This is an even chance method of mine.
I use it for betting on even/odd.
To begin- wait if EO comes, then bet E
If OE comes, bet O
On a win- Wait for a virtual loss and after that when any of the above 2 sequence comes, resume betting
On a loss- Wait for a virtual win and after that when any of the above 2 sequence comes, resume betting
Follow +1/-1 and reset on a new high.
First test played on euro layout, 115 spins, +130 profit, 10 unit bet size
and if you get ee you bet e?
Quote from: Tomla021 on Mar 31, 02:36 PM 2016
and if you get ee you bet e?
No I wait for either EO or OE to bet, so after eeo.. we can bet e. This way we ride out the streaks of eeeeee or oooooo with one loss or no loss
got ya riding the chop--thanks
Quote from: Willie on Mar 31, 02:01 PM 2016
This is an even chance method of mine.
I use it for betting on even/odd.
To begin- wait if EO comes, then bet E
If OE comes, bet O
On a win- Wait for a virtual loss and after that when any of the above 2 sequence comes, resume betting
On a loss- Wait for a virtual win and after that when any of the above 2 sequence comes, resume betting
Follow +1/-1 and reset on a new high.
First test played on euro layout, 115 spins, +130 profit, 10 unit bet size
What is the highest unit size you have gotten with +1?
Highest bet size was +3 units in that spin set (+30 units playing with 10 unit as bet size)
The hit rate is good with this.
More testing required though, maybe you can give it a go
Low base unit obviously won't get us much ahead since triggers are few with this method. So I prefer bet size of 10 or 15 units and then go ahead from there
Anytime it switches bet the prior?
So
E
E
E
O
NOW BET E
it seems like a nice little baccarat bet
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Mar 31, 04:47 PM 2016
Anytime it switches bet the prior?
So
E
E
E
O
NOW BET E
That's right..
Could someone else test this as well,. Would be helpful
Here are some spins. Win loss next to each betting opportunity
O
E
O (W)
O (L)
O
O
E
E (L)
E
O
E (W)
E
O
E (W)
E
E
O
E (W)
E
O
E (W)
O (W)
E (W)
ZERO (L)
O
O
E
O (W)
ZERO (L)
E
E
O
O (L)
E
E (L)
O
E (W)
E (L)
O
9 wins. 7 losses. good enough for progression? dunno. gotta test more.
Willie still testing?
Yes I am on this still.
Thanks for posting your spins.
A short win goal works good in this, like somewhere between 50 to 70 when played with 10 units as bet size
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 01, 06:47 PM 2016
Here are some spins. Win loss next to each betting opportunity
O
E
O (W)
O (L)
O
O
E
E (L)
E
O
E (W)
E
O
E (W)
E
E
O
E (W)
E
O
E (W)
O (W)
E (W)
ZERO (L)
O
O
E
O (W)
ZERO (L)
E
E
O
O (L)
E
E (L)
O
E (W)
E (L)
O
9 wins. 7 losses. good enough for progression? dunno. gotta test more.
In your results you would reach +70 by spin 21
yea its pretty good
going through Zumma, this thing rocks
good work
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 03, 08:22 PM 2016
going through Zumma, this thing rocks
good work
hey thanks!
:D
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 03, 05:13 PM 2016
Willie still testing?
On your 8th roll was that a mistake? Shouldn't that been ODD? You have the bet EVEN.
Quote from: doubledime on Apr 03, 09:51 PM 2016
On your 8th roll was that a mistake? Shouldn't that been ODD? You have the bet EVEN.
Those were actual spins
I wrote win loss next to each opportunity
I bet odd as the rules state, but even hit
I wasnt writing what i would have bet, i was writing actuals
Hi willie,
I will also try a test for this - but can you please show an example so that I can correctly understand the exact points when to start/stop betting. Sorry to be a pain but it is important to me at the outset to get it the right way before I start the testing procedure.
E
E
O - bet on E right?
E - W+1 ; so now wait for a virtual L right?
O - virtual win
E - virtual win
E - virtual loss - resume at next trigger right?
O - bet on E right?
O - L-1 ; so now wait for a virtual W right?
O
O
E
O - virtual win - resume betting on E right?
E - w+2 ; wait for virtual L right
O
E
O
E
E - virtual loss ; resume at next trigger right?
E
O - bet on E
E - w+1 ; wait for virtual L right?
E - virtual loss
E
O - bet on E
O - L-1 ; so now wait for a virtual W right?
E - virtual win; resume betting on O right?
O - w+2
At this point the Profit = +3 - ok?
Regards,
A.
When you see EO bet on E. OE bet on O
The first 5 spins of your example
E
E
O no bet (EE is not a trigger)
E. Here bet E. (prior was EO) Win.
O. Here bet O. (prior was OE) Win
You could wait a VL after a win just showing the bet example
Hi RG,
The rule was stated:
"On a win - Wait for a VIRTUAL LOSS and after that when any of the above 2 sequence comes, resume betting..."
So I think I am right?
A.
Quote from: atlantis on Apr 04, 06:55 AM 2016
Hi RG,
The rule was stated:
"On a win - Wait for a VIRTUAL LOSS and after that when any of the above 2 sequence comes, resume betting..."
So I think I am right?
A.
Yes. U were.
Its early sorry
I tested without the VL thats the only tweak i made
A real money test just now in online live autowheel resulted in +10u in 101 spins. Highest bet=3u.
I used the +1/-1 progression and played the original way set out in the opening post by Willie.
I'm happy with that result. :)
Luckily I did not hit a 0.
Might be interesting, as a member above voiced, to try it on baccarat/punto banco or even Sic Bo (using big/small) too.
Anyhow, it is nice and easy to play and I agree that maybe use higher units and skedaddle when you've grabbed a few is good idea for the time invested...
:)
A.
Quote from: atlantis on Apr 04, 09:22 AM 2016
A real money test just now in online live autowheel resulted in +10u in 101 spins. Highest bet=3u.
I used the +1/-1 progression and played the original way set out in the opening post by Willie.
I'm happy with that result. :)
Luckily I did not hit a 0.
Might be interesting, as a member above voiced, to try it on baccarat/punto banco or even Sic Bo (using big/small) too.
Anyhow, it is nice and easy to play and I agree that maybe use higher units and skedaddle when you've grabbed a few is good idea for the time invested...
:)
A.
Great that you picked it up for testing atlantis. Yes higher units is the way to go in this. Also thanks for all the interesting system you post :)
Im going to test this more and more
$25 chips $100 win goal per day?
Curiosity: playing this on all 3 ECs at once :ooh:
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 04, 10:34 AM 2016
Im going to test this more and more
$25 chips $100 win goal per day?
If you plan to use $25 chips, $100 win goal can be for just a session, n much more for the day :thumbsup:
Alright. Recommended bankroll in units??
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 04, 12:02 PM 2016
Alright. Recommended bankroll in units??
BR can be 200
Win goal per session would be 50 when played with 10 units
Maybe you havent tested this enough to answer. But longest loss streak to date?
How many losses consecutively? Ive had 3
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 04, 12:19 PM 2016
Maybe you havent tested this enough to answer. But longest loss streak to date?
How many losses consecutively? Ive had 3
Yes I am also discovering it as I go, longest I have had is 4 consecutive losses as of now, but it recovers itself in few spins
So $400 is decent bankroll with $25 units if waiting 1 virtual loss id assume
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 04, 12:26 PM 2016
So $400 is decent bankroll with $25 units if waiting 1 virtual loss id assume
Yes seems sufficient, but then we can go, 25/35/45/55.. etc for a loss if larger drawdowns on the lines of 25/50/75/100.. scares us, infact this will eat up BR of 400 within 6 straight losses
Scared money doesnt win money 8)
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 04, 10:58 AM 2016
Curiosity: playing this on all 3 ECs at once :ooh:
I would prefer to have the confidence of playing with a single EC first, using this method :)
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 04, 12:35 PM 2016
Scared money doesnt win money 8)
True, but have to test it more first :thumbsup:
So I'll go with 10 units as base in the beginning ;)
I get ahead of myself. Your right
Good work again ill test late and report back
Fyi wiggy has uploaded real wheel spins under real spins section
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 04, 12:46 PM 2016
I get ahead of myself. Your right
Good work again ill test late and report back
Fyi wiggy has uploaded real wheel spins under real spins section
Thanks, will take a spin set from there
@tomla if you give it a go on baccarat post results!!
Compliments of Wiggy
Win Loss Registry
longest loss in a row was 5
has to be played with larger units to be worth the time because it takes awhile
100 spins. (batch 1) Celtic Casino 23/01/2016.
1. 19
2. 4
3. 4 L
4. 18
5. 15
6. 0 L
7. 7
8. 15
9. 10
10. 4 L
11. 36
12. 5
13. 3 L
14. 35
15. 7
16. 7
17. 27
18. 24
19. 30 L
20. 23
21. 12 W
22. 23 W
23. 28 W
24. 18 L
25. 2
26. 00
27. 15
28. 17
29. 32
30. 8 L
31. 6
32. 21
33. 30 W
34. 15 W
35. 12 W
36. 29 W
37. 27 L
38. 7
39. 30
40. 1 W
41. 27 L
42. 0
43. 0
44. 32
45. 29
46. 27 L
47. 23
48. 23
49. 00
50. 2
51. 21
52. 8 W
53. 1 W
54. 30 W
55. 18 L
56. 17
57. 1 L
58. 3
59. 25
60. 21
61. 18
62. 24 L
63. 20
64. 10
65. 18
66. 6
67. 22
68. 15
69. 0 L
70. 10
71. 17
72. 20 W
73. 12 L
74. 14
75. 32
76. 27
77. 9 L
78. 8
79. 3 W
80. 27 L
81. 14
82. 3 W
83. 00 L
84. 9
85. 6
86. 14 L
87. 18
88. 22
89. 24
90. 6
91. 23
92. 35 L
93. 5
94. 6
95. 12 L
96. 5
97. 8 W
98. 4
99. 24
100. 30
roulette ghost i think you only go for 1 win as willy originally had it
Quote from: Tomla021 on Apr 04, 06:09 PM 2016
roulette ghost i think you only go for 1 win as willy originally had it
yea i just wanted to show the win loss registry for a large number group...not bad at all
ok carry on---enjoy
Quote from: Tomla021 on Apr 04, 06:11 PM 2016
ok carry on---enjoy
the +1 is achieved quick on his method
Quote from: Tomla021 on Apr 04, 06:09 PM 2016
roulette ghost i think you only go for 1 win as willy originally had it
I never said +1 tomla :D
I mentioned +50 with 10 units as base..
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 04, 06:05 PM 2016
Compliments of Wiggy
Win Loss Registry
longest loss in a row was 5
has to be played with larger units to be worth the time because it takes awhile
100 spins. (batch 1) Celtic Casino 23/01/2016.
1. 19
2. 4
3. 4 L
4. 18
5. 15
6. 0 L
7. 7
8. 15
9. 10
10. 4 L
11. 36
12. 5
13. 3 L
14. 35
15. 7
16. 7
17. 27
18. 24
19. 30 L
20. 23
21. 12 W
22. 23 W
23. 28 W
24. 18 L
25. 2
26. 00
27. 15
28. 17
29. 32
30. 8 L
31. 6
32. 21
33. 30 W
34. 15 W
35. 12 W
36. 29 W
37. 27 L
38. 7
39. 30
40. 1 W
41. 27 L
42. 0
43. 0
44. 32
45. 29
46. 27 L
47. 23
48. 23
49. 00
50. 2
51. 21
52. 8 W
53. 1 W
54. 30 W
55. 18 L
56. 17
57. 1 L
58. 3
59. 25
60. 21
61. 18
62. 24 L
63. 20
64. 10
65. 18
66. 6
67. 22
68. 15
69. 0 L
70. 10
71. 17
72. 20 W
73. 12 L
74. 14
75. 32
76. 27
77. 9 L
78. 8
79. 3 W
80. 27 L
81. 14
82. 3 W
83. 00 L
84. 9
85. 6
86. 14 L
87. 18
88. 22
89. 24
90. 6
91. 23
92. 35 L
93. 5
94. 6
95. 12 L
96. 5
97. 8 W
98. 4
99. 24
100. 30
Thanks Rouletteghost for posting the spins.
You would reach the wingoal of +50 on the 40th spin here if bet size is 10 initially
Also the original test of the system is on Euro layout, and these spins are the American ones, so need to cross check it on that as well.
( sorry forgot to mention at the start)
i shared your method on bet selection forum under the baccarat section
i extended credit to you, not myself
Quote from: Willie on Apr 03, 06:32 PM 2016
In your results you would reach +70 by spin 21
I'm confused about how you implement play.
You said to wait for virtual wins after a loss. Didn't
see that in the example.
Also, are you continuing playing for the chop till you lose? Or just
playing 1 spin and stopping?
Also, your nomenclature(sp?) is inconsistent. You talk about "units" as individual
things and then use "10 units". If that were the case "+/- 1 unit" would be
$10..... $11......$12........ on unit at a time. Not "10 units".
Your unit size is $10. Not 10 units.
Quote from: Willie on Apr 03, 06:32 PM 2016
In your results you would reach +70 by spin 21
At "$10 units", there are 5 wins, and 2 losses.
+3 "units". $30 if you like.
Quote from: Willie on Apr 04, 12:13 PM 2016
BR can be 200
Win goal per session would be 50 when played with 10 units
So a 20 unit bank. Win is 5 units? $10 unit?
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 04, 06:10 PM 2016
yea i just wanted to show the win loss registry for a large number group...not bad at all
Also, after a win, wait for a virtual loss. Which is confusing. Cause then you are
waiting for a virtual win again, and never play.
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 05, 07:29 PM 2016
i shared your method on bet selection forum under the baccarat section
i extended credit to you, not myself
Thanks :)
Quote from: mogul397 on Apr 05, 09:16 PM 2016
At "$10 units", there are 5 wins, and 2 losses.
+3 "units". $30 if you like.
If you use the progression mentioned in the method, you would reach $70
Quote from: Willie on Apr 05, 11:25 PM 2016
If you use the progression mentioned in the method, you would reach $70
Still not sure if/when we're supposed to wait for paper wins or losses.
The people who posted workouts didn't seem to wait for anything and
that didn't seem to bother anyone.
Quote from: mogul397 on Apr 06, 09:30 AM 2016
Still not sure if/when we're supposed to wait for paper wins or losses.
The people who posted workouts didn't seem to wait for anything and
that didn't seem to bother anyone.
You can read again for better clarity and they did wait ;)
Quote from: Willie on Apr 06, 10:31 AM 2016
You can read again for better clarity and they did wait ;)
In the original post you say,
"On a win- Wait for a virtual loss and after that when any of the above 2 sequence comes, resume betting
On a loss- Wait for a virtual win and after that when any of the above 2 sequence comes, resume betting
Follow +1/-1 and reset on a new high."
Reply #20 is an extraordinary playout by atlantis. The only one that I see that's actually
documented. RG posted some, but just the data.
In the only detailed run that I see, Atlantis consistently documents waiting for a "virtual loss".
But after that never waiting for the "virtual win". I find the notion of waiting for the virtual
win confusing, but I asked and you never explained it. But you seem to think that it was
done in the examples. I don't see it.
BTW, +1 -1 is called a "D'alenbert" progression.
Quote from: mogul397 on Apr 06, 11:19 AM 2016
In the original post you say,
"On a win- Wait for a virtual loss and after that when any of the above 2 sequence comes, resume betting
On a loss- Wait for a virtual win and after that when any of the above 2 sequence comes, resume betting
Follow +1/-1 and reset on a new high."
Reply #20 is an extraordinary playout by atlantis. The only one that I see that's actually
documented. RG posted some, but just the data.
In the only detailed run that I see, Atlantis consistently documents waiting for a "virtual loss".
But after that never waiting for the "virtual win". I find the notion of waiting for the virtual
win confusing, but I asked and you never explained it. But you seem to think that it was
done in the examples. I don't see it.
BTW, +1 -1 is called a "D'alenbert" progression.
I think you read a little too much into it
All those inquiries you made hinder your understanding of the method
This is it: OE bet O. EO bet E.
Thats it. Nothing more nothing less.
OP recommended a progression of damblert and to wait 1 virtual win or loss.
You dont have to play that exact way. Free think a bit and try it in zumma
Whether its in examples or not doesn't mean much. Perform a test. Its such a simple method you can execute a 40 spin test in 3 minutes.
Constructive criticism: you think to deep into methods. This is simple. I mean this is as simple as it can get.
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 06, 11:25 AM 2016
I think you read a little too much into it
All those inquiries you made hinder your understanding of the method
This is it: OE bet O. EO bet E.
Thats it. Nothing more nothing less.
OP recommended a progression of damblert and to wait 1 virtual win or loss.
You dont have to play that exact way. Free think a bit and try it in zumma
Whether its in examples or not doesn't mean much. Perform a test. Its such a simple method you can execute a 40 spin test in 3 minutes.
Constructive criticism: you think to deep into methods. This is simple. I mean this is as simple as it can get.
Thanks RG. Actually, to be fair, I often don't think deep enough. That's why I end up looking
stupid out of the box. A little too quick on the draw. But I know what you mean and what
you are saying. Gave it a zumma wallpaper test. And it seems reasonable.
NOW, I'll drill deeper. These are my collective thoughts.
1) I wondered in the beginning about seeing the virtual waits on wins and losses. Then I saw what
seemed to be ignoring them. And a weird documentation crossing "units with units" (like calling
"10" a unit, and then talking about =/- 1 unit. Even for a dummy like me, that pops breakers in my head.
So I tried to think it through, read the thread, hope someone else noticed....
2) I think that I've explored a method similar to this, but was not sure what could be unique about this
direction. I've looked at aspects of "playing streaks (more than 1 in a row), chops, and the like. In this
obvious methodology you are now playing some sequential betting (flat or progression), which is kind
of spreading out what you might be doing if you bet every spin. (You watching MrJ????)
And then you go through mind spins about how many in a row there are, if you can make more betting
the D'alenbert, how many in a row happen, etc etc. And you realize that it's no differnet.
However I do think (my own fallacy) that stoping and waiting out losing streaks helps. My own fallacy.
3) Putting a bow on the package, the D'alenbert always seems like the simple solution. And finding something
creative, like spreading out the bet selections, always seems to be the ointment that will smooth it out.
But generally the D'alenbert never seems the best solution.
I like what you (RG) were pointing out in your list of results. It kind of worked. Playing straight showed the
probablility of a long number of losses. You didn't lay out the results per this method. But if you had,
it would have helped a long D'alenbert that ended up resolving.
I like this kind of methodology. Still looking for something not too outrageous to go and play.
To have many good sessions where I feel comfortable that I won't break a bank, enjoy a couple
hours of play, and make a couple bucks.
I plan on doing more testing, but wanted to see what the masses resolve about this virtual loss waiting
thing, so I can know what I am doing or looking for.
I think the sentiment so far is pretty good.
BTW, the simple way to see the methodology is that you are looking for
single evens. The occur half the time. Just trying to jump over the
sequences.
Observation:
Trying to beat roulette is like a dog running in a circle trying to catch his own tail.
For recreational purposes only"Play it at your own risk.<<<<< ROFLMAO
And after looking and considering this more, one thing that is popular is to look for
doubles. Weather to play them or avoid them.
I can tell you from experience, they LOVE to cluster. You get a cluster of
EEOOEEOOEEOO, and you're dead. Good thing to defend yourself from.
Quote from: Tamino on Apr 06, 03:00 PM 2016
Observation:
Trying to beat roulette is like a dog running in a circle trying to catch his own tail.
For recreational purposes only"Play it at your own risk.<<<<< ROFLMAO
Good observation. What brings you here, then?
Quote from: mogul397 on Apr 06, 03:42 PM 2016
And after looking and considering this more, one thing that is popular is to look for
doubles. Weather to play them or avoid them.
I can tell you from experience, they LOVE to cluster. You get a cluster of
EEOOEEOOEEOO, and you're dead. Good thing to defend yourself from.
You DOG, you.....
(link:://i.imgur.com/WTDnnwE.gif)
Quote from: mogul397 on Apr 06, 03:43 PM 2016
Good observation. What brings you here, then?
REPLY: To get a good laugh.
For recreational purposes only. Chuckle at your own risk.
Quote from: Tamino on Apr 06, 04:03 PM 2016
REPLY: To get a good laugh.
For recreational purposes only. Chuckle at your own risk.
Was talkin to mr j and general about a meet n greet. Can you come?
And tell me to eat the rare steak at my own risk
RG
Great idea of yours. But what always concerns me is that"Risk Clause". LOL.
Quote from: Tamino on Apr 06, 04:16 PM 2016
RG
Great idea of yours. But what always concerns me is that"Risk Clause". LOL.
When mr j brought up meeting and invited general i immediately thought "its a ploy to kill me"
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 06, 04:19 PM 2016
When mr j brought up meeting and invited general i immediately thought "its a ploy to kill me"
I just bought the shovels today.
Ken
Most expensive thing on the menu for me then
cmon yall should be in 'The Bi#ch And Complain Thread Aka Your Chance to Yell At The General. " doing dinner plans etc
Quote from: Tomla021 on Apr 06, 04:49 PM 2016
cmon yall should be in 'The Bi#ch And Complain Thread Aka Your Chance to Yell At The General. " doing dinner plans etc
We will drag u into this! I know what state ur in!
Works been slow
I need another hobby
Quote from: Tomla021 on Apr 06, 04:49 PM 2016
cmon yall should be in 'The Bi#ch And Complain Thread Aka Your Chance to Yell At The General. " doing dinner plans etc
What state are you in? I'll give out my damn address, I dont give a s**t.
Ken
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 06, 03:52 PM 2016
(link:://i.imgur.com/WTDnnwE.gif)
I'll say the same thing I say at a table.
"DON'T BEAT ME!!!!!"
Quote from: MrJ on Apr 06, 04:23 PM 2016
I just bought the shovels today.
Ken
You guys are actually going to meet in person?
Are you going to secretly concoct/share the holy grail with RG?
(that you make fun of?)
Quote from: mogul397 on Apr 06, 08:45 PM 2016
(that you make fun of?)
Yea they get to make fun of me in person, and tell me I'm "one of them" and humiliate me. In exchange the general will show me how to find bias in my airball. It's an even exchange
I am hoping for a US meet and greet. So I can see you in person. I have to see you to believe it.
Actually I can't believe in the history of this board noone arranged an Atlantic City thingy
Now if I was placing bets in front of you Mogul, would you be over my shoulder asking me what I am doing even though you are watching in plain sight?
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 06, 08:49 PM 2016
Yea they get to make fun of me in person, and tell me I'm "one of them" and humiliate me. In exchange the general will show me how to find bias in my airball. It's an even exchange
I am hoping for a US meet and greet. So I can see you in person. I have to see you to believe it.
Actually I can't believe in the history of this board noone arranged an Atlantic City thingy
Now if I was placing bets in front of you Mogul, would you be over my shoulder asking me what I am doing even though you are watching in plain sight?
I might.
Once someone who lived relatively close (Conn I think) had a system he told me about.
We tested it. We arranged a meeting. I stood and watched him for a while. (We were both
there to play the same way. Just watching as I think he had played before).
Long story short, he diverged from his method. And after his play (I wouldn't go up and talk
to him during real play and disrupt his concentration) it turns out that he did divert from the
method. It diverged from there and the method (on paper) didn't hold up as well as we thought.
Before I played and lost.
One other time I went with someone I know. And one thing is clear.
When you're bellie up to the table, anything can and will happen. And the person draws in,
like a sphincter puckered from being sour. Like a black hole. And the only way they can
explain their actions is after it is over. (And they should not be disturbed during it)
Quote from: mogul397 on Apr 06, 09:24 PM 2016
like a sphincter puckered from being sour. Like a black hole
That's the worst visual I've ever gotten from this forum. Ever.
Also, that is the most obscene explanation I have ever read describing a player who diverted from the original plan and played random bets.
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 06, 09:28 PM 2016
That's the worst visual I've ever gotten from this forum. Ever.
Also, that is the most obscene explanation I have ever read describing a player who diverted from the original plan and played random bets.
It's being in the zone.
Was an answer to your question about if I'd ask you what you were doing. Had the experience that,
even though it had been planned and discussed, didn't look right. And it wasn't.
I thought we had a depth of resolve (considering we meth there) that was true.
BTW, there's nothing to compare to your animations. I won't even try.
Quote from: mogul397 on Apr 06, 09:40 PM 2016
It's being in the zone.
Was an answer to your question about if I'd ask you what you were doing. Had the experience that,
even though it had been planned and discussed, didn't look right. And it wasn't.
I thought we had a depth of resolve (considering we meth there) that was true.
BTW, there's nothing to compare to your animations. I won't even try.
I thought it was funny what you said.
I know all about diverting. Luckily for me diverting has worked out down to my last dollar and winning it all back
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 06, 09:43 PM 2016
I thought it was funny what you said.
I know all about diverting. Luckily for me diverting has worked out down to my last dollar and winning it all back
The funny thing about what you say is that I've heard this from you before. And lucky for
you, you do tend to go down that road. And somehow save yourself. In real life it must really
get you 3nd guessing yourself, since somehow when it gets tough, your intuition kicks in, you
are "all in" and make it out smelling good. Not a good life lesson.
Most people end up being road KILL.......
While I have you, when you meet the big wigs for the forum meeting, you have to discuss how we
can change things so that a method gets posted, discussed, tested, and then officially dies with
a stream of common sense posts by me that end the tread. Getting weird. When I see a stream of
my handsome face, I know it's over.
It's, "New post, RG, other person, RG, other people, RG, RG, RG (lookin good so far), a few new comments,
RG, RG, Mogul, RG, someone else, mogul, RG, RG mogul mogul mogul mogul mogul,,,,,,,,,,..................
Then some off topic stuff. This time about the meeting. Beating dead animals and other animations.
Need to continue the winning threads. But just because you disguise the puzzle pieces to look like
something different, doesn't mean they are the same. Hence beating the dead horse.....
Quote from: mogul397 on Apr 06, 02:26 PM 2016
Thanks RG. Actually, to be fair, I often don't think deep enough. That's why I end up looking
stupid out of the box. A little too quick on the draw. But I know what you mean and what
you are saying. Gave it a zumma wallpaper test. And it seems reasonable.
NOW, I'll drill deeper. These are my collective thoughts.
1) I wondered in the beginning about seeing the virtual waits on wins and losses. Then I saw what
seemed to be ignoring them. And a weird documentation crossing "units with units" (like calling
"10" a unit, and then talking about =/- 1 unit. Even for a dummy like me, that pops breakers in my head.
So I tried to think it through, read the thread, hope someone else noticed....
2) I think that I've explored a method similar to this, but was not sure what could be unique about this
direction. I've looked at aspects of "playing streaks (more than 1 in a row), chops, and the like. In this
obvious methodology you are now playing some sequential betting (flat or progression), which is kind
of spreading out what you might be doing if you bet every spin. (You watching MrJ????)
And then you go through mind spins about how many in a row there are, if you can make more betting
the D'alenbert, how many in a row happen, etc etc. And you realize that it's no differnet.
However I do think (my own fallacy) that stoping and waiting out losing streaks helps. My own fallacy.
3) Putting a bow on the package, the D'alenbert always seems like the simple solution. And finding something
creative, like spreading out the bet selections, always seems to be the ointment that will smooth it out.
But generally the D'alenbert never seems the best solution.
I like what you (RG) were pointing out in your list of results. It kind of worked. Playing straight showed the
probablility of a long number of losses. You didn't lay out the results per this method. But if you had,
it would have helped a long D'alenbert that ended up resolving.
I like this kind of methodology. Still looking for something not too outrageous to go and play.
To have many good sessions where I feel comfortable that I won't break a bank, enjoy a couple
hours of play, and make a couple bucks.
I plan on doing more testing, but wanted to see what the masses resolve about this virtual loss waiting
thing, so I can know what I am doing or looking for.
I think the sentiment so far is pretty good.
Not sure why things went downhill after this post.
And yeah the initial terms used could be a bit confusing for some people..
So putting it this way..
If we choose our starting bet to be $10, then we add
+10$ after a loss to our bet size
-10$ after a win to our bet size
Also yes the sequence of OOEEOOEEOOEE could take us deeper in the progression but it won't break the bank since we get 5 losses in these 12 spins which can be recovered from.
Do test and reply with your spins instead of just posting the sequence which would kill it. Every system can be bust when 'the run from hell' comes.
I never said this won't..
.
Question for Willie,
Is there a reason why you have chosen O E - over R- B or H - L ?
Just curious.
Tamino
Quote from: Willie on Apr 07, 11:08 AM 2016
instead of just posting the sequence which would kill it. Every system can be bust when 'the run from hell' comes.
I never said this won't..
Ive told mogul this many times
This is what he loves to do: open zumma and find a losing page
Ive told him a million times you can find a loser for ANY method
But hes older and wiser...... :ooh:
Quote from: Tamino on Apr 07, 06:00 PM 2016
Question for Willie,
Is there a reason why you have chosen O E - over R- B or H - L ?
Just curious.
Tamino
No Tamino, no reason at all..
You can go ahead with any of the EC bets here.
I find even/odd easiest to track :)
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 07, 06:18 PM 2016
Ive told mogul this many times
This is what he loves to do: open zumma and find a losing page
Ive told him a million times you can find a loser for ANY method
But hes older and wiser...... :ooh:
It's not the point. The point is, when you do the wallpaper test, you would HOPE
to do well for a while before having a loss. Or a really bad run.
When it slaps you in the face, it's not good.
Quote from: mogul397 on Apr 08, 09:45 PM 2016
It's not the point. The point is, when you do the wallpaper test, you would HOPE
to do well for a while before having a loss. Or a really bad run.
When it slaps you in the face, it's not good.
Im watching naked gun right now. 1988 it was released. They made fun of democrats. The good ole days. Im drunk
I hate democrats liberals and democrats
I don't like democrats because they want to kill puppies and bunnies.
Quote from: The General on Apr 08, 11:25 PM 2016
I don't like democrats because they want to kill puppies and bunnies.
democrats
liberals
socialists
all the same
ba hum bug
Back to reality, been testing this method a bit and it is holding up pretty well.
Very well, actually.
I'm still a bit confused about the idea of waiting for virtual wins/losses,
vs playing through for continuing chops. What the rules are, and
what the best way to play them are.
I hate to be the guy to say this. You say your doing well with it but you dont know the rules?
Quote from: Tomla021 on Apr 09, 07:30 PM 2016
I hate to be the guy to say this. You say your doing well with it but you dont know the rules?
Then don't be............
As with most things the rules change arbitrarily. Been a while since I played with this.
April 9? Double winner. My 33 wedding anniversary and 6 month anniversary that I have
this cast on my leg!!!!!! (A dubious distinction).
Quote from: Tomla021 on Apr 09, 07:30 PM 2016
I hate to be the guy to say this. You say your doing well with it but you dont know the rules?
On the serious side, I ran some zumma pages and it was like winning the lottery.
Unfortunately it doesn't always work out that way. Played with this before. Can't help
"doing well" when the pages just spit out singles. And multiple singles.
Have to see how correct "rules" will put on the brakes. Also, D'alenbert can be and is VERY
dangerous, when the tide is not in your favor.
Zumma. Page 27. 15 spins down. Double loss. Scrap it
that was a joke by the way
for a mechanical system this does very well
i am testing BACC shoes with it now as well
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 11, 07:24 PM 2016
that was a joke by the way
for a mechanical system this does very well
i am testing BACC shoes with it now as well
I'm not sure what I was thinking when I explored this direction. Memory tells me that
somehow I was trying to play both sides of the fence and work on singles and then
multiples. That's what I recall. Then, of course, just one side or the other.
So there WOULD be times when singles were scarce. Hence the value of the
virtual wins or losses. But it is painful to be in a choppy area and let them all
go by.
Quote from: mogul397 on Apr 09, 07:28 PM 2016
Back to reality, been testing this method a bit and it is holding up pretty well.
Very well, actually.
I'm still a bit confused about the idea of waiting for virtual wins/losses,
vs playing through for continuing chops. What the rules are, and
what the best way to play them are.
Here is how I play it-
Wait for OE or EO to happen in the start>
O
O
E- trigger, will bet odd on next spin
O-
win/will wait for a virtual loss before betting (virtual loss being OO or EE) so no bet on next spin
E- no bet on next spin
E- Virtual loss/bet odd on next spin
E-
loss/will wait for virtual win before betting (virtual win being EO in this case) so no bet on next spin
O- Virtual win/bet even on next spin
E-
winHope its clear now :)
Willie whats the longest L streak to date?
Thanks
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 12, 12:39 PM 2016
Willie whats the longest L streak to date?
Thanks
I have seen a loss streak of 4 till date, but I finish the session at $50 profit, playing with $10 as base.
And it has recovered well from drawdowns to take me to my session win goals.
Quote from: Willie on Apr 12, 01:02 PM 2016
I have seen a loss streak of 4 till date, but I finish the session at $50 profit, playing with $10 as base.
And it has recovered well from drawdowns to take me to my session win goals.
Thank you
That loss streak is not bad and if it keeps up i may entertain an aggressive progression
Quote from: Willie on Apr 12, 12:38 PM 2016
Here is how I play it-
Wait for OE or EO to happen in the start>
O
O
E- trigger, will bet odd on next spin
O- win/will wait for a virtual loss before betting (virtual loss being OO or EE) so no bet on next spin
E- no bet on next spin
E- Virtual loss/bet odd on next spin
E- loss/will wait for virtual win before betting (virtual win being EO in this case) so no bet on next spin
O- Virtual win/bet even on next spin
E- win
Hope its clear now :)
It is. Thanks Willie.
So if I understand the logic, if you get a sequence of "doublets", or longer runs on
both sides, it would kill you.
OOEEOOEEOOEEOOEE OR longer strings of "virtual losses".
Cause each time there was a change it would be the "virtual win"
that enabled betting for the next loss.
My thinking about the "virtual win" was an ACTUAL win. Like seeing "OEO"
or "EOE". The win being the trigger and then the win. Not just the trigger.
Playing and looking for "doubles" (Or avoiding them) is a common stragegy. And it
is surprising how often you get strings of them.
I only mention it because it's a hard bullet to dodge.
Since most methods end up coming down to a predictable, common sense, playout,
I like to take the poetic presentation and fashion it in the vernacular.
Many years (decades) ago I used to work with some people. We called ourselves
"system builders", to have a name for it. The other guy was a retiring Judge in CA
(Was a lawyer/DA for most of his career). He'd get called in to fill in for other judges
out sick or on vac.. We were doing a lot of craps stuff, with the tester book, etc.
Well as he sat up on the bench he said he had all his papers and stuff in front of him.
And we were joking at how the disposition of something that was coming up might go
one way or another based on how his numbers were going. Or if the had the audacity
to be talking or interrupting him while he got into the heat of something on the bench.
So next time you're in court (RG), remember that the judge could be crunching roulette
or craps numbers. You may want to ask. ( Yeah, I know RG. You drink and get drunk.
When I drank (1/2 gal of vodka a day) 14 years ago I'd occasionally grow hand cuffs.
That illness is generally cured by sobriety. (FYI)
Anyway, one time we were trying to out do ourselves. I came up with this complex path
to picking a bet. Even chance. "Do this, subtract that, put it in a bag, swing it over your head,
and SCREAM LIKE A CHICKEN".
The email came back, "isn't that the same as playing "next to last"?"
He was right.
this is a fun EZ little system----thanks willy
Agreed
A silly bet selection with nice wins.
Quote from: mogul397 on Apr 13, 09:01 AM 2016
It is. Thanks Willie.
So if I understand the logic, if you get a sequence of "doublets", or longer runs on
both sides, it would kill you.
OOEEOOEEOOEEOOEE OR longer strings of "virtual losses".
Cause each time there was a change it would be the "virtual win"
that enabled betting for the next loss.
My thinking about the "virtual win" was an ACTUAL win. Like seeing "OEO"
or "EOE". The win being the trigger and then the win. Not just the trigger.
Playing and looking for "doubles" (Or avoiding them) is a common stragegy. And it
is surprising how often you get strings of them.
Agreeing with you mogul, that strings of OOEE are a setback here, but even in the long one that you included, we would have only 5 actual losses which can be recovered easily as I have already mentioned..
Quote from: Tomla021 on Apr 14, 11:42 AM 2016
this is a fun EZ little system----thanks willy
Thanks Tomla, RG :)
Quote from: Willie on Apr 14, 12:01 PM 2016
Agreeing with you mogul, that strings of OOEE are a setback here, but even in the long one that you included, we would have only 5 actual losses which can be recovered easily as I have already mentioned..
Im am aggressive player
I test it with a virtual loss and then begin martingale until a win
Stupid. I know.
Willie do you play this regularly? Successfully?
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 14, 02:33 PM 2016
Willie do you play this regularly? Successfully?
Yes these days I alternate one session with this method and the next one with link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=16812.0 (link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=16812.0)
Quote from: Willie on Apr 14, 03:21 PM 2016
Yes these days I alternate one session with this method and the next one with link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=16812.0 (link:://:.rouletteforum.cc/index.php?topic=16812.0)
Cool. Thanks
If either of these goes tough, I wait to come back to at least positive and then switch to the other one
Quote from: Willie on Apr 14, 12:01 PM 2016
Agreeing with you mogul, that strings of OOEE are a setback here, but even in the long one that you included, we would have only 5 actual losses which can be recovered easily as I have already mentioned..
I see your point. But you've still got to work you way back.
Point taken.
Zumma pg 31
Red/black L L W L W L L
Even Odd L L W L L L W L L L W L
High/Low L L L L L L L L
i long for the day when you post a method then find the losing zumma page and post it
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
:yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn:
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 17, 05:04 PM 2016
i long for the day when you post a method then find the losing zumma page and post it
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
:yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn:
Well when I'm up and about (soon) I don't bother with zumma. I just run down. And I made
like 10 trips (if you remember) last fall. I was ELATED. Then I got hit (on paper) for real,
3x in a row. Got my ass handed to me.
The more I think about it there is a larger problem at hand. The "problem" is that eventually
comes the killer string. And it has the same look and feel. It's like dodging a bullet.
There are 2 or 3 elements.
1) Of course, a long losing string always starts with the first loss. Up as you lose
progressions ALWAYS increase their bets to recoup after a loss. Perhaps feeding
into the losing sequence with bet increases is the wrong timing. It is reflex to do so.
But wrong timing.
2) Playing an opposite (up as you win) progression is a way to go. If you ask yourself
the question, "When do I ever get into an up as you lose session where I generate a
substantial amount of profit, that early on isn't dwarfed by a drawdown that's bigger than
that profit? Playing the up as you win (if you keep track) will give you spots where you can
cut your losses, and move a "stop win", where you end the session with a profit.
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 17, 05:04 PM 2016
i long for the day when you post a method then find the losing zumma page and post it
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
:yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn: :yawn:
And the thing that you STILL never realize is that, unlike you who have claimed
(undocumented) to practice thousands of results on various holy grails, I fall onto
these sessions effortlessly.
To add the 3rd point to my other post, the obvious answer would be to be able to
anticipate these changes of trend. One obvious way (which I mentioned) is the
1st loss. Every run of losses begins with the first loss.
(link:://i.imgur.com/IFU4vOB.gif)
Just that occasionally I actually post results on things. The point
of being here.
I don't spend 99% of my time posting youtubes and funny faces.
Quote from: mogul397 on Apr 18, 09:14 AM 2016
Just that occasionally I actually post results on things. The point
of being here.
I don't spend 99% of my time posting youtubes and funny faces.
Someone needs to input humor
Lots of people here are stiff
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 18, 09:16 AM 2016
Someone needs to input humor
Lots of people here are stiff
Remember the benchmark. (That you claim is so attractive to you. Atlantis?)
I no longer need to beg and explain the reason and point of this place.
Just one word. "benchmark".
Quote from: RouletteGhost on Apr 18, 09:16 AM 2016
Someone needs to input humor
Lots of people here are stiff
And some people are the village idiots.