!
:D :D :D :D
Just example of yesterday session how 12 furthest won in the row...and with those 18 spins everything explains..sorry gents but me of to WIEN tomorrow to teach the man a method and
his instruction were to delate all excels.
Gents,
I have built a tracker that automatically tracks the 2 groups of nine (furthest and recent). Just working on making the rest of the sheet user friendly. Basically after every number/spin entered you just have to click a button and it'll resort the groups accordingly (gotta love VBA).
Trying to make it place bets and everything for you, but don't think that's possible as it's a dynamic work group that changes every spin.
Stef - can I get a copy of your tracker to see what you have in place? Thanks.
MM
Attached you'll find a pic of my tracker, so far. The pic only shows the groups and how they are sorted and how the tracker works (so far). I will most likely be adding a part for the bets underneath, but it won't be automated (atleast for now).
Can soggett/flat/Sam let me know if these groups look right so far (in the example) and if it makes sense?
Thanks,
MM
looks ok as far as I can tell
a tracker would be great, thank you for your effort
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Nov 20, 01:54 AM 2012
Playing FTL on any EC instead of sectors/splits or lines would be much easier ;D And they do also usually repeat within 300 spins. Flat thinks that his bet is more balanced but its more about getting clusters of wins at the right moment in the progression. You can win 50% or more of bets here and still be in a negative territory.
"....be a real tester"
matty
Your tracker is fine as it except that I would put the last on the left and the furthest on the right. That would be easier for me, but I'm just one person. I will be happy to put it through its paces any time. Our Thanksgiving is coming up and I will be gone from Wednesday afternoon 'till sometime Friday or even Saturday.
You do realize that the "last" must be in a certain order (as per my video by Director soggett) and the furthest don't matter a whit what order they're in.
I think Director soggett should be up for an Oscar!
Sam
matty
Attached is a copy of Stef's "9 last spllits".
I don't know this for sure, but on the last system of FlAtMaN's, he looked at spins in groups of 5 and went up if he had two wins and down if he had three. Now I think he looks at nine spins and does the same. Up if four wins; down if five.
Don't hold me to that.
Sam
Sam,
Flat has said that he tested various progressions for 9v9 and found groups of 9 to be best,
He intimated there was a reason for this but didn't elaborate.
I thinks it's +1 -1.
Trebor
I think i'm to good for this world ;D
I took the opportunity to rebuild my 9 splits tracker
to a last - furthest version.
It will show litterly "last" or "furthest" and the matching splits.
I think i really should do this stuff as a living ;D
Edit: trackers corrected and attached 2 posts further :)
Quote from: Stepkevh on Nov 20, 04:32 PM 2012
I think i'm to good for this world ;D
I took the opportunity to rebuild my 9 splits tracker
to a last - furthest version.
It will show litterly "last" or "furthest" and the matching splits.
I think i really should do this stuff as a living ;D
niceee
thanks a lot man :-*
edit:
quick test
i think there is a mistake
it says to bet furthest split 8 but when I input split 8 it says loss
edit 2:
there is something definitely wrong with the furthest splits
last splits work ok so far
also when zero hits it changes from last to furthest and vice versa - it shouldnt
sry if I bring you down
youre right, i forgot to change the l/w validating :-)
gonna fix it
Voila these should be good now
Stephan
ow, doesn't it change on a loss ??
I mean when zero falls, does it need to stay on the same bets ?
yes, but not after zero
after zero it stays the same
everything else seems fine now
thanks again
now testing is going to be a breeze :)
sry Stepkevh
but theres still something wrong with the furthest
I think it doesnt calculate the right splits
it tells to bet the last split that hit
I dont know
Sorry guys that i was gone suddenly but the electricity fell out overhere.
This morning when i woke up everything was okay again.
Normally the trackers are good now.
Let me know if not, with maybe a screenshot.
Stef
Quote from: Still on Nov 20, 01:01 PM 2012
"....be a real tester"
Still
One question. How many sessions here would you like to test to make a decision if this is worth playing? If it wins 30 times in a row and you need 20/1 strike rate to break even it indicates for some thats a good method. Its based on catching repeaters and having large enough BR to survive draw downs. In my opinion you can apply this concept to any EC. If repeaters prevail over chops you win most of the time but if opposite happens occasionally you will lose your BR. :D
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Nov 21, 12:44 AM 2012
Still
One question. How many sessions here would you like to test to make a decision if this is worth playing? If it wins 30 times in a row and you need 20/1 strike rate to break even it indicates for some that's a good method. Its based on catching repeaters and having large enough BR to survive draw downs. In my opinion you can apply this concept to any EC. If repeaters prevail over chops you win most of the time but if opposite happens occasionally you will lose your BR. :D
Well there's somebody here willing to pay FlatMan decent $ for a well tested system that stands up to many winning sessions in a row (30) with the idea that is enough to make it worth playing. My standards might equal that if i am interested in getting lucky for a few weeks. I would do more extensive testing if i was interested in systematically winning over several years. The question is always, how promising must a system be for me to invest in programming my own test.
I want to know how occasionally a set BR would be lost...what size the BR needs to be for 30 winning sessions to be common...how much per session average gain. Most importantly, i want to see a chart of the output...different charts depending on different input. I want to see what it does flat over a long time and how a progression helps it (or not).
FlatMan is asking for testers, not guesses on how it will perform. Would you be willing to add a tracker to the mix? If not, why not?
Quote from: Stepkevh on Nov 21, 12:24 AM 2012
Sorry guys that i was gone suddenly but the electricity fell out overhere.
This morning when i woke up everything was okay again.
Normally the trackers are good now.
Let me know if not, with maybe a screenshot.
Stef
Stef I hate doing this to you, but...
look at the screen
this happens, but if I use the last or the zero then the next furthest is ok
maybe just that cell is wrong?
soggett,
no problem at all.
If there is a mistake then it must be said so that i can give a look at it and fix it :D
Voila,
And if there's still a problem let me know.
I'm here to solve it :-)
Stef
thank you
It works fine now
gonna do some testing
ok, please don't kill me
I don't know
I tried the rng version and I noticed this again
this is from the manual version
I inputed the number from the rng version just to be sure
no prob, will have another look :-)
Okay, i think i finally solved the problem :)
I kept the F9 button pressed and let the sheet scroll trough 500 numbers for a minute
and did'nt notice any error anymore.
Stephan
nope, still happens
and now i cant make it happen again
the only error that i found is when your first 2 spins are 0, how possible is that :-)
and one in the first rows, never noticed it, but i gave the same layout as your picture.
Hopefully its solved now :-)
thanks Stef for your hard work.
How about progression in cycles of 9?
Quote from: FlAtMaN on Nov 20, 04:51 AM 2012
Wrong,very wrong......do some testings with any outside E/C bets than compare it
with LvF-9---and you maybe notice great difference between these 2 bets.Flats doesn't think that my
bet is more balanced....HE KNOW THAT.......be a real tester then compare all those 34 winning session with any outside E/C bets then you will find out what am I about here.
Comparing your bet with any outside E/C bet would not accomplish anything in your 34 sessions. If i lost once i would just lose a bet to this guy. I like your bet but dont buy your claim that any group of 18 numbers repeats more. Are some groups on the wheel more or less random?
Quote from: Robeenhuut on Nov 22, 02:41 AM 2012
Comparing your bet with any outside E/C bet would not accomplish anything in your 34 sessions. If i lost once i would just lose a bet to this guy. I like your bet but don't buy your claim that any group of 18 numbers repeats more. Are some groups on the wheel more or less random?
Put data up, or shut up. Stats, charts, anything! Anything except this constant 'i'm smarter than you are' approach to commentary. You make it sound like your analysis is coming from a deep well of wisdom. I say, PRINT the DATA that backs up what you are claiming. Is E/C better? PRINT IT. Put up a chart of your way of doing something versus any other way so we can compare. Supply your charts with 200K data points each...or more. Let US make the decision whether something is worthy of our time, or HOW we intend to use data. If not, i say this is just coming from a wise guy.
Quote from: Still on Nov 22, 02:52 AM 2012
Put data up, or shut up. Stats, charts, anything! Anything except this constant 'i'm smarter than you are' approach to commentary. You make it sound like your analysis is coming from a deep well of wisdom. I say, PRINT the DATA that backs up what you are claiming. Is E/C better? PRINT IT. Put up a chart of your way of doing something versus any other way so we can compare. Supply your charts with 200K data points each...or more. Let US make the decision whether something is worthy of our time, or HOW we intend to use data. If not, i say this is just coming from a wise guy.
------------------
Still, that depends on what level of understanding you are....if i say betting against a dozen appearing 4 times is a recipe for disaster are you really going to ask me for data and charts...? I guess not, because much about this has been done before and NOW its easily recognized as being a disaster....no need for data to prove for it should be common knowledge....this is what RBH seems to be saying....if you understand what he his saying, then you too would realize there's no need for 200K spins of data...
just a friendly remark
Vundarosa
Quote from: Still on Nov 22, 02:52 AM 2012
Put data up, or shut up. Stats, charts, anything! Anything except this constant 'i'm smarter than you are' approach to commentary. You make it sound like your analysis is coming from a deep well of wisdom. I say, PRINT the DATA that backs up what you are claiming. Is E/C better? PRINT IT. Put up a chart of your way of doing something versus any other way so we can compare. Supply your charts with 200K data points each...or more. Let US make the decision whether something is worthy of our time, or HOW we intend to use data. If not, i say this is just coming from a wise guy.
Still
I will draw a chart for you. Which color would you like?
Regards
Quote from: vundarosa on Nov 22, 03:04 AM 2012
------------------
Still, that depends on what level of understanding you are....
Thanks vundarosa.
There is an undercurrent in his comments implying a high priest level of understanding that appears to me to be mostly about brow-beating and showing off magical powers of super cognition thanks to some crystal ball stashed away somewhere in the dark.
What is it backed up with? Really?
Quote from: vundarosa on Nov 22, 03:04 AM 2012
if i say betting against a dozen appearing 4 times is a recipe for disaster are you really going to ask me for data and charts...? I guess not, because much about this has been done before and NOW its easily recognized as being a disaster....
So i want to see what kind of disaster it is. Show me the data and the charts of the disaster. Then let me decide how i will or won't use the disaster. Some systems have an interesting way of postponing the inevitable disaster. I may want to see if i can use that data short-term, if it can't be used long term.
SHOW how this particular system proposed by F_LAT_INO is the same as betting against a dozen appearing 4 times in a row. Show how it compares to any other system.
What does "much about this" mean? Much about F_LAT_INO? Much about roulette?
Am i supposed to be amazed with how much Robeenhut knows? Should i just go away now? If he knows so much, why doesn't he just go away? What is he doing here? Why doesn't he go wherever Garnabby goes whenever he's not here?
Wow! Look how easy it is for Robeenhut to recognize the F_LAT_INO's ideas are complete disasters!! It's amazing how he can do that and also LOSE LESS at the same time!
Quote from: vundarosa on Nov 22, 03:04 AM 2012
no need for data to prove for it should be common knowledge....this is what RBH seems to be saying....
He's saying he's smarter than F_LAT_INO and acting like its easy to be smarter than F_LAT_INO...and doesn't have time to actually post any kind of data relative to what's being proposed. Why? Because F_LAT_INO is so silly that it's a waste of Robeenhut's time to back up anything he is saying with any kind of data?
Quote from: vundarosa on Nov 22, 03:04 AM 2012
if you understand what he his saying, then you too would realize there's no need for 200K spins of data...
just a friendly remark
Vundarosa
Robeenhut has for a long time said that all you can really do is LOSE LESS when you lose. He should just say that, over and over again, instead of acting like he has analyzed the system at hand and come to a negative conclusion. If he has analyzed it, SHOW THE DATA. If he does not use data, HOW does he do his analysis? If math equations, show the equations. If he has not analyzed it, then why comment? He should just repeat the generic argument that you can only LOSE LESS.
I recommend either to make the generic argument over and over....or actually address the details of the system in question in the only terms that matter - data and charts - other than esoteric math equations.
The alternative is to troll for reactions.
Still
Quote from: Still on Nov 22, 04:09 AM 2012
Show how it compares to any other system.
---------------
do you believe it is diferent than follow the last EC? Why so or why not?
vundarosa
Quote from: vundarosa on Nov 22, 04:15 AM 2012
---------------
do you believe it is diferent than follow the last EC? Why so or why not?
vundarosa
I just don't appreciate the type of analysis that stands back and makes authoritative statements about whether it is a bird, or a plane, or whether it is able to jump tall buildings. It sounds like ladies gossiping to me...as they sit to play bingo at the local church. By the time they are done gossiping about whatever it was, opportunity has passed by. For the time it takes to gossip about whether it is the same or different than some other system that is known not to work, 200K of spins or more could have been generated to *prove something*.
All systems are the same if you see them all as subject to the same number of zeros on the wheel. If that is the extent of Robeenhut's analysis, he should just say so. If the objective is to LOSE LESS, then these kinds of comparisons strike me as drunken, and not at all scientific.
They are not the same. One system will produce a signature when the data is graphed. The other system will produce another kind of signature. One may lose less than the other. Fine. I want to see the characteristics of one system compared to another to see if there is anything in the data i might be able to use short or long term. I will decide what to do with the data. I don't need a high priest constantly standing between me and the data, expecting me to believe that wine is blood.
What is common knowledge? F_LAT_INO has been at this a lot longer than Robeenhut, works harder at improving his game, and subsists entirely on proceeds from his systems while Robeenhut does not. What do we know? We know that Robeenhut is trivializing F_LAT_INO's efforts, and wants us to believe that he can run mental circles around the numbers involved, unlike the rest of us mortal muggles.
Just some observations,
Still
Quote from: Still on Nov 22, 04:54 AM 2012
I just don't appreciate the type of analysis that stands back and makes authoritative statements about whether it is a bird, or a plane, or whether it is able to jump tall buildings. It sounds like ladies gossiping to me...as they sit to play bingo at the local church. By the time they are done gossiping about whatever it was, opportunity has passed by. For the time it takes to gossip about whether it is the same or different than some other system that is known not to work, 200K of spins or more could have been generated to *prove something*.
All systems are the same if you see them all as subject to the same number of zeros on the wheel. If that is the extent of Robeenhut's analysis, he should just say so. If the objective is to LOSE LESS, then these kinds of comparisons strike me as drunken, and not at all scientific.
They are not the same. One system will produce a signature when the data is graphed. The other system will produce another kind of signature. One may lose less than the other. Fine. I want to see the characteristics of one system compared to another to see if there is anything in the data i might be able to use short or long term. I will decide what to do with the data. I don't need a high priest constantly standing between me and the data, expecting me to believe that wine is blood.
What is common knowledge? F_LAT_INO has been at this a lot longer than Robeenhut, works harder at improving his game, and subsists entirely on proceeds from his systems while Robeenhut does not. What do we know? We know that Robeenhut is trivializing F_LAT_INO's efforts, and wants us to believe that he can run mental circles around the numbers involved, unlike the rest of us mortal muggles.
Just some observations,
Still
Typical of you Still. Vundarosa asked you simple question and you again go on your tirade against me wanting to lose less and failing to produce data or charts. I would consider it a waste of time in your case. You would not get it anyway. Learn some basics and statistics on your own.
Quote from: Still on Nov 22, 04:09 AM 2012
Thanks vundarosa.
There is an undercurrent in his comments implying a high priest level of understanding that appears to me to be mostly about brow-beating and showing off magical powers of super cognition thanks to some crystal ball stashed away somewhere in the dark.
What is it backed up with? Really?
So i want to see what kind of disaster it is. Show me the data and the charts of the disaster. Then let me decide how i will or won't use the disaster. Some systems have an interesting way of postponing the inevitable disaster. I may want to see if i can use that data short-term, if it can't be used long term.
SHOW how this particular system proposed by F_LAT_INO is the same as betting against a dozen appearing 4 times in a row. Show how it compares to any other system.
What does "much about this" mean? Much about F_LAT_INO? Much about roulette?
Am i supposed to be amazed with how much Robeenhut knows? Should i just go away now? If he knows so much, why doesn't he just go away? What is he doing here? Why doesn't he go wherever Garnabby goes whenever he's not here?
Wow! Look how easy it is for Robeenhut to recognize the F_LAT_INO's ideas are complete disasters!! It's amazing how he can do that and also LOSE LESS at the same time!
He's saying he's smarter than F_LAT_INO and acting like its easy to be smarter than F_LAT_INO...and doesn't have time to actually post any kind of data relative to what's being proposed. Why? Because F_LAT_INO is so silly that it's a waste of Robeenhut's time to back up anything he is saying with any kind of data?
Robeenhut has for a long time said that all you can really do is LOSE LESS when you lose. He should just say that, over and over again, instead of acting like he has analyzed the system at hand and come to a negative conclusion. If he has analyzed it, SHOW THE DATA. If he does not use data, HOW does he do his analysis? If math equations, show the equations. If he has not analyzed it, then why comment? He should just repeat the generic argument that you can only LOSE LESS.
I recommend either to make the generic argument over and over....or actually address the details of the system in question in the only terms that matter - data and charts - other than esoteric math equations.
The alternative is to troll for reactions.
Still
I won't comment on your level of understanding of my and Vundarosa posts. Just show me kindly where i posted that Flat's ideas are complete disasters and what is the relevance of Garnabby's whereabouts :D And calm down.
Where is FlAtMaN???
All I ever wanted was to know the honest-to-God right way to test his system. Now I want the sheets he took down.
Put up the sheets, FlAtMaN!
Sam
OK, gentlemen
Perhaps FlAtMaN cannot log on again. He's hot at me, so he has not emailed me to that effect.
I've worked too dang hard to learn this system to let it go.
@Stef
Is the last post of the tracker accurate? I don't want to be using a faulty one.
@All
If we don't hear from FlAtMaN soon, I will begin testing his system own my own. I will download spins from Spielbank, table 2 every day beginning as soon as I can free myself from holiday activities. Table 2 seems to be what everyone uses.
I will start a thread under testing and go from there. I'd rather have FlAtMaN on board, but let's press ahead anyway.
Sam
Hey guys there is one thing that was not very clear to me about flat's system. I', talking about the formula he uses whenever he lowers his bet after a win (he said he does this calculation in his mind). Could somebody please provide me with a clear example of how to use it?
by the way my visual basic tracker is almost completed, I will share when ready.
thanks in advance!
Tony
Quote from: tonynewlife on Nov 24, 02:42 PM 2012
Hey guys there is one thing that was not very clear to me about flat's system. I', talking about the formula he uses whenever he lowers his bet after a win (he said he does this calculation in his mind). Could somebody please provide me with a clear example of how to use it?
by the way my visual basic tracker is almost completed, I will share when ready.
thanks in advance!
Tony
Flat and perhaps you can do it in your mind. Flat reduce 1. +1 on loss -1 on win. A very old and famous way whith all kinds of EC.s have been used since at least the year of 1800.
It lose sometimes big, but often win a small, it winns terrible often, but tank at the end. The end can take long if you have some luck, or faster.
Quote from: Ralph on Nov 26, 09:17 AM 2012
Flat and perhaps you can do it in your mind. Flat reduce 1. +1 on loss -1 on win. A very old and famous way with all kinds of EC.s have been used since at least the year of 1800.
It lose sometimes big, but often win a small, it winns terrible often, but tank at the end. The end can take long if you have some luck, or faster.
This is to remove as it posted due to mousing wrong.
Quote from: Ralph on Nov 26, 09:17 AM 2012
Flat and perhaps you can do it in your mind. Flat reduce 1. +1 on loss -1 on win. A very old and famous way whith all kinds of EC.s have been used since at least the year of 1800.
It lose sometimes big, but often win a small, it winns terrible often, but tank at the end. The end can take long if you have some luck, or faster.
Not in my real playing....this 1+1- is just for explanations purposes....but shortly to explain/which I
have earlier in some methods/for instance start playing/usually in cycles5.6.7.8.9,depends/and having
several negative cycles in the row,come due bet 7,then that particular cycle wins dominantly,almost recupering all loses....then I don't reduce to 6 but to 2 or 3,depends on the present result.
Quote from: FlAtMaN on Nov 26, 11:43 AM 2012
Not in my real playing....this 1+1- is just for explanations purposes....but shortly to explain/which I
have earlier in some methods/for instance start playing/usually in cycles5.6.7.8.9,depends/and having
several negative cycles in the row,come due bet 7,then that particular cycle wins dominantly,almost recupering all loses....then I don't reduce to 6 but to 2 or 3,depends on the present result.
Who are you expected to understand this explanation?
Quote from: Ralph on Nov 26, 12:58 PM 2012
Who are you expected to understand this explanation?
---What,you really don't get it,sorry I can't explain it better then did